Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 2096435" data-attributes="member: 20239">Agree 100%.&nbsp; I've been playing and running the game this way since 1980.&nbsp;&nbsp;<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused&nbsp; &nbsp; :confused:"&nbsp; data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /> What?Oh.&nbsp; You weren't being serious with the first one.&nbsp; Way to raise my hopes and then crush my spirit.&nbsp; Tease!&nbsp; &nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious&nbsp; &nbsp; :]" data-shortname=":]" />&nbsp; Believe it or not, my groups work the same way.&nbsp; IMO, it's up to the DM to present challenges (real challenges, not just &quot;interesting dilemmas&quot; or whatever) and then work with the players as they try to overcome them.&nbsp; It's players vs. DM in that the players are supposed to bring their best game and the DM is supposed to pull no punches as far as the established challenges.&nbsp; Where it's NOT player vs. DM is when it comes to the DM adjudicating the rules and making judgement calls, at that point he's the &quot;referee&quot; and is supposed to be fair and impartial.I think the poll starts with an unfounded premise, that &quot;players vs. DM&quot; is inherently opposed to &quot;cooperating to create a good game&quot;.&nbsp; Adversarial gaming is just like any other game, the fun is in the challenge and the competition, but in order for the competition to be meaningful there needs to be a relatively equal chance of any &quot;side&quot; winning or losing....and that's why we have rules.Bad advice.&nbsp; A good DM is a much more challenging and interesting adversary than any computer.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ourph, post: 2096435, member: 20239"] Agree 100%. I've been playing and running the game this way since 1980. :confused: What? Oh. You weren't being serious with the first one. Way to raise my hopes and then crush my spirit. Tease! :] Believe it or not, my groups work the same way. IMO, it's up to the DM to present challenges (real challenges, not just "interesting dilemmas" or whatever) and then work with the players as they try to overcome them. It's players vs. DM in that the players are supposed to bring their best game and the DM is supposed to pull no punches as far as the established challenges. Where it's NOT player vs. DM is when it comes to the DM adjudicating the rules and making judgement calls, at that point he's the "referee" and is supposed to be fair and impartial. I think the poll starts with an unfounded premise, that "players vs. DM" is inherently opposed to "cooperating to create a good game". Adversarial gaming is just like any other game, the fun is in the challenge and the competition, but in order for the competition to be meaningful there needs to be a relatively equal chance of any "side" winning or losing....and that's why we have rules. Bad advice. A good DM is a much more challenging and interesting adversary than any computer. [/QUOTE]

Verification