DM as . . .

[JRRNeiklot]

Nail, meet head.

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.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I would say it has been about half and half. More recently it has been favoring the facilitator, but that may be partly due to my being a little more careful about joining groups if I get the feeling the DM is more adversarial.

 

[DungeonMaester]

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.

Quoted for sooo much truth!

To many Dms now a days are under the impression that they players should do the story telling. This leads to Generic Fantasy campaign where you can be just about everything in D&D books, and play through any generic story line from Book A, Movie B.

As a Dm, I flesh out a world filled with Clans, Kings, and Families and such to make a player feel like he as much a part of this world as he is the real world when he sees his friends walking down the street and his enemies in a dark alley.

What I wont do is play ball. If you want to play something that doesn't exist in my campaign, then go cry to some one who cares. I didn't spend 24 hours making this world just to cave in to a player who spent 5 mins. making a character sheet.

/Off soapbox

---Rusty

 

[The Shaman]

Yes.

 

[Gorin Stonecleaver]

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.

While this particular instance proved to be suspenseful it is a rare occurrance that such is created by the dice falling where they may. You do several good things that add to the suspense, like having the players roll for the time for reinforcements to arrive. Ie anything where they are rolling to decide something important about the outcome creates suspense. I am by not by any means a great DM and I "wing it" way too much sometimes but I would argue that a great DM can create a session like you just described every session, with the players still feeling like they could have died with one bad roll. The Great DM is like the director of a great movie he can create the illusion of suspense when there is none. The players are so absorbed into the story they don't ever consider the Dm changed the damage on that crit to the rogue from 48(dropping him to dead) to 30 (OMG hes still alive). I have acheived this kind of suspension of disbelief in 4 or 5 sessions in the 6 years I have been been DMing in 3rd edition. There is no feeling like it in the world (well almost no feeling like it ) it is what I strive for every session. Most times I fall short of my goal but then I am only a fair to middlin DM. I play in a game where the DM is a strictly let the dice fall where they may and he is a better Dm than me but if he never facillitates or fudges then all of the great moments will only happen when the dice fall that way. I have tried to convert him but he and I go round and round about the dm "cheating". I prefer to think of it as Directing a great action movie. I realize this can go to far you have to kill characters on occaision or in a long running game they discover you fudge the dice sometimes. It is a difficult balancing act to know when to let the dice stand and when to change it a little for the suspense. Anyway just my 2 cents on the topic. Good gaming all.

 

[DungeonMaester]

Yes.

Yes? To?

No?

---Rusty

 

[Reynard]

While this particular instance proved to be suspenseful it is a rare occurrance that such is created by the dice falling where they may. You do several good things that add to the suspense, like having the players roll for the time for reinforcements to arrive. Ie anything where they are rolling to decide something important about the outcome creates suspense. I am by not by any means a great DM and I "wing it" way too much sometimes but I would argue that a great DM can create a session like you just described every session, with the players still feeling like they could have died with one bad roll. The Great DM is like the director of a great movie he can create the illusion of suspense when there is none. The players are so absorbed into the story they don't ever consider the Dm changed the damage on that crit to the rogue from 48(dropping him to dead) to 30 (OMG hes still alive). I have acheived this kind of suspension of disbelief in 4 or 5 sessions in the 6 years I have been been DMing in 3rd edition. There is no feeling like it in the world (well almost no feeling like it ) it is what I strive for every session. Most times I fall short of my goal but then I am only a fair to middlin DM. I play in a game where the DM is a strictly let the dice fall where they may and he is a better Dm than me but if he never facillitates or fudges then all of the great moments will only happen when the dice fall that way. I have tried to convert him but he and I go round and round about the dm "cheating". I prefer to think of it as Directing a great action movie. I realize this can go to far you have to kill characters on occaision or in a long running game they discover you fudge the dice sometimes. It is a difficult balancing act to know when to let the dice stand and when to change it a little for the suspense. Anyway just my 2 cents on the topic. Good gaming all.

Ultimately, to me it is a game first and while I do my best to allow players the opportunity and possibility to go their own way and create a great story, I don't so so at the detriment of the game. I have just had too many cool "stories" (not narratve plots, but guys sitting around shooting the bull) come out of those funky bones for me to believe that it makes a better game to fudge on behalf of whatever story I think I want to tell (whether that's for or against the players).

Some players don't like that. They don't play with me for long. That's okay, because a) I need to have fun too, and b) a slightly smaller group of like minded people always results in a better game.

 

[Gorin Stonecleaver]

Ultimately, to me it is a game first and while I do my best to allow players the opportunity and possibility to go their own way and create a great story, I don't so so at the detriment of the game. I have just had too many cool "stories" (not narratve plots, but guys sitting around shooting the bull) come out of those funky bones for me to believe that it makes a better game to fudge on behalf of whatever story I think I want to tell (whether that's for or against the players).

Some players don't like that. They don't play with me for long. That's okay, because a) I need to have fun too, and b) a slightly smaller group of like minded people always results in a better game.

Todd is that you? lol Just kidding. You sound just like my friend though. We can agree to disagree. I really don't try to tell the story I want, so much as try and reward the players for acting like heroes. I kill players for stupidity (not so much now they are smarter). I think the rogue vaulting off the clerics shoulders to get over the ogre and tumbling behind the evil orc shaman should be rewarded so when a lucky roll of a crit for a failed jump or tumble roll would kill said heroic rogue I sometimes choose to intervene. and reduce the damage for said crit to reward the player for his actions. That is why I don't always let the dice fall where they may.

Your turn to rebut my argument, or we could just agree to disagree.

 

[Sir Elton]

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.

I see myself as a facilitator.

 

[was]

50/50