D&D General DM Authority

[FrogReaver]

I’m with Chaosmancer with this one, but I think that the two sides are using different definitions for “disagreement”.

“Disagreements” are like “I want pasta for supper and my wife wants chili”. This is the equivalent of the rules disagreements referred to in this thread. There is no ultimate authority between my wife and I, but somehow, we manage to agree on what to eat (every single night even!).

I have difficulty envisaging our having a sufficiently serious disagreement that we wouldn’t be able to come to a decision on.

Wives aren’t the best example. You have huge trust there and a commitment to each other that extends well beyond playing D&D or going out to dinner. Dinner isn’t a sufficiently important enough example either.

 

[Thomas Shey]

This is an interesting thing. I wouldn’t rejoice at “getting to be a player for once” because I generally prefer DMing. I mean, I enjoy playing from time to time, but I don’t get the itch for it like I do with DMing. I’d be curious to know if there’s any correlation between preference for a top-down power structure and preference for being a DM.

I usually am, and barring the urge to take a break for a while (as I'm doing in the current PF2e campaign I'm in) on the whole prefer to be a GM.

 

[Oofta]

Wives aren’t the best example. You have huge trust there and a commitment to each other that extends well beyond playing D&D or going out to dinner. Dinner isn’t a sufficiently important enough example either.

Besides, the correct wording for a happy marriage is "Yes dear, you're right dear, I was wrong dear."

 

[FrogReaver]

Besides, the correct wording for a happy marriage is "Yes dear, you're right dear, I was wrong dear."

That’s why internet agreements don’t get solved. There’s no wife in them.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yes a game can change.

But here's the thing, the DM does not have the authority to change the campaign's setting, tone genre, or style once it has started without player agreement.

That is a limit of DM Authority. A DM cannot switch up the game without player permission.

If you think that's a noncontroversial position, wait around for a thread about bait-and-switch campaign premises.

 

[Oofta]

A better comparison (for me) is trying to drive somewhere when you don't have a nav system directions.

The driver ultimately has control, the passenger may have a map. The driver makes the final decision on when to turn, they can ask for advice and the passenger(s) can help with navigation. It's not unusual for multiple people to have an idea of where they are going and if someone in the back seat has been there before the driver is probably going to listen to them.

So the driver is the "final arbiter of where the car goes", that doesn't mean that they don't listen. Unless you have google maps, because it never lies. Unless it's telling you to drive into a lake.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't understand how Chaosmancer can assert that groups can handle rules debates without a DM as final arbiter. I understand the thesis of group consensus, but there needs to be a referee, after all.

Why?

A: Rules question comes up. GM expresses an opinion. Player disagrees. GM asks rest of the group. Majority agrees with--whoever they agree with. Group goes with this.

What about that required the GM as referee there?

As I've said, I'd never claim that will work with all groups, but the claim it can't work with any seems poorly supported.

 

[Oofta]

If you think that's a noncontroversial position, wait around for a thread about bait-and-switch campaign premises.

If I change direction of a campaign it's generally with feedback from the players or at their behest. After all they're in charge of their PCs actions.

There's also a thing called "secrets that get revealed that can change direction" which has been part of some awesome campaign moments. But true bait-and-switch? Why would any DM do that?

 

[Thomas Shey]

This is a bit tangential to the issue, but how do my fellow ENWorlders handle NPCs authored in by players?

I've found that player retention over family and "friend" NPCs can be useful for relieving DM strain, but quickly becomes unfeasible if said NPC supposedly has access to goods or services which the player desires.

That's only a problem if the player expects to not only create, but operate said NPCs. Not what I've seen when people have done that.

 

[prabe]

Yes a game can change.

But here's the thing, the DM does not have the authority to change the campaign's setting, tone genre, or style once it has started without player agreement.

That is a limit of DM Authority. A DM cannot switch up the game without player permission.

Kinda depends on what you mean by "genre." The two campaigns I'm running are, I would say, pretty middle-of-the-road as far as D&D goes.

But when it comes to stories, Campaign One has had, at least : Undead Hunt; Dungeon Crawl; Item Quest; Cage Match; Dragon Lair; Travelogue; Gate Closure; and Vengeance (in 67 sessions) and Campaign Two has had, at least: Cultist Hunt; Mystery; Travelogue; Labor Dispute; Dungeon Crawl; Rampaging Gnolls; and Dragon Rescue (in 33 sessions). Some of those stories took a session or two; others took ... thirty or more, I think.