Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ThatGuyThere" data-source="post: 3527573" data-attributes="member: 36764">...wow. This isn't intended to be a flame (no, seriously), but I don't think I'd ever invite you back to my table after you tried to call me on &quot;cheating&quot; exactly one time. And I just mean that to say, &quot;Wow, this hobby has enormous depth and variation to it&quot;.If we (D&amp;D players) are just playing a game - getting together with friends to play a varient of Monopoly in which the Battleship and the Thimble have ACs and Hit Points and earn treasure - then yes, the DM is 100% &quot;accountable&quot; for his rules mechanics. It's a combat simulation at that point, similar to Battletech, in which there isn't really a &quot;Referee&quot;, even though it'd be awfully handy to have one. The DM just interprets rules - hopefully neutrally - while trying his best to overcome the PCs, and when he fails, they gain treasure and he tries again with another, somewhat more powerful monster.I'm more interested in telling a story. Sure, there are cool game elements - random combat, special maneuvers, measuring how &quot;cool&quot; your character has become. But they're trappings to the story of the Temple of Elemental Evil, or the Keep on the Borderlands, or Count Strahd, or whatever other story my players and I are telling. And as DM, I fudge rules, left right and center, to keep that story interesting. Am I cheating? No; we're not playing a &quot;game&quot; in that sense; cheating is meaningless when you're telling a story - you can't &quot;cheat&quot; and have Beowulf beat Grendel, and nor would it be &quot;cheating&quot; to have Grendel beat Beowulf.I'm of the school (clearly) that says &quot;DMs, by definition, can't cheat&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ThatGuyThere, post: 3527573, member: 36764"] ...wow. This isn't intended to be a flame (no, seriously), but I don't think I'd ever invite you back to my table after you tried to call me on "cheating" exactly one time. And I just mean that to say, "Wow, this hobby has enormous depth and variation to it". If we (D&D players) are just playing a game - getting together with friends to play a varient of Monopoly in which the Battleship and the Thimble have ACs and Hit Points and earn treasure - then yes, the DM is 100% "accountable" for his rules mechanics. It's a combat simulation at that point, similar to Battletech, in which there isn't really a "Referee", even though it'd be awfully handy to have one. The DM just interprets rules - hopefully neutrally - while trying his best to overcome the PCs, and when he fails, they gain treasure and he tries again with another, somewhat more powerful monster. I'm more interested in telling a story. Sure, there are cool game elements - random combat, special maneuvers, measuring how "cool" your character has become. But they're trappings to the story of the Temple of Elemental Evil, or the Keep on the Borderlands, or Count Strahd, or whatever other story my players and I are telling. And as DM, I fudge rules, left right and center, to keep that story interesting. Am I cheating? No; we're not playing a "game" in that sense; cheating is meaningless when you're telling a story - you can't "cheat" and have Beowulf beat Grendel, and nor would it be "cheating" to have Grendel beat Beowulf. I'm of the school (clearly) that says "DMs, by definition, can't cheat". [/QUOTE]

Verification