D&D General DM Authority

[Blandco]

Did they ruin those games though? They certainly lead to a different experience than the designed one, but if the people playing had more fun, who’s to say they the game was “ruined”?

It's been covered by many articles. Most games never came to a satisfying conclusion and ended up dragging on and on. The number one point most people come to is that house rules always ruined the basic gameplay. Interesting isn't it?

BoardGameGeek

boardgamegeek.com

 

[Charlaquin]

Again no system mastery is considered. An experienced player will be less disappointed by restrictions than a brand new player who just read the PH and was looking forward to playing a dwarf. That's all. Just considering the perspective of the player.

I have never known a new player to read the PHB before playing the game. Usually DMs either give them a set of pregens to choose from or else asks what kind of character they want to play and walks them through creating it.

Now, the fact that the PHB is so unfriendly to new players is a problem that hurts the hobby, but that’s a whole different topic than the one we’re discussing here.

 

[Oofta]

But to a brand new player they are.

I've taught several people to play. Not one thought of it as a board game after the first session, none had any issues with my restrictions.

You seem to be seeing issues where there are none.

 

[FrogReaver]

Again no system mastery is considered. An experienced player will be less disappointed by restrictions than a brand new player who just read the PH and was looking forward to playing a dwarf.

I'm not convinced that is true. But an experienced player does has more recourse as it will be relatively easier for him to find an alternate game.

Speaking of dwarves. Our next campaign features only dwarf PC's and it's for play purposes. (Tends to give a greater feeling of belonging and caring about what happens to the dwarf community).

That's all. Just considering the perspective of the player.

If I'm a new player - I'm going to join said game and give it a try and see if I even like D&D at all. I'll give it a few sessions. I might find myself loving the game. I might find myself hating it. And I might find that I'm really not into this character and really want to play my dwarf and so i go find a game I can be a dwarf in.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's been covered by many articles. Most games never came to a satisfying conclusion and ended up dragging on and on. The number one point most people come to is that house rules always ruined the basic gameplay. Interesting isn't it?

BoardGameGeek

boardgamegeek.com

But again, “ruined” the game by who’s standards?

I am well aware of the effects that common Monopoly house rules have on the game, and that a lot of the common perceptions of Monopoly (chiefly that it “takes forever”) are a result of those house rules. But I’m not willing to say that the experience these house rules create is inherently worse than the base experience. That’s up to individual players to decide what they like and what they don’t.

 

[Aebir-Toril]

Arguing that house rules and restrictions ruin a tabletop RPG is never going to be a popular argument. There's a reason my mates and I sit down to play D&D with kitbashes.

 

[Imaculata]

It's been covered by many articles. Most games never came to a satisfying conclusion and ended up dragging on and on. The number one point most people come to is that house rules always ruined the basic gameplay.

To be honest, I have never played a game of Monopoly that didn't feel like it dragged on and on. Even without house rules. Imo, it is just a dreadful game, where the winner is decided pretty early on in the game, and what follows is just a long drawn out crawl towards the inevitable victory of that winner.

Arguably, this is what prompted Monopoly Legacy; a variant of Monopoly that is all about switching up the rules, and changes to the game being permanent.

D&D never stated that its rules are law. They are guidelines. Most DMG's for example explicitly state that the DM can choose to not make use of magic items at all, for example.

 

[Don Durito]

Yes. A lot of the monopoly house rules are there to basically keep the game as a group game for as long as possible and give people a chance to keep playing.

 

[Blandco]

I've taught several people to play. Not one thought of it as a board game after the first session, none had any issues with my restrictions.

You seem to be seeing issues where there are none.

If I went by my experiences as a DM I would have a similar experience as you have. No issues.

However, like I said for research I have went in as a player looking at the online games that were available to me and I found the issues with DM authority consistently overriding player choice. I saw things much differently then I did as a DM running games.

And that is pretty much it. Like I said I am limited to what I can experience in the online D&D landscape but I can't discount what I have experienced.

 

[Aebir-Toril]

None. My answer comes from the perspective of a new D&D player who might have their interest piqued by something in the PH or free rules.

Okay, and? What's your point? If I'm running a humans game, I'll make it clear prior to the game session. Questions are welcome from the players. If they don't want to join in, so be it.

 

[Minigiant]

1) The original design of Monopoly was for it to have one player get a lead then absolutely steamroll the remaining players.

2) A player coming to a DM's game and attempting to change it is as bad as a DM not telling the player what type of game it is.

3) To me, the biggest source of the moaning and groaning of DMs and players is them going to Session 1 without being both on page of type of game it is and finding the disagreement later after investment.

4) Most of the groups memes about D&D have a source based on the cultures of D&D and its community and designers.

 

[Rhenny]

Ideally, DM and Players need to have trust in each other and have to established the game concept prior to play. Does the DM use pre-existing challenges as created in adventure or does the group allow DM to improvise to add excitement and challenge at times.

Personally, I like DMing and playing in games where everyone is free to improvise in an attempt to add excitement and autonomy for players and DM alike. I like to encourage “yes and” interplay between characters and npc/monsters so that any encounter or situation can vary greatly depending on choices. I like players to know up front that as a DM, moments can change. Reinforcements can arrive. Monsters/NPCs can run or escape. Hazards can crop up at unexpected times. Sometimes evil masterminds even make mistakes. Sometimes magic functions strangely for better or worse.

I like to play with people who can immerse themselves in fantasy and push rules to the background. I like players who trust that the DMs job is to create excitement and challenge without invoking “us vs them” attitude. I always want to avoid the “Zero Sum Game” with D&D.

 

[Aebir-Toril]

If I went by my experiences as a DM I would have a similar experience as you have. No issues.

However, like I said for research I have went in as a player looking at the online games that were available to me and I found the issues with DM authority consistently overriding player choice. I saw things much differently then I did as a DM running games.

And that is pretty much it. Like I said I am limited to what I can experience in the online D&D landscape but I can't discount what I have experienced.

Is it really a DM overriding player choice, or a player choosing to play something the DM has already said is not welcome at their table?

 

[zarionofarabel]

If I went by my experiences as a DM I would have a similar experience as you have. No issues.

However, like I said for research I have went in as a player looking at the online games that were available to me and I found the issues with DM authority consistently overriding player choice. I saw things much differently then I did as a DM running games.

And that is pretty much it. Like I said I am limited to what I can experience in the online D&D landscape but I can't discount what I have experienced.

But if this new player that has already read the PHB probably also did even the tiniest bit of research on the hobby simply because they took the time to read the PHB (something many veteran players can't claim). This extra exposure to the greater hobby would most likely lead them to the conclusion that some DMs restrict stuff because of reasons. Then they would already know they need to find a game that includes what they are looking for. Personally I would find it very unusual to meet a player that took the time to read the PHB but also did no further research or reading and was then flabbergasted by the idea that some DMs don't allow elfs in their games. IMHO, anyway.

 

[Don Durito]

I think people looking for games online have probably already been thoroughly introduced to the game. Even if they have never played it, I think before you start looking to play a game with strangers over the internet you have probably immersed yourself in the online culture.

I don't think many people get a Player's Handbook for Christmas and immediately go to Roll20 for their first go at playing the game.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't think it's "Entitlement" to expect to be able to play something in the book that you bought as an eager board game enthusiast?

The PHB itself tells you in the into section to ask the DM what is available and what isn't. Given that the game itself goes out of its way to tell players that so early in the book means that it is absolutely entitlement to expect all options to be available.

 

[Aebir-Toril]

It's been covered by many articles. Most games never came to a satisfying conclusion and ended up dragging on and on. The number one point most people come to is that house rules always ruined the basic gameplay. Interesting isn't it?

BoardGameGeek

boardgamegeek.com

A correlative truth doesn't invalidate the exception, nor does it indicate a rule.

 

[Charlaquin]

To be honest, I have never played a game of Monopoly that didn't feel like it dragged on and on. Even without house rules. Imo, it is just a dreadful game, where the winner is decided pretty early on in the game, and what follows is just a long drawn out crawl towards the inevitable victory of that winner.

That’s by design. The game was created as a propaganda piece to teach kids about the inherent unfairness of capitalism.

 

[Aebir-Toril]

Man. When Elf loli reminds of Aioli, you know you should probably go get something to eat. Back in a while.

A little Aioli spread on bread with some fine wine to accompany a hot meal...

 

[Aebir-Toril]

If the DM claims to want to run a game of 5E and then does not not allow the PC races that are in the PH...

I don't think it's "Entitlement" to expect to be able to play something in the book that you bought as an eager board game enthusiast?

It's a board game. I have never seen someone throw away the boot in Monopoly for "reasons". Yet this is what I see in most discord servers in the LFG section.

If they advertised as much beforehand, there's no problem.