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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 5604243" data-attributes="member: 386">I wasn't trying to say that it detracts from the DM's authority.  I was trying to say that, when a player who is trying to overcome challenges also has the ability to define those challenges, you screw over the player.  The two things don't work together.  Does the player stay true to his goals for playing the game (that is, overcoming challenges) or does he stick up for plausibility in the campaign?Players should be freed from the responsibility of determining what's plausible and what's not so they can fully engage the game.  The DM isn't trying to overcome challenges and is thus in the perfect place to make judgement calls on what's plausible in the campaign world and what's not.It's not a zero-sum game.  Exercising judgement serves everyone.  If the DM is constantly making poor judgement calls, it's probably time for a talk.  Poor judgement calls happen, we're human and we can't get away from them, but it's not that hard to DM well.Right.  I often ask players about the plausibility of something, or they speak up and challenge a judgement call.  What you don't want to do is lean on their judgement so much that the players can't engage the game.  You don't want to give them DM responsibilities that will take away from why they are playing the game in the first place.(Quick example - the PCs were making a raft and I'm no boy scout.  One of the guys in my group does a lot of camping, so I told him: "I have no idea how long it would take.  What do you think?"  I can't do that all the time, though; "Do you think the guard is having a good day or is he in a surly mood?"  It's my responsibility to answer that question.)</blockquote>

Verification