Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8164486" data-attributes="member: 6801228">(Chunk, how do we keep moving nearly 10 pages a day?)Why then would you want to claim an authority which to use is morally wrong? That a DM could do something morally wrong is not a good thing, but you seem to want to defend the right they have to exercise just that authority.That you would do so is rather beside the point that other people have done so. And since they have, and it worked, then it logical to then put forth that a DM is not strictly neccessary to run the monsters. Because, sometimes, people let the Players run the monsters.Why is saying the game belongs to the entire group a deal breaker for you?"I can't see people liking it, therefore it is impossible for people to like" seems like an incredibly weak argument. Considering we just proved that you can run DnD without a DM, something you flat out admitted was possible, then how can you turn around and say that "yes, you cannot run DnD without a DM"I mean, I can't tell you what to to think, but refusing to acknowledge your own admission and stating that you are the most important person at the table? That seems like a very tenous position to have.Um... first off, you can't claim that it isn't fun for them. You literally have nothing to base that on except the fact that you can't imagine it would be fun. Secondly, "a different experience" is not "a different game" Yeah, an NFL player has a different experience than the guys playing football in the park, but they are still playing the same game to a large degree.So the players need to know every houserule, every public knowledge detail and all of that months before the game? No, that is when you start making things, but that isn't when the players are informed of them. I guess if you do a whole bunch of pre-session zero talking, that is when these things might come up, but seeing "the dice hit the table" and realizing you probably have everyone roll their stats... a player might roll stats that inspires them to play a paladin during session 0. Being a paladin they would want to be part of a holy order. Do you honestly restrict them to a specific and limited group of potential holy orders, with no input from them at all?Which again, I don't get. I don't see the value in overriding the group. I don't see myself as more important than the other people sitting at the table. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I have been wondering if part of the issue we are running into stems from the choice all those decades ago to say "Dungeon Master". I'm honestly a little sick of that title, especially since it doesn't seem accurate. (And no, I don't see the problem in it being related to "Master of Ceremonies" as I'm sure someone will immediately say, for one thing, that title seems to apply to officially hosted events which are like stage productions. Which is not how I'd describe most DnD games)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------See, that is the thing though. A lot of people don't present this as a preference. A lot of people present it as though a collaboratively built world must by its very nature be an inferior product. The "change in play" is a sign, to me, of a poorly executed version of what we are talking about. Especially since it caused problems for you to be able to navigate the world. Just because the only time someone served hotdogs to you they were burnt black and tasted horrible doesn't mean that it is impossible to make a hotdog that tastes good. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I could point to several games I have played and several more that I have watched and a lot of conversations on these forums that would tell me that I am right.So.. because most people will continue doing a thing means... what exactly? You admit it is possible, so why can't we discuss doing it.</blockquote>

Verification