D&D General DM Authority

[prabe]

And that's my point.
There are many different types of people playing D&D now. So DMs cannot be vague.

Seems to me you're setting up a case where the DM has to be specific about excluding things that haven't occurred to them, and where the DM is to blame for not getting certain pop-culture-ish references. Maybe the player needs to be specific about their character idea.

 

[generic]

And that's my point.
There are many different types of people playing D&D now. So DMs cannot be vague.

So, are you contradicting what you said earlier?

You implied that the DMG's game type definitions could lead to better GM-player communication.

Now, you're implying that the DM needs to list every element of the game before they begin running it, lest the player be baited.

 

[Minigiant]

This just seems like such an odd ax to grind. I don't disagree - I think you have a point. DMs should be clear what kind of game their running.

But this...


Has never come up on this thread other than from you. Are there secrets about my world and details about upcoming events they don't know about? I sure hope so!

I mean, I don't know if you just got burned by some DM but can you point to one posting on this board that has said or implied that hiding the tone and general feel of the campaign is a good thing? I mean, sometimes it happens because the DM doesn't know how to clearly state things and players don't know how to ask. But on purpose? With intent? Not that I'm aware of.

I didn't say that it is on purpose.
The point is that many say that revealing campaign characteristics is voluntary.
"I do it but DMs shouldn't be forced to" in one way or another has been said a lot.

 

[FrogReaver]

DMs should say Hercules and Goku are banned at Session 0 not Session 4
The problem is a whole lot of DMs are waiting until Session 4 and getting upset,

It's actually fairly hard to cover all the things that aren't okay in a game.
What about Wolverine?
What about Captain America?
What about the Hulk?
What about etc?

I'd hate to see your session 0's

 

[generic]

I didn't say that it is on purpose.
The point is that many say that revealing campaign characteristics is voluntary.
"I do it but DMs shouldn't be forced to" in one way or another has been said a lot.

I'd agree if you'd stick to one god-damned definition for campaign characteristics.

 

[prabe]

The point is that many say that revealing campaign characteristics is voluntary.

There's a difference between telling the players what kind of campaign/s you usually run, so they have a feel for the range, and telling them specific facts about the setting you want their characters to find out.

 

[Oofta]

I didn't say that it is on purpose.
The point is that many say that revealing campaign characteristics is voluntary.
"I do it but DMs shouldn't be forced to" in one way or another has been said a lot.

I'm just saying that this is a really odd thing to keep harping on. I agree. While no one is perfect, DMs should be clear on what type of game they're running.

What else needs to be said?

 

[Minigiant]

So, are you contradicting what you said earlier?

You implied that the DMG's game type definitions could lead to better GM-player communication.

Now, you're implying that the DM needs to list every element of the game before they begin running it, lest the player be baited.

Nope

Just:
Theme
Tone
Playstyle

It's actually fairly hard to cover all the things that aren't okay in a game.
What about Wolverine?
What about Captain America?
What about the Hulk?
What about etc?

I'd hate to see your session 0's

"The Beast Route is a heroic Fantasy game."

Boom. All my players who that Marvel Superhero Characters and their lookalikes are banned.

 

[zarionofarabel]

way to miss my point.

Then what is your point?

 

[generic]

"The Beast Route is a heroic Fantasy game."

Boom. All my players who that Marvel Superhero Characters and their lookalikes are banned.

Banned is an interesting term. I'd chalk that one down to common sense.