-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Dealing with an "oldschool" DM
- Thread starter wayne62682
- Start date
Infiniti2000
First Post
I agree. That simply doesn't sound like fun. I don't like to waste my time on things like that so I would work to change it. Offer to run the game instead, perhaps even picking up right there. Or, simply having an open discussion will work, if everyone is mature enough to handle that. Lastly, leave and find another group. Tell the other players that you're going to DM for a while and invite them over. I'd say that there's about a 99.8% chance they'll follow you and not the other guy.
wayne62682
First Post
Not likely since the other players are the DM's wife, his sister and her boyfriend
I am planning on running an Eberron campaign and show how to really run a 4e game.
I wholeheartedly endorse Hjorimir's advice! Time and again, I see (here and elsewhere) problems raised that really arise from losing sight of the fact that a D&D game is firstly a social engagement. What point the pastime unless one is spending time in good company? If the participants were not friends from the first, then participation in an extended campaign should hardly leave them strangers. It is a cooperative venture!
Some of the examples seem to me just plain poor refereeing, regardless of game. There's a skill to master, and both earnest effort and aptitude figure in that -- just as some folks have what it takes to star in operas, while others (such as Yours Truly) can't carry a tune in a bucket.
As an "old school" DM myself, I agree that 4E calls for an adjustment to one's approach. Theoretically, I suppose one could adjudicate it more as one might old D&D, but I think that likely to void key reasons for choosing 4E instead.
In any case, the game has by design some balances engineered to somewhat tighter tolerances than in some others. The first requirement of a DM is technical proficiency; one must know and understand the rules before modifying them. Laziness on that account is just a second wrong that does not make things right.
Some of the examples seem to me just plain poor refereeing, regardless of game. There's a skill to master, and both earnest effort and aptitude figure in that -- just as some folks have what it takes to star in operas, while others (such as Yours Truly) can't carry a tune in a bucket.
As an "old school" DM myself, I agree that 4E calls for an adjustment to one's approach. Theoretically, I suppose one could adjudicate it more as one might old D&D, but I think that likely to void key reasons for choosing 4E instead.
In any case, the game has by design some balances engineered to somewhat tighter tolerances than in some others. The first requirement of a DM is technical proficiency; one must know and understand the rules before modifying them. Laziness on that account is just a second wrong that does not make things right.
MichaelSomething
Legend
I agree with this. If you want something done right, do it yourself.
Bodhiwolff
First Post
I'm not going to say anything new or innovative here. But I am going to add my support to a bunch of points already made.
I started my gaming career with AD&D as well -- see below -- and I can definitely attest that 4E is a new animal. And it is one which I vastly prefer, from a gamer standpoint.
Honest, open communication is a core part of any gaming situation. "Old School" AD&D relied upon a social contract between the DM and the players, in that the players knew that the DM had the best interests of the story at heart, and while the DM might fudge things a little, they never "cheated". Roleplaying was light on rules, but heavy on social/verbal interaction, and relied completely upon the ability of the DM and players to communicate their wishes to each other. Games fell apart when DMs had a hidden agenda (like, say, secretly enjoying kililng their players) or when these lines of communication broke down.
Furthermore, the setup of the printed products themselves reinforced this mentality. The original DMG was the big book of hidden rules, which the players weren't even supposed to crack open. The DM knew how things ran behind the scenes, and the players trusted that the DM ran the game properly.
This system had its flaws. My first game of AD&D was with a DM who, in all honesty, had no idea how the game ran. I played a 1st level wizard with "wish" spells at my disposal for 3 months before discovering that there were limits to the number and type of spells usable per day (boy, that was an adjustment!) I eventually ran a "better" game using the real rules, and while it was difficult for us to make the adjustment, we were all the better for it, and never looked back.
So, if your DM learned the original AD&D mentality, it takes a massive mindset shift to get over that.
Just take a look at Andy Collin's articles on Dragon, about game transparency. Instead of the old-school mentality of "hidden information", game transparency assumes that players/characters know certain things about monsters, and that putting such information in the players' hands ultimately speeds things up, makes things easier, and eases tension. Instead of hiding the AC, hit-points, status, and quality of monsters, instead 4E runs perfectly happily with the players having access to all of this information -- and in the case of my game, having the players track this for me, freeing up my brain for other tasks!
So talk to your DM.
Have them read some of the articles. Have them re-read the DMG. Have them physically explore the layout of the books, and see that the "rules" are now in the hands of the group as a whole, and not the DM. The entire group plays on a level playing field, and the DM simply guides the flow of the storyline.
It isn't about "blue bolts from heaven" anymore, or "forcing alignment shifts", or any of that sort of thing.
If your DM simply refuses to be convinced, then run a game for him -- all the time showing him in the new DMG, or in Dragon articles, where your attitude and ideas are coming from. Show him that losing a little bit of "control" is good for the game, and that things can be fun for everybody at the table.
And if they're still unconvinced, then it is time to find a new game.
I started my gaming career with AD&D as well -- see below -- and I can definitely attest that 4E is a new animal. And it is one which I vastly prefer, from a gamer standpoint.
Honest, open communication is a core part of any gaming situation. "Old School" AD&D relied upon a social contract between the DM and the players, in that the players knew that the DM had the best interests of the story at heart, and while the DM might fudge things a little, they never "cheated". Roleplaying was light on rules, but heavy on social/verbal interaction, and relied completely upon the ability of the DM and players to communicate their wishes to each other. Games fell apart when DMs had a hidden agenda (like, say, secretly enjoying kililng their players) or when these lines of communication broke down.
Furthermore, the setup of the printed products themselves reinforced this mentality. The original DMG was the big book of hidden rules, which the players weren't even supposed to crack open. The DM knew how things ran behind the scenes, and the players trusted that the DM ran the game properly.
This system had its flaws. My first game of AD&D was with a DM who, in all honesty, had no idea how the game ran. I played a 1st level wizard with "wish" spells at my disposal for 3 months before discovering that there were limits to the number and type of spells usable per day (boy, that was an adjustment!) I eventually ran a "better" game using the real rules, and while it was difficult for us to make the adjustment, we were all the better for it, and never looked back.
So, if your DM learned the original AD&D mentality, it takes a massive mindset shift to get over that.
Just take a look at Andy Collin's articles on Dragon, about game transparency. Instead of the old-school mentality of "hidden information", game transparency assumes that players/characters know certain things about monsters, and that putting such information in the players' hands ultimately speeds things up, makes things easier, and eases tension. Instead of hiding the AC, hit-points, status, and quality of monsters, instead 4E runs perfectly happily with the players having access to all of this information -- and in the case of my game, having the players track this for me, freeing up my brain for other tasks!
So talk to your DM.
Have them read some of the articles. Have them re-read the DMG. Have them physically explore the layout of the books, and see that the "rules" are now in the hands of the group as a whole, and not the DM. The entire group plays on a level playing field, and the DM simply guides the flow of the storyline.
It isn't about "blue bolts from heaven" anymore, or "forcing alignment shifts", or any of that sort of thing.
If your DM simply refuses to be convinced, then run a game for him -- all the time showing him in the new DMG, or in Dragon articles, where your attitude and ideas are coming from. Show him that losing a little bit of "control" is good for the game, and that things can be fun for everybody at the table.
And if they're still unconvinced, then it is time to find a new game.
Perram
Explorer
If you aren't having fun at the table, you really only have a few options. The best option is open honest communication with the DM, and hope he listens. But also remember to take his feelings into account, too. You're looking for 'middle ground' here, not winning him over completely. The DM needs to have fun, too.
If he's agreeable to it, run a one shot for the group on an off night, or at a good breaking point in the campaign. Take the time to show off the system, rewards, etc.
In the end, the DM just may not prefer the new style of gaming. That is his preference. In such a case, you'll either need to enjoy 4e the way he runs it, or suggest that he might want to look for a different system that is more to his taste such as Hackmaster Basic, 1e, 2e, or some of the OGL games like OSRIC.
If he's agreeable to it, run a one shot for the group on an off night, or at a good breaking point in the campaign. Take the time to show off the system, rewards, etc.
In the end, the DM just may not prefer the new style of gaming. That is his preference. In such a case, you'll either need to enjoy 4e the way he runs it, or suggest that he might want to look for a different system that is more to his taste such as Hackmaster Basic, 1e, 2e, or some of the OGL games like OSRIC.
Similar Threads
