Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2590947" data-attributes="member: 18280">ThirdWizard,Now that we have the bigger issue of the authority of the DM out of the way to almost everyone's satisfaction (DM has authority, but should not necessarily use it in some ways), we get down to the far more contentious "How should the DM self-limit his own authority" portion of the thread.I think, in this case, that many of the tricks of poor DMs and good DMs are the same tricks.  The difference lies in application and motivation.  For instance:Do I hide rules from players?  Yes.  Guilty as charged.  I said so far upthread, and I am reaffirming it here.  I hide rules from players.  The critical thing, I think, is "What sort of rules, and why?"The rules I hide tend to be new monsters, prestige classes that their characters would not have accurate information about (i.e., they do not get to know the special class abilities of every evil cultist they meet), local-area feats or feats that have prerequisites they cannot meet (i.e., race-based, where the race is "troglodyte" and no PC can be a troglodyte), hidden ramifications of cosmology (including the specific nature of an alternate planar cosmology), and things of that nature.Why do I do this?  Because I believe that it adds to versimilitude, and ultimately to the enjoyment of all involved.  Players like to know ahead of time what the creatures can do.  However, players end up rehashing and bragging about the time they faced foes with unknown abilities and triumphed.  Players like to be surprised.I know that sometimes these things sound like they are splitting hairs, but this is as valid as my distinction between a DM who makes changes because he wished to please the players, and a DM who is obligated to make changes.  They are very different animals.So, in other words, I agree with you here.Let me also say this:  prestige classes were one of the best tools 3.X gave us for versimilitude, in that DMs can create groups specific to place, species, and/or culture.  The generic "this class is for everyone" idea, imho, is less compelling.  Not only that, but if the choices players are allowed to make do not include some limitations imposed by those choices (i.e., if I am an elf I can never be a dwarven defender), it lessens the value of the ability to choose.Players should get to choose between options that combine strength with weakness, rather than merely choosing how to further compound strength.  Obviously, YMMV, but this is necessary in what I would see as an optimal game from either side of the screen.RC</blockquote>

Verification