D&D General DM Authority

[prabe]

The post Oofta was responding to was one level removed from the "no DM" discussion. I was defending that a hack and slash megadungeons are DnD. Because it was stated that that style of play is not DnD.

I don't think we disagree at all about this. That's definitely D&D, though it's not a playstyle of D&D that I particularly enjoy.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This whole conversation came about because chaos was saying that a DM doesn't need authority and that you can play without a DM. I basically stated that, to me, I don't see how that would work and that it wouldn't feel like D&D to me. So here we are. It still doesn't feel like D&D to me, no matter what label others put on it. That doesn't make them wrong.

Correction.

It was stated that it was impossible to play DnD without a DM.

I gave a style of DnD that could work without a DM.

That style is playing a hack and slash megadungeon, with limited NPCs. The type of game where you kick down the door, kill the monsters, take their stuff, and repeat.

You said that playing a hack and slash megadungeon where you you kick down the door, kill the monsters, take their stuff, and repeat was "Not DnD" and basically an "ad-hoc Boardgame"

I called you out on that. Then Scott brought it back up, and we are here.

I even acknowledged that playing without a DM might feel like something is missing for you, because you have always played with a DM.

 

[Chaosmancer]

@Oofta never said that it wasn't fine to play that way. He said that he just didn't think that it was D&D.

It is fine to play DnD that way, it just isn't DnD... that would mean you aren't playing DnD, so it isn't fine to play DnD that way.

By stating that you are no longer playing Dungeons and Dragons, you are stating that you have removed the game so far from what it is supposed to be, that it needs a new identity. Therefore you are playing it "wrong", because you are no longer playing the same game.

If you are playing poker by asking someone if they have a three and they respond with "Go Fish" then you are playing Poker wrong, because you are not playing Poker. I don't understand how this is not so blatantly obvious that we need to be having this conversation. If you tell someone "This is not X" then they are doing X wrong, because if they were doing it right, it would be X.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm not sure what you are "Playing out." You didn't answer my questions at all.

You asked if Tunnels and Trolls was Dungeons and Dragons. Since that is blatantly obvious, I moved to the next part of the question.

If you change the rules of DnD enough, are you no longer playing DnD?

I then went through and confirmed that playing a Hack and Slash Megadungeon with few NPCS, where you kick down the door, kill the monsters, take their stuff, and repeat changes no rules of DnD.

So, if I have changed no rules, then I am playing DnD, correct? We aren't playing Tunnels and Trolls, because we are using the rules of DnD. So unless you can point to rules that that style of play changes, then all we are left with is that playing a style you disagree with isn't DnD. Which is one true wayism.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I can literally start with D&D and slowly over time, change all of the rules to match those rule sets. Is that D&D or did changing the D&D rules eventually make it not D&D? And if so, when did the change happen?

If no rules change, then why is it not DnD?

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, I agree with that. If you’ve house ruled D&D to have an identical ruleset to Tunnels and Trolls, you aren’t really playing D&D any more, you’re playing Tunnels and Trolls. I don’t think anyone would ever do that, but if they did, I think it would be a valid assessment to say they’re playing Tunnels and Trolls rather than D&D.

Then is it X-1 where X = Tunnels and Trolls for whad D&D is? If one rule remains the same, it's still D&D?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I am confused. Are there people on here saying, that playing D&D without a DM, is still D&D?

That was part of it.

I demonstrated that the game can be played as a Hack and Slash Megadungeon, with random tables, and that there would be little need for a DM.

I was then challenged that a Hack and Slash Megadungeon was not a way to play DnD.

I went more specfic, making clear that I was talking about the style, about playing a Hack and Slash DnD game, in a Megadungeon, with few NPCs, where you just kill monsters and take their stuff.

I was told that was Not DnD. And then people got offended when I refused to let them get away with declaring an entire style of play (one I don't even like) as invalid, while simultaneously claiming that all ways of playing the game are valid.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes. In addition, if you disagree and that in your opinion it is not, you are telling them they're playing wrong.

You called a game of Hack and Slash DnD, in a Megadungeon where there are few NPCs, where the players kick in doors, kill monsters, and take their stuff before repeating, "Not DnD" and "an ad-hoc Board Game"

If you are telling someone that their way of playing DnD is not playing DnD, then you are telling them they are playing wrong. That is definitionally true, no matter how you try to get away from it. You said "the way you are playing the game is not DnD" that is telling someone they are playing the game wrong.

 

[Charlaquin]

Then is it X-1 where X = Tunnels and Trolls for whad D&D is? If one rule remains the same, it's still D&D?

I’m not really familiar with Tunnels and Trolls, so I’m not well positioned to make judgment calls about where that line lies. Nor am I particularly interested in such a thought experiment. The practical example under discussion is D&D as-written, but without a DM. I’d say that’s D&D, and to say it isn’t is awfully exclusionary.

 

[Chaosmancer]

IMO. If One-true-wayism means that anyone can call anything D&D and be defended for it then one-true-wayism is a crock of crap.

But one-true-wayism isn't about "calling anything D&D". It's about acknowledging that there are a wide variety of playstyles which others find fun. It's about acknowleding there's a wide variety of ways to play D&D. It's about not telling others what they should find fun. It's not about acknowleding that everything is D&D as long as someone is willing to call it such - that would be absurd.

So if someone said they liked 4e and someone else responded "That isn't DnD it is a poorly made board game" they are not engaging in one true wayism? I know they would be engaging in edition warring, but are they not also declaring an entire section of playing DnD as wrong?