Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 5833409">Honestly, the books should by default establish the "DM" as the "leader" of the group.  While more cooperative gaming does exist this style of gaming is often practiced by much more experienced players.  In my not so humble and highly anecdotal opinion, I believe that generally speaking the DM should lead the group.Using the political analogy of "consent of the governed" is a much more wishy-washy phrase than people would like to believe.  It can mean that players will give the DM UNLIMITED POWER!!!!!  over the game.  It could mean that the DM is little more than perhaps a slightly more experienced or savvy player who can help people out while they all play a very group-constructed game.The DM should lead by consent, however they should still "lead" in some fashion, from as simple as providing advice and guidance, perhaps answers to rules questions, to a forced march through the desert.  It really depends on the campaign, the DM, and the players.  I don't believe that a 100% cooperative game should be the default design, but I don't feel a dictatorship is the solution either.I do feel that in the past Wizards has done a good job in establishing the DM as the "guide" to the game, while acknowledging that the level of power the DM possesses is highly dependent upon the group.In short: Some groups work well in a highly cooperativly created game, some players don't.  Some DMs like to see the amazing things their players can create on their own while providing only a little support.  Some DMs like to run very narrative-focused story-style adventures.  Both are perfectly fine ways to play D&D.  However, I feel that the more cooperative games come about from experience and learning on the subject.  The more you play, the more likely you are to come up with creative ideas on your own, the more you want to see those ideas come to fruition.  When you are new to the game, you require much more direction and assistance in simply playing the game, creating your own content is unlikely to even be on your mind.I do not agree with the mentality that the DM is "just another player", be they helpful reference desk, general guide to the game, or narrativist, the DM holds a privileged position in any game where the players are not all equally experienced and educated.However, I feel that what Wizards is saying by "empowering the DM" and what this poster is saying are different things.  When I hear Wizards talk about "empowering the DM", I get the general feeling that what Wizards is trying to do is give the DM the ability to more easily break away from the pre-programmed systems and structures that are printed in the books.  They are not attempting to establish the DM as the table dictator, they are attempting to establish a more clearly defined way for DMs to be creative without worrying about breaking the game or relying on highly rail-roady printed content.</blockquote>

Verification