DM as . . .

[Pbartender]

Mostly as a facilitator.

However, there are NPCs in any adventure who are adversaries of the heroes. In order to represent these NPCs properly, it is often necessary for the DM to act as an opponent-adversary of the PCs through these NPCs, while still facilitating the game and its rules in a fair manner.

 

[Pbartender]

...to echo Hjorimir in different words.

(Stupid double-post.)

 

[Kahuna Burger]

gah, bad vote, bad vote! must read more carefully....

I unfortunately have had a run of adverserial DMs, which is not reflected in my overly quick vote.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I'd say about half and half. Most DMs in my experience crow when a well-designed climactic encounter brings the PCs down to size, but they're generally rooting for the party.

I don't care either way, as long as they're good at their style. The best D&D campaign I ever had was with a very adversarial GM; he played by the rules and never used more than we could beat, but we had to be both lucky and good to win through. The story was good, too.

 

[The Truth]

I chose half-and-half, although I wouldn't have chosen the term "adversary". As DaveMage said, the DM as adversary is an insta-win (and then very lonely). At the same time, it is my job as DM to make the players and their characters work for it. Easy fights, free treasure, unearned rewards (including non-mechanical IC rewards) tend, IME, to bore the living crap out of most players. It's a game, first and foremost, and games are more fun when they are challenging. That's true for me as DM too -- I am having the most fun when my players are chalenging me: overcoming my challenges, "winning" the adventures, pushing my game into unexpected directions, and so on. And it is true of the power gamer ("That combo does WHAT? -- Good show!") and the immersive role-player ("You do what with the queen? -- Good show!") alike.

I agree with this completely, and I try to make my adventures tough but fair. I like being surprised when my player come up with a clever ideas to overcome their challenges. (Of course, I like their ill-conceived plans just as much .)

P.S. Nice post count!

 

[Mallus]

I''m always a facilitator, even when I'm facilitating a beat-down...

 

[Reynard]

I'd say about half and half. Most DMs in my experience crow when a well-designed climactic encounter brings the PCs down to size, but they're generally rooting for the party.

I don't care either way, as long as they're good at their style. The best D&D campaign I ever had was with a very adversarial GM; he played by the rules and never used more than we could beat, but we had to be both lucky and good to win through. The story was good, too.

Quick story from this week's game to illustrate my DMing style:

The PCs (2 clerics, a fighter/rogue, a fighter and a barbarian) are trying to escape a orc, ogre and giant infested fotress via a teleport circle they have to find. They have already been in a number of encounters and haven't had a chance to rest, so they are at like half strength. Last week's cliff hanger had them breaking through a door to see 6 ogres with Large Halberds waiting for them. When the session started, the party formed up and made the ogres come to them. these kinds of fights, I roll dice in front of the players. I also have the players roll dice for me on things that are arbitrary/random: in this case, how many rounds before reinforcements arrive (1d6, the player rolled a 6). So they are fighting smart and using tactics and when the rogue moves in for a sneak attack he gets critted. 30 points of damage (also rolled in front of the players). he doesn't go down. The ogres last for another round or two, so the Pcs have 2 rounds to get through the next door to find the portal. They do so, and slam and bar the door just as reinforcements, including an ogre with an enormous maul (warclub) to break down the door.

Now the PCs have to search out the teleport circle while the ogre tries to bash down the door to get to the PCs. I had another player roll for the ogre every round as the party searched.

That player -- rolling open on the table -- must have rolled more 4s, 7s and 8s than I have ever seen. The PCs were able to not only fidn the portal, but do some looting and battle prep.

Because my DMing style is what it is -- "let the dice fall where they may" is probably the best description -- we had an exciting, tense session. Had I fudged to soften the crit on the rogue, or just made up a number of rounds it took for reinforcements to arrive, or just decided the giant ogre with the huge club could make it through the door in two swings,things would have been very different, and, IMO, not nearly as fun.

Luckily, I have players that appreciate my style* now, rather than the ones that got mad when they lost, died or were simply in a tough sitaution.

*mostly. they still bug me about loot.

 

[sniffles]

I generally see the GM as a facilitator. If I regularly had experience of the GM as adversary I wouldn't be playing with that GM any longer. The GM sometimes presents challenges to the players, but he shouldn't consider himself their adversary, IMHO.

 

[KB9JMQ]

The trick is to be a facilitator while seeming to be an adversary. That way the players really enjoy their victories. I cackle in glee when they screw up while at the same time, in my heart, I'm rooting for thier success.

I love when somebody writes my response for me .

I try to be the facilitator as much as possible but I think you have to be a bit adversarial to play the game.

 

[maggot]

I don't see DMs as either facilitators or adversaries, but rather as another "player" in the game. Of course, DMs play by a different set of rules than players of PCs.