Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4017538" data-attributes="member: 22779">I strongly disagree with this point.&nbsp; Mostly for the reason that I prefer people to play the character in front of them.&nbsp; If you're playing a 6 Int Half-orc with a 5 Cha, you are NOT going to be making speeches.&nbsp; Ever.&nbsp; While yes, minis do introduce a tactical aspect to combat, it's not exactly difficult to assume.&nbsp; None of us, or at least not many of us, are expert tacticians.&nbsp; However, it does not take tactical brilliance to think that surrounding your enemy is a good idea and getting surrounded is bad.&nbsp; In other words, there is a qualitative difference in the level of expertise between eloquent social dialogue and stepping 5 feet to the left so you get out of the way of that charging elephant. No, it really, really isn't.&nbsp; It is not the DM's job to cause bad events.&nbsp; It is the DM's job to set up the situation.&nbsp; Whether the situation is good or bad is the job of the players to determine.&nbsp; If the DM chucks a hard fight at the PC's and they simply run away, that's not a &quot;bad event&quot;.&nbsp; &nbsp; No one died, no one even took any damage.And that result was entirely controlled by the players.The idea of DM as Story Teller is really divorced from any edition of D&amp;D.&nbsp; 2e came closest to this point of view and it was almost universally seen as bad.&nbsp; The DM as Referee has generally been seen as the best position for a DM to take.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4017538, member: 22779"] I strongly disagree with this point. Mostly for the reason that I prefer people to play the character in front of them. If you're playing a 6 Int Half-orc with a 5 Cha, you are NOT going to be making speeches. Ever. While yes, minis do introduce a tactical aspect to combat, it's not exactly difficult to assume. None of us, or at least not many of us, are expert tacticians. However, it does not take tactical brilliance to think that surrounding your enemy is a good idea and getting surrounded is bad. In other words, there is a qualitative difference in the level of expertise between eloquent social dialogue and stepping 5 feet to the left so you get out of the way of that charging elephant. No, it really, really isn't. It is not the DM's job to cause bad events. It is the DM's job to set up the situation. Whether the situation is good or bad is the job of the players to determine. If the DM chucks a hard fight at the PC's and they simply run away, that's not a "bad event". No one died, no one even took any damage. And that result was entirely controlled by the players. The idea of DM as Story Teller is really divorced from any edition of D&D. 2e came closest to this point of view and it was almost universally seen as bad. The DM as Referee has generally been seen as the best position for a DM to take. [/QUOTE]

Verification