Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 4163603" data-attributes="member: 307">And? Someone has to come up with what the responses of a game world will be. If no choice has any impact, then you aren't actually DMing a game, then you are really involved in public masturbation.No. They can (and do) also derive enjoyment from the party itself. If they don't, and only derive vicarious enjoyment through their guests supposed enjoyment, then they usually end up not enjoying themselves much.In other words, the DM should run the game the players want regardless of his or her own desires. That's simply ridiculous.No. Keep serving fish. If the guests don't like fish, that's their problem. If they want something else, they can cook dinner and eat at home, if they can get off their lazy hind ends and do it. You can always find other guests who do like fish.Easily. Go open up the covers of pretty much any published setting. How long will it take you to find something of no actual value to the players that exists merely as an artistic addition? Something that is purely "masturbatory" to use your phrasing? Six seconds? Less?Perhaps you should look at the actual text of the 1e DMG concerning alignments too. Or the text of any game that includes things like flaws or drawbacks concerning how to penalize players for having such attributes. The history of FRPGs (actually, RPGs, not just FRPGs) is all about imposing some form of DM fiat over players - in the sense that the DM decides what sort of campaign is being run, not the players.The problem you are having seems to stem from the notion that any kind of penalty for the players is either inherently wrong, or must be somehow scaled to their current power level. Basically, you seem to be arguing that no matter what the PCs do, the response will be "level appropriate", because to do otherwise you are "imposing" on the players somehow.I counter by saying this: by reacting in such a manner, you are not imposing on the players. You are actually freeing them. if their choices only result in level appropriate responses, then they don't actually have meaningful choices. They are on a set of railroad tracks of your making, and they will end up at "win-town" (so to speak) right on schedule, no matter what they do. On the other hand, if their choices have meaning, if the campaign world reacts to them in a consistent and reasonable manner, then their choices could easily get them killed. As a result, they have actual choices, not the false choices you seem to want to stick them with.Given your posts here, I'm inclined to think your alleged story hour is just an elaborate hoax.</blockquote>

Verification