Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sundragon2012" data-source="post: 3815752" data-attributes="member: 7624">Hello,In the 24yrs I have been a DM/GM I have seen the evolution of dungeonmastering behavior from being Tomb of Horrors Rat Bastard DM to being Soft, Squishy Spineless DM. Maybe I shouldn't call this evolution because there is the idea that evolution is about objective improvement or betterment. However, I have decided to call it evolution in the real sense of adaptation to environment ie. adaptation to the game of D&D.Over the last weeks I have seen a lot of angst and anger by DMs who feel that the changes to the core millieu will somehow make D&D other than D&D, that removing the Great Wheel Cosmology, that changing the backstory of demons and devils, that disagreeable names of magical orders in the 4e PHB, that the succubus will become a devil and the erinyes will become more like the mythic Fury, that tieflings will be in the PHB, etc....will destroy D&D for them. Somehow these changes will destroy their campaigns.AD&D suffered early on from EGG's idea that there was one true way to play D&D but we've gotten away from that...or have we? In the 3e era tons of optional splat material was released that somehow magically got treated as core by DMs who didn't have the nerve to "just say no" to things that were mechanically broken or things that didn't fit in their games. The initially reasonable mantra of "Options not restrictions" became the battlecry cry of players who honestly believed that a DM who wouldn't let them have anything they wanted from whatever splatbook du jour was just produced was "denying them the fullness of the D&D experience." Yeah I actually saw that written and up to that point had never heard of such a thing in all my years of gaming.WoTC made a clear marketing decision based on financial realities to market less to DMs and more to players with 3e and 3.5. This made financial sense because players dramatically outnumber DMs. This decision was not, however, about the benefits or damage that this philosophy could cause in any given DMs campaign. The empower the players idea was intimately tied to this marketing strategy. Empowering the players translates into players spending more money on splatbooks under the guise of greater choice. Oh yeah, it engendered choice to the point where it seemed to term DMs into jellyfish.DMs need to resume their rules as rules arbiters, setting builders, adventure creators and storytellers. The changes 4e is bringing about will put many DMs who slavishly followed core idea in a tough position, but no tougher than the position non-core DMs have been in since the game began. I have long ago accepted that Jams Wyatt, Rich Baker, Monte Cook, etc. don't share my complete vision of the ideal game or game world. C'est la vie. It is what it is. My job as DM is to sift for the diamonds in the dung (and my dung may be your diamonds) and not to sit on my rump waiting to be spoon fed other DMs (ie. game designers) visions of good fantasy. The recent bruhaha about Frost Giants not being included in MM1 is indicative of the mindset of many DMs unfortunately in that they feel frustrated that a monster they wanted to use isn't going to be in the new book. Well, what I say to that is...Be a DM and either adapt an existing giant in the MM1 or create one whole cloth. That solves the problem.I completely understand that mechanical changes are harder to make and I can't speak on them because I know as little as anyone else regarding the number of changes 4e wil bring. In regards to new 4e lore, if you don't like certain things as they are going to appear in the 4e lore, change it. If you want you succubi to be demons make them demons, what the core says on this is irrelevant to your game (unless you are a PS DM then I can sympathize). If you want the Great Wheel in your game, stick in the Astral Sea. If you want modrons in your game write them up as needed for your PCs to encounter. If you want Grazz't to be the crossdressing, nose-picking, jig dancing lord of the 10th layer of Hell...do it.  If you don't want a certain "core" class or race in your game, forbid it. You know your setting and what will fit. If your setting's continuity doesn't allow for tieflings, then : poof : they don't exist and never have. Core is NOTHING more than the baseline of what you NEED to play the game. At its heart, core is only the mechanics and not the classes, races or lore. You can create entirely new classes, races and lore and still be as legitimately DMing D&D as the guy next door who insists that only what is in the PHB, DMG and MM enter his game. It isn't WoTC's job to maintain the feel and integrity of your game. Their job is to come up with shiny new products that may or may not suit your campaign. It is YOUR job to maintain the integrity of your campaign and setting. It isn't your player's job either. Good players do care about the setting they play in and won't request things that will screw with it. However many don't think along those lines because it isn't their job to do so, its yours.Empower yourself, be a DM. Decide, create arbitrate.....that is why your role at the table even exists. Maybe instead of doomsday, 4e is the chance to start fresh as a DM. Why not?As always, feel free to discuss. Sundragon</blockquote>

Verification