D&D General DM Authority

[Oofta]

"There is no one true way to play DnD"

"In my opinion the way you play is not playing DnD"

Do you not see how those statements are in conflict? Just because you say "hey, that's only my opinion" it doesn't change the fact that you are declaring a style of DnD as not DnD, while at the same time trying to take the high road and saying all ways of playing DnD are valid. Because what you are saying is that playing it that way is wrong, of course it is only in your opinion, but you can't believe that all ways are valid and that one way is wrong. That doesn't work.

It's a label. You would apply the label, I would not. I've never once said you're doing anything wrong no matter how often you deem it to be so.

Anyway I have to go do something more important like argue about which ice cream flavor is better.

 

[Scott Christian]

I see you didn't highlight him calling that style of DnD a "D&D based board game", because we were talking about hack and slash megadungeons. Not even necessarily ones with no DM, but he found the very concept of a hack and slash megadungeon with few or no NPCs where you simply fight monsters and take their stuff "not the game described in the rulebooks"


I think that is false. I think that is so provably false that the very idea of it being true is ludicrous. Is it my preferred style of play? No. But that doesn't make it not DnD.


But hey, it is okay to judge other people's way of playing the game as long as you say "in my opnion" first right? That isn't saying that there is only one true way to play the game, just that in your opinion any way that doesn't fit your vision of how the game shouldn't work isn't actually playing the game.


Of course, since I'll be accused of twisting words and lying and all that, let me just go ahead and quote myself here so I can point out how, no, I'm not lying. Yes, I did say these things, and if Oofta misunderstood, well, I believe the recently shut down thread everyone was saying that misunderstanding would be entirely on him.

Umm.... look four posts back. You two were discussing a table without a DM. He clearly said he couldn't see how it would be more than a glorified dungeon crawl.
So, reading earlier posts, it did not seem to me like your conversation was about dungeon crawls, but rather, how a no DM table can be anything more than a dungeon crawl.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Umm.... look four posts back. You two were discussing a table without a DM. He clearly said he couldn't see how it would be more than a glorified dungeon crawl.
So, reading earlier posts, it did not seem to me like your conversation was about dungeon crawls, but rather, how a no DM table can be anything more than a dungeon crawl.

So, you are going to simply ignore how I broke it down. How I showed that while there was one point where the conversation was no DM, the second point was "is this DnD".

That was the main point of the post he quoted, the main point he was responding to. I broke it all down, I demonstrated this. If you want to ignore that, then I don't know what to do here. You want to accuse me of something, then ignore the events that transpired.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's a label. You would apply the label, I would not. I've never once said you're doing anything wrong no matter how often you deem it to be so.

Anyway I have to go do something more important like argue about which ice cream flavor is better.

The label you used, repeatedly, was "Not DnD"

If "DnD" is a label to you, then I don't know what else to say.

 

[happyhermit]

I'm just going by people I've seen who had problems with metacurrency who would absolutely have expected to treat things like the variable hit points as actually describing the world (and it sounds like maybe the ones you're talking about would too), and I think that's sometimes a problem; a lot of people don't really want to deal with the idea that hit points really are meat points either, but at the end of the day, variable hit points are not any more "realistic" than one where people have someone can get lucky and luck is represented by metacurrency at least.

All I will say (hopefully ) about the nature of hitpoints/meatpoints is that they have never caused much trouble for me in actual play, no more than hitboxes or metacurrency or whatever. In theory having multiple tracks (as has been done in D&D optionally a lot) can alleviate some issues, but IME it's a wash whether or not it's worth it.

(As I acknowledged in another post, I'm aware some people can deal with that and not with scene editing, and I understand the distinction there. People who can deal with level variable hit points but not "I didn't take all that damage" metacurrency I kind of can't.)

I think at this point it comes down to "works for some not others". I agree that they can be played out similarly and that's why I mentioned that metacurrency can be a lot of things.

I did, indeed, assume at least some elements of actual, well, realism where an issue when you used "real". I suspect something like--hurm, "solidity" might have been a better term.

I admit the terms aren't always best, we have plenty of words to describe the idea but they often have particular connotations ie; Immutable and solidity seem to indicate the world is resistant to change, when it isn't from in in-character, in-fiction, in-world perspective. I like fidelity, but it's not all that clear to many and often gets interpreted as "realism" and discussing realism is a quagmire.

... The scene-editing part is a bit more of a step, but for a game where that kind of narrative control is appropriate I don't have a problem with it, either (though I'm not sold it always is).

For the record, I have 0 problems with it, same for many people I have played with who have the preference I keep mentioning. Not saying you are arguing otherwise but it's very common these days for people to hear "that's not my favorite, or I don't like that" and hear "It's terrible and shouldn't exist". Have had tons of fun playing storytelling games and ttrpgs that lean into storytelling, just because it isn't our favorite type of game doesn't mean we hate it. Very glad we have a few games that scratch the particular itches we have, and that some games are flexible enough to support a variety of preferences.

Personally? I don't see the difference between the players declaring changes and a DM declaring changes.

The GM "declaring changes" is also an issue for the people I mentioned.

Okay, if you are looking at it as similar to the roleplay for therapy, you might see why this is something we are considering could be a problem for the table.

Nope, you are just trying to associate "therapy" with "bad", while I was pointing out that the example you provided as "not roleplay" can clearly be roleplay, and that this is an established idea (probably older than ttrpgs).

Okay, are telling the jokes in game, or out of game? Serious question.

Huh? You were talking about puppets.

Because if they are telling jokes in the story... they are crafting a story.

Nope, not what "crafting" means.

The problem is you are acting like making a decision in character is the same as dropping something, or it is the waste product of the game.

The problem is, you are acting like making a decision in a game is the same as crafting a story.

But making a decision for what your character is doing is the main driving force of the game. Without that there is no game. It can't be seen as an accident or as a waste product.

Making decisions is the main point (outside of more story-telling type games where the story can be the main point). Of course it's entirely possible to have a game where "making a decision for what your character is doing" isn't a part of the game, and despite what you say, there is still a game, it just isn't a roleplaying one (see; storytelling games).

 

[Oofta]

The label you used, repeatedly, was "Not DnD"

If "DnD" is a label to you, then I don't know what else to say.

That it's just a label? That we simply disagree and you admit that I've never told you you're doing it wrong?

IMHO what you describe is a board game with an ad-hoc board. There's nothing wrong with that, I enjoy board games too. But even dungeon crawls (which honestly I don't much care for, but to each their own) has a give-and-take, an element of surprise, tactics, encounter balancing and on-the-fly decisions that a DM provides.

You consider it D&D? Okay. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[Maxperson]

"There is no one true way to play DnD"

"In my opinion the way you play is not playing DnD"

Do you not see how those statements are in conflict? Just because you say "hey, that's only my opinion" it doesn't change the fact that you are declaring a style of DnD as not DnD, while at the same time trying to take the high road and saying all ways of playing DnD are valid. Because what you are saying is that playing it that way is wrong, of course it is only in your opinion, but you can't believe that all ways are valid and that one way is wrong. That doesn't work.

That's simply not true.

"Your way is not D&D" is a statement of fact and One True Wayism. It's a declaration.

"In my opinion your way is not D&D." is a statement of opinion and NOT a declaration, therefore it cannot be declaring your way to not be D&D.

 

[Lanefan]

I see you didn't highlight him calling that style of DnD a "D&D based board game", because we were talking about hack and slash megadungeons. Not even necessarily ones with no DM, but he found the very concept of a hack and slash megadungeon with few or no NPCs where you simply fight monsters and take their stuff "not the game described in the rulebooks"

And, somewhat sadly, in this he is largely correct; at least when speaking of 4e and 5e.

1e and 3e, and to some extent 0e, were pretty straightforward in their focus on dungeon-delving, killing, and looting. 2e wishy-washed all over the place (typical for 2e). The tone of 4e and 5e, though, has moved rather sharply away from the hack'n'slash megadungeon model - 4e's earliest official adventures notwithstanding - to something less kill-and-loot oriented.

 

[Lanefan]

In my analogy fishing(roleplaying) was the goal. The various ways of fishing are how you go about getting there.

I'm going to take that analogy one step further if I may:

Fishing - however you do it - is the activity. (roleplaying)
Catching a fish you can eat for dinner (story) can be either an intended goal or a happy side effect of that fishing activity, depending on one's approach.

Maybe I've done all my research as to where the fish are, bought the latest fishfinder tech, and timed my expedition to suit their feeding hours; cause dammit, I'm bringing fish home come what may. (story as goal)

Maybe I just want to drift around in a boat on a nice summer day with a beer, and tossing a line over the side is a fine excuse to do so; and if any fish happen to jump into the cockpit then so be it. (story as side effect)

 

[Lanefan]

I am not crafting a full compost bin, I am doing prep in the kitchen and making and eating sandwiches, which can result in a full compost bin.

Given some stories I've read, the authors might well have been better off just crafting the full compost bin and stopping there.