A DM by any other name

[Grabuto138]

That just seems crazy to me. Unless I as the DM actually wanted such a connection to exist (and if I did I would actually check with you first before making such and in game proclaimation). How do you know this NPC is really who he claims to be and not another soldier or creature or assasin or spy etc etc. Now as the DM I have pull you aside and say um dude thats a problem your uncle didn't know him. Now I have the tell the group you're mistaken and have effectivle flagged to the entire group that something is up with this guy.

Furthermore where does the madness stop can you suddenly proclaim you're are the nephew of the mayor since the party is headed to meet him to talk about a job? Can you spontaniously decide you are the brother of the archmage who rules the local magic guild when you want to buy components or apply for membership?

No thanks glad it works for your group though...

A lot of it depends on your improv skills and your relationship with your players. My group has been together along time and no one would intentionally undermine the DM. When a player throws out a new piece of world-building it is assumed that it serves the game. The DM can also just make an off-colored comment, gently mock the player, and drive on if it is conflicts with the narrative. But in general our DMs -including me- will make a decided effort to make it fit the narrative.

Edit: Assuming you are in good relations with your players, and it is understood that players can add to the narrative, you don't have to pull anyone aside. You just shake your head and say, "I don't think so dude. Hand me the Pepsi."

 

[Emerikol]

...
Edit: Assuming you are in good relations with your players, and it is understood that players can add to the narrative, you don't have to pull anyone aside. You just shake your head and say, "I don't think so dude. Hand me the Pepsi."

I'm not against you doing this in your games. It though is pretty far afield playstyle wise from the typical D&D campaign. Obviously for other games it's right at home. I am curious though if this is your style of game why you even play D&D. Even 4e.

For me I wouldn't touch this playstyle with a ten foot pole. But that's just my preference. As both a DM and as a player, I much prefer a world be far more defined ahead of time.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not against you doing this in your games. It though is pretty far afield playstyle wise from the typical D&D campaign. Obviously for other games it's right at home. I am curious though if this is your style of game why you even play D&D. Even 4e.

For me I wouldn't touch this playstyle with a ten foot pole. But that's just my preference. As both a DM and as a player, I much prefer a world be far more defined ahead of time.

Well, at least for 4e, the DMG and to a greater extent the DMG2 go into exactly how to play this way. I found it enlightening, personally.

 

[ComradeGnull]

So much goodness in so few words.

This strikes to the heart of my whole point—profound thanks ExploderWizard. I don't want to tell my players what to do. I don't want to grant them permission for their actions. But what I reject, and some players now seem to want, is the ability of the player to choose an action and automatically arrive at an rules-predetermined outcome without the possibility of DM intervention.

My honest, gut reaction is that a reasonable portion of the louder NMMI crowd over at the WotC boards are basically people who want just that—the autonomy to determine their own character's success. When that happens, the DM might as well go home.

But there have always been players that had that kind of freedom- spell casters.

A wizard casts fireball. He rolls his hit and succeeds. The spell does the stated damage in the rules to the stated number of opponents. If the DM thinks it is reasonable, it might set some things in the environment on fire.

A Fighter uses Blinding Poke in the Eye (or whatever). He rolls his hit and succeeds. The enemy he attacked is blinded, and suffers the penalties described in the rules. If the DM thinks it is reasonable, in the course of wandering around blind the creature might fall down some stairs or off the edge of a cliff.

The first example has worked the same way from the earliest roots of D&D to the present day. The second example is how 4e works. Why is example one empowering to the DM, and the second example takes autonomy away from the DM to determine success?

 

[Emerikol]

Well, at least for 4e, the DMG and to a greater extent the DMG2 go into exactly how to play this way. I found it enlightening, personally.

Well at least part of this playstyle is pretty much independent of the rules. If you want to say someone is your uncle and the DM allows it then thats possible in any game.

 

[ComradeGnull]

I'm not against you doing this in your games. It though is pretty far afield playstyle wise from the typical D&D campaign. Obviously for other games it's right at home. I am curious though if this is your style of game why you even play D&D. Even 4e.

For me I wouldn't touch this playstyle with a ten foot pole. But that's just my preference. As both a DM and as a player, I much prefer a world be far more defined ahead of time.

Which speaks to my point earlier about different DM's having different strengths and different play styles.

You would like to have the story more fixed and improvise more on the rules. Others would like to have the rules more fixed and improvise more of the story.

 

[Scylla]

I'm not against you doing this in your games. It though is pretty far afield playstyle wise from the typical D&D campaign. Obviously for other games it's right at home. I am curious though if this is your style of game why you even play D&D. Even 4e.

For me I wouldn't touch this playstyle with a ten foot pole. But that's just my preference. As both a DM and as a player, I much prefer a world be far more defined ahead of time.

Agreed. I'm happy this style works for you Grabuto138, but it's hardly the mainstream style of play (and I say that knowing that defining "mainstream play" in D&D is tough). Whatever floats your boat, and all that.

What motivated this OP is an attempt by a small but active faction to change the way my game has always been played. And yes, I realize I can always play the way I prefer regardless, just as Grabuto prefers his style of play. But, as has been mentioned, rules can be written to facilitate a certain style of play, and I'd rather not see the 30+ year tradition of the DM's role overturned in the next edition. As Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. once said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." You want to play an untraditional game? Go for it. But kindly don't campaign to change a pillar of the game I've loved for years.

 

[Scylla]

But there have always been players that had that kind of freedom- spell casters.

A wizard casts fireball. He rolls his hit and succeeds. The spell does the stated damage in the rules to the stated number of opponents. If the DM thinks it is reasonable, it might set some things in the environment on fire.

A Fighter uses Blinding Poke in the Eye (or whatever). He rolls his hit and succeeds. The enemy he attacked is blinded, and suffers the penalties described in the rules. If the DM thinks it is reasonable, in the course of wandering around blind the creature might fall down some stairs or off the edge of a cliff.

The first example has worked the same way from the earliest roots of D&D to the present day. The second example is how 4e works. Why is example one empowering to the DM, and the second example takes autonomy away from the DM to determine success?

You make a good point. But in pre-3e editions there are mitigating factors that reduce the effect on overall play:
— We're only talking about spellcasters here. So the DM hasn't "lost his autonomy" for half the party's actions.
— Many spell descriptions allowed some interpretive implementation. And a good portion of the spells involved communication with gods, fortune telling or info gathering, and other non-combat things. If in 1e you used a spell to talk w/ your god, the DM was the voice of that god. In 4e a huge percentage of spells are combat- and/or grid-oriented and far more tactical in nature.
— There wasn't as much spell casting going on. No at-wills. A 3rd-level mage got a whopping 3 spells per day. Three actions per day isn't going to usurp any DM's authority.

So in 1e, maybe 10% of party actions fall into that range. But in 4e, with at-wills and all classes having powers, you're talking about pretty much every action a PC takes, so the effect is greater.

 

[Emerikol]

[MENTION=6685694]ComradeGnull[/MENTION]

I think your concerns are more variety than DM control. You want fighter powers because to you that is more fun than just saying you attack or making an improvisational move. I'm sympathetic to this point of view but it really is outside our discussion on DM power.

As DM I always control what happens. Yes I compute damage when you use fireball in the normal way the same way I compute damage from a sword thrust. Yes wizards have more variety in earlier editions. But we are talking about situations where someone does something outside the norm.

Examples...
1. Can I use my 5 magic missiles to cut 5 individual ropes on a rope bridge?
2. Once charmed how far can I abuse this newly gotten good will?
3. If I "suggest" you jump in the river, will you? Even if it's magic? How much additional acting on my part is necessary?
4. Can someone hold the door open when I cast fireball and slam it after the bead goes through? (pre 4e fireball)

All the stuff above requires adjudication by the DM.

 

[Lokiare]

I think it has more to do with player agency than DM fiat.

For one thing as a player I enjoy knowing that my fireball deals 4d6 damage if I cast it (barring some fire resistance or something).

They just moved player agency over to all classes instead of just one.

I like that the DM has rules to follow, it makes the game go much smoother. It allows the DM to focus on story, plot, and role playing rather than fiddly rulings that only slow down the action...