Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jackelope King" data-source="post: 2576750" data-attributes="member: 31454">Would you like me to list the other seven DMs I've played under and then explain to you why only one of them really knew what he was doing? And I would've happily walked out on these guys right away, but in most cases, they had the only game in town at the time. I was fed the line for three years that I couldn't be the DM because I couldn't afford to by the DMG, so I didn't even bother aside from a few on-offs until 3E came out and I organized a group from scratch, which has proven very successful.And I call BS on this, because in my experience on different message boards and in playing with different groups at college, I've never met a single such player. Only counting real life experiences just since 3.5 came out, I've probably met about 20 people who have only started playing the game with 3E, and in the games I've played with them, I've never once seen this sort of behavior. I've seen players call their DMs on bad rulings, but even that is really only amplified by the mouthpiece of message boards like these, and I think calling a DM on bad rulings after the session is a good thing, since it encourages the DM to improve his/her arbitration abilities and encourages all the players to gain a firmer grasp on how the game plays.I recognize that coming from a background with lots of good DMs gives you a different view on things. If you've never had a DM whose solution is to point to his hat that says "DM = God" and then repeat that he said you lost your actions for the round so you lost them, then you probably wouldn't understand why the concept of DM Fiat drove players away from the game. Again, I'm glad you never went through this and you've had many more great DMs than bad ones. But lots of folks aren't so lucky. Just because the DMs you've had have usually been able to toe the line between excellent adjudication and horrible DM Fiat doesn't mean that all of them can. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the goal of a ruleset should be to minimize the disconnect in the shared interface between the members of the group so that the scene the GM describes translates easily and believably to the players, allowing the players to easily assess the situation and make realistic assumptions about the situation to minimize the burden on the DM of adjudicating rules. Ideally, a ruleset should handle as much of that mechanical legwork as possible, minimizing DM judgement calls wherever possible, because these judgement calls are invariably the heart of most disputes at the gaming table. A good DM will, nine times out of ten, have sound judgement and make an excellent call that makes the game better for everyone.But not every group has a good DM.</blockquote>

Verification