Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 3435231" data-attributes="member: 3424">On the issue of rules subduing the DM, I'd just like to chime in with a contrary view. I think that whether you prefer a less comprehensive rules set that allows a DM more flexibility in making things up, or whether you prefer a more comprehensive rules set that a DM can just take and use depends very much on your strengths as a DM.I personally find that the more comprehensive rules of 3.5e play to my strengths as a DM. I have a good memory, so I can remember even the more obscure rules (or at least, I can usually remember where to look and find them in a minute or less). I'm good at adaptation, so if there is something that is not quite covered by the rules, I can extrapolate from a similar rule based on my understanding of the 3e design philosophy. I'm good at combining existing structures in new ways (it's no accident that one of my favorite toys as a child, before I discovered D&D, was Lego), and a comprehensive rules set gives me lots of fiddly bits to play with. What I am bad at is coming up with stuff on the fly. If I had to do it several times per game session because I was using a less comprehensive rules set, I think the overall quality of my games will suffer.The way I see it, the DM is in control of so many things - setting, plot, NPCs, challenges, pacing - that he could agree to play by the rules and still be in charge. In fact, some of us prefer it that way! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification