D&D DMing is not playing chess against the players!!


log in or register to remove this ad


Trust me- before the term RBDM showed up, there was the Killer DM.
Yeah, okay, we were all thirteen years old . . . once.
I'll never forget the first 3 DMs I played under. The first guy was authoritarian but fair. The second guy was pure cool. The third guy?

The third guy put a Huge Ancient Red Dragon in the first main room of the 1st level of a dungeon into which a 1st level party was venturing.
I did shi . . . er, stuff like that, too,* but the goal wasn't to fight - it was to negotiate.



*In my case it was a balrog who demanded the adventurers bring him some macguffin from the dungeon in exchange for their lives.
 

'll never forget the first 3 DMs I played under. The first guy was authoritarian but fair. The second guy was pure cool. The third guy?

The third guy put a Huge Ancient Red Dragon in the first main room of the 1st level of a dungeon into which a 1st level party was venturing.
I once put a Pit Fiend in a Tux at the door to dragon's lair. (He was the doorman.) The party was about level 12. The paladin (I should have seen this coming) wanted to attack him. Fortunately, one of the other players talked him out of by saying "don't attack the dungeon dressing."
 


I know 4th ed has brought in more tactical stuff on the tabletop, but is this "D&D as chess" more of a recent thing?
No, it isn't.

One of my favorite devices is the pit. However, my players, after
having several promising players impaled at the bottom of one, got
together and brainstormed on a solution to the problem. Their solution:
tie everyone together in mountain climber fashion so that when a player
fell into a pit he would be saved by a safety line. My countermove: I
decided to have a weight (1 ton) drop from above the pit when it was
sprung, which would carry the player and all his confederates into the
pit, crushing or impaling (take your pick) them all.

But never underestimate the player! They again brainstormed on a
solution and came up with another award winning idea: since my traps
were sprung by weights they would take a small cart with them, loaded
with lead, which they would push in front of them. They also would
bring several pairs of wheels and a carpenter, so they could continually
reuse the same cart. My countermove: I decided that when a player
reached a trap it would not only activate but would also activate several
other previously-unactivated traps that would lie along the player’s approach
paths. Not only did this prevent the players from using their cart
idea, it also deterred them from ever trying to weasel around my pits
again!
- Dragon #26, 1979
 

It's a game. The DM is supposed to challenge the players.

In a tour de force, pure game elements and pure internal-consistency elements blend in perfect harmony without reducing the fantastic to the mundane.

Not every thing all the time has to be a tour de force. In fact, I will suggest that Rule #1 is something like "Lighten Up and Have Fun".

The dungeon should be mysterious and surprising and scary and weird and wonderful, and often enough darned funny, not boring.

It should offer the chance to get your character killed in pursuit of treasure and glory.

Just because there's an ancient red dragon, it does not follow that you need to pick a fight with it. That holds when it's "properly" down on the 7th level or deeper, too.

If you can't negotiate the dungeons, then stay out of the wilderness.
 
Last edited:

In a tour de force, pure game elements and pure internal-consistency elements blend in perfect harmony without reducing the fantastic to the mundane.
This.

Ideally, for every monster, the most tactically sound action should also be the action that is most conducive to creating fun at the table.

I always experience a vague sense of dissonance when I deliberately take what I feel to be a tactically inferior option because I think it would be more fun for the players.
 



Remove ads

Top