Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thotas" data-source="post: 2586004" data-attributes="member: 18974">I've been checking this thread frequently, haven't posted to it in a while ... let's just say Raven CrowKing has saved me a great deal of typing.&nbsp;&nbsp; (Incidentally, RC, your &quot;baker analogy&quot; is called &quot;Social Exchange Theory&quot; by sociologists.&nbsp; It has a long and well respected history.&nbsp; In this instance, it basiclly says time is money, and how we spend our time and who we spend it with is governed by the same rules economists apply to capitol.&nbsp; Except you used cookies instead of time.)&nbsp; One small point from a while back I do want to bring up ... someone was differentiating between a strong DM and a good DM.&nbsp; Now, it's true, I've run into the strong DM who wasn't a good DM and yes, they fuel many nightmare scenarios referred to on this thread and others.&nbsp; But I've never met a good DM who wasn't a strong DM.&nbsp; Because any good DM must convey the atmosphere of the world he's running, be it home-brew or store-bought, and to convey it, he has to know it and enforce it.&nbsp; The other thing I want to bring up is that I see more and more agreement with DM empowerment.&nbsp; Various specific points that we pro-DM-Str types make keep getting &quot;Well, yeah, that's obviously the DM's place ... but I knew this one guy ...&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; or in the case of some unlucky types, I knew these eight guys.&nbsp; Those guys aren't relevant.&nbsp; I quote Shaman from pages past: &quot;Bad DMing trancends rule systems&quot;, or some such.&nbsp; I'll add that Good DMing does, too.&nbsp; There's a fellow on these boards who calls himself Diaglo who will be more than happy to tell you how few rules you need if your DM is good.&nbsp; I know, you've said it before --&nbsp; &quot;Those guys are rare, we need rules to keep the crappy DMs from making a mess of things.&quot;&nbsp; I repeat, Bad DM is stronger than rules.&nbsp; The word that it all comes down too, I think, is trust.&nbsp; If you can trust your DM, it'll probably be a good game.&nbsp; If not, it's a waste of everyone's time.&nbsp; I suppose letting the players push the DM around is one way to simulate trust, but it'll never work as a substitute for the real thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thotas, post: 2586004, member: 18974"] I've been checking this thread frequently, haven't posted to it in a while ... let's just say Raven CrowKing has saved me a great deal of typing. (Incidentally, RC, your "baker analogy" is called "Social Exchange Theory" by sociologists. It has a long and well respected history. In this instance, it basiclly says time is money, and how we spend our time and who we spend it with is governed by the same rules economists apply to capitol. Except you used cookies instead of time.) One small point from a while back I do want to bring up ... someone was differentiating between a strong DM and a good DM. Now, it's true, I've run into the strong DM who wasn't a good DM and yes, they fuel many nightmare scenarios referred to on this thread and others. But I've never met a good DM who wasn't a strong DM. Because any good DM must convey the atmosphere of the world he's running, be it home-brew or store-bought, and to convey it, he has to know it and enforce it. The other thing I want to bring up is that I see more and more agreement with DM empowerment. Various specific points that we pro-DM-Str types make keep getting "Well, yeah, that's obviously the DM's place ... but I knew [I]this one guy[/I] ..." or in the case of some unlucky types, I knew these eight guys. Those guys aren't relevant. I quote Shaman from pages past: "Bad DMing trancends rule systems", or some such. I'll add that Good DMing does, too. There's a fellow on these boards who calls himself Diaglo who will be more than happy to tell you how few rules you need if your DM is good. I know, you've said it before -- "Those guys are rare, we need rules to keep the crappy DMs from making a mess of things." I repeat, Bad DM is stronger than rules. The word that it all comes down too, I think, is [I]trust[/I]. If you can trust your DM, it'll probably be a good game. If not, it's a waste of everyone's time. I suppose letting the players push the DM around is one way to simulate trust, but it'll never work as a substitute for the real thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification