Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 4129216" data-attributes="member: 3887">Is it your experience that DM authority derives from the rules? My experience is that DM authority is conferred by the players, it's a product of trust. I don't see how the new system -- I'm hesitant to even call it a system, it's more like a rough guideline from placing the old skill checks in a new context-- would change that.A DM makes a judgment call?Why are you making this so difficult? No-one demands that kind of rigorous continuity. If the proposed skill usage sounds absurd to you, say no, if it's interesting, run with it, and if it's borderline, give the player the benefit of the doubt and see how the action develops.No, it makes concrete knowledge of things that have no real importance in the ongoing campaign unimportant. There's a difference. I'm not going to hold it against my players if they find a better solution to a puzzle/challenge than the one I thought up. In fact, I welcome it when that happens. I'm a generous soul. Besides, I think the act of negotiating the solution to a problem has vastly more entertainment potential than me design interesting challenges and all their possible solutions beforehand. (not to mention it's much easier) This part is just nonsense. A DM doesn't need an encyclopedic knowledge of... well, everything, they need players willing to give them enough authority to run the game (which occasionally means letting go of whatever real-world expertise they possess).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mallus, post: 4129216, member: 3887"] Is it your experience that DM authority derives from the rules? My experience is that DM authority is conferred by the players, it's a product of trust. I don't see how the new system -- I'm hesitant to even call it a system, it's more like a rough guideline from placing the old skill checks in a new context-- would change that. A DM makes a judgment call? Why are you making this so difficult? No-one demands that kind of rigorous continuity. If the proposed skill usage sounds absurd to you, say no, if it's interesting, run with it, and if it's borderline, give the player the benefit of the doubt and see how the action develops. No, it makes concrete knowledge of things that have no real importance in the ongoing campaign unimportant. There's a difference. I'm not going to hold it against my players if they find a better solution to a puzzle/challenge than the one I thought up. In fact, I welcome it when that happens. I'm a generous soul. Besides, I think the act of negotiating the solution to a problem has vastly more entertainment potential than me design interesting challenges and all their possible solutions beforehand. (not to mention it's much easier) This part is just nonsense. A DM doesn't need an encyclopedic knowledge of... well, everything, they need players willing to give them enough authority to run the game (which occasionally means letting go of whatever real-world expertise they possess). [/QUOTE]

Verification