DM as . . .

[Mark CMG]

The poll isn't about what you prefer or think the game is meant to sanction, it is about what you see most often at the table.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Most often ... facilitator. I don't like DMs whose sole purpose is to kill the party. I mean, they're the DM. If you are out to show me how you can weild your big stick, toss my character up against a terrasque so I can bow at your ability to defeat me.

I'd rather play with a DM who is all about the story. Their story, my player's interaction with it ... which of course when done right becomes our story.

Now, having said that. I know most DMs have a few favorite NPCs. Sometimes that can become adversarial. But I prefer that kept to a small portion of the game.

 

[DaveMage]

Facilitiator.

Kinda silly for a DM to be the adversary since he or she certainly can cause a TPK on a whim.

 

[EricNoah]

My DMs are players in my game, and I'm a player in their games. Nobody's an adversary. We all know deep down inside our true desire is to delight and entertain. Sometimes that means kicking the PCs where it hurts, so that later victory is that much sweeter. And nothing is more entertaining than seeing your character choices, roleplaying, and clever planning pay off.

 

[CleverNickName]

Well, in our campaign I *am* the DM...and I like to think of myself as a facilitator. I haven't had anyone complain about it, and I haven't had anyone slash my tires after a particularly difficult gaming session...so I think I'm on the right track.

 

[Ourph]

I see most DM's playing the role of facilitator during the out-of-game, adventure-design phase and adversary during actual play. Obviously, the DM is expected to play by the rules established in the facilitator phase (even adjudicate them) during the adversary phase, which prevents the "automatic TPK" scenarios mentioned above.

 

[hong]

I see most DM's playing the role of facilitator during the out-of-game, adventure-design phase and adversary during actual play. Obviously, the DM is expected to play by the rules established in the facilitator phase (even adjudicate them) during the adversary phase, which prevents the "automatic TPK" scenarios mentioned above.

Bah. Rules are for players. Stop oppressing the DM.

 

[Reynard]

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.

 

[diaglo]

rules as guidelines.

the referee is there to make rulings.

 

[Hjorimir]

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.