DMG & MM: Players Stay Out?
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Grazzt said:
And therefore has no bearing on the discussion at all. Assuming that only "bad" DMs have a motivation to want their players to experience this new world through their characters is, well, it is pretty typical really. Every time a DM related discussion comes up here, there's a tide of posts that imply, if not outright say, DM's are out to screw their players at every turn. Quite frankly, I don't understand it. After all, you can't play the game without one; one assumes you wouldn't play with a bad one; so, the logical conclusion is that your DM doesn't do those things.
Counterspin
First Post
Reynard - People bring up bad GMs because they've experienced them playing D&D, and thus find them pertinent to the experience of D&D. Lots of us have had them either before we knew better or because of strong restrictions of playing groups due to geography or play preference.
Counterspin said:
That doesn't explain why it is nearly always "bad DMing" that is either at the root of a given problem or, more typcially, and inevitable consequence of any suggestion that gives (or, more appropriately, gives back) the DM his authority over the game and the milieu (notice I did *not* say authority over the players). Moreover, when was the last time someone said something to the effect of "This would be really awesome in the hands of a good DM"? i'm sure we could dig up a few examples here and there, but it is far less common a sentiment.
Counterspin
First Post
Bad DMing is given as the reason for most problems because the DM has the most power at the table, and is thus the most likely to screw up the worst.
As for "This would be really awesome in the hands of a DM," no one says it because it's trite, essentially. Anything would be good in the hands of a good DM.
As for "This would be really awesome in the hands of a DM," no one says it because it's trite, essentially. Anything would be good in the hands of a good DM.
Hussar
Legend
Reynard said:
There's a very simple reason for this Reynard.
Saying that bad design is good because a Good DM can make it good doesn't change the fact that it's bad design in the first place. Playing Blind Man's Bluff with rules mechanics is bad design. It's poor organization for one. For another, it ignores the rather large number of people out there who play and DM at the same time.
Heck, a recent poll on the 3e board showed that almost no groups had only one DM. A group after a minimum amount of time will likely include at least two people with DMing experience, if not more. Thus, the whole, "Gee, let's bury this rule in the DMG" doesn't inspire any more sense of wonder at all.
Maybe it's because I started with Basic D&D. There was no separation of the rules between multiple books there. There was no assumption that you were verboten from seeing the DM's rules. You bought to box set and you read it. Then you gave it to your friends to read, because they wanted a shot too.
The idea that we should play in ignorance and somehow this results in a better game is a dead horse that should have been turned to glue a very long time ago.
The Little Raven
First Post
I don't mind my players reading the MM or the DMG or anything of the sort (except if I'm running a module... touch that, and die!), since my word is the final authority at the table when I'm DMing. I think it's a matter of boundaries during play (I'm the DM, you're the player; you don't tell me I'm doing it wrong) than access to the information.
I have players who comment on my "changes" to monsters and concepts, when we're taking a break and chatting about stuff, but they have all learned to respect the DM's authority over his particular campaign so that we don't try to rules lawyer eachother.
I have players who comment on my "changes" to monsters and concepts, when we're taking a break and chatting about stuff, but they have all learned to respect the DM's authority over his particular campaign so that we don't try to rules lawyer eachother.
Hussar said:
It's not "playing" ignorance in this situation, though. The game has changed dramatically, both in flavour and in specific mechanics. therefore, if there was ever a time to allow a "sense of wonder" for the long time player, it is now -- but doing so means not pouring through the rulebooks that you don't need (with, of course, the supposition that you don't actually need them).
Thunderfoot
Hero
Oh the number of times I've been 'stoned' electronically for this...
The DMG or MM utilized by a player at my table without prior permission is punishable by loss of XP, loss of hit points and possible expulsion for a session.
I have played since the beginning - and I have always stated that the Dungeon Master's Guide is just that a guide for the DM, not the players. I too play and DM, but most of my players do not. The Rule 0 is trying to put the horse back in the can... as I see it, if a player disputes your ruling and then cites from the book that says, you have ultimate authority to alter content they should immediately be struck by lightning for being too stupid to read the section that says...he's the DM, that's why.
I understand the need to regulate the 'big baby' syndrome of I can do anything and I'll prove it. But at the same time how many DMs have bent the rules to build a plot poijnt only to have Stanley T. Nerdburger say [whiny voice] umm, according to the DMG on page 12,145 the square of the angle of the hypotenuse is directly proportionate to the effect of El Nino on the hyperbole of the gravitic flux capacitor and therefore, you're wrong.. nyah nyah nyah [/whiny voice]
In 1st and 2nd edition at the very least I could say, "you have offend the gods, you are hit with 1 million, 1 millionth hp lightning bolts...take 1 hp of damage and make 1 million saves for all of your equipment", but now with object DR, and such, you can't even do that....
Granted MOST people do not try to unbalance the game with unfair knowledge; MOST people know when to separate player form character info, MOST people have the common decency to try to at least hide their copy of the forbidden tomes.... It is however the Lowest Common Denominator for which the no way, now how, no why rules existed. Frankly, I want them back!
The DMG or MM utilized by a player at my table without prior permission is punishable by loss of XP, loss of hit points and possible expulsion for a session.
I have played since the beginning - and I have always stated that the Dungeon Master's Guide is just that a guide for the DM, not the players. I too play and DM, but most of my players do not. The Rule 0 is trying to put the horse back in the can... as I see it, if a player disputes your ruling and then cites from the book that says, you have ultimate authority to alter content they should immediately be struck by lightning for being too stupid to read the section that says...he's the DM, that's why.
I understand the need to regulate the 'big baby' syndrome of I can do anything and I'll prove it. But at the same time how many DMs have bent the rules to build a plot poijnt only to have Stanley T. Nerdburger say [whiny voice] umm, according to the DMG on page 12,145 the square of the angle of the hypotenuse is directly proportionate to the effect of El Nino on the hyperbole of the gravitic flux capacitor and therefore, you're wrong.. nyah nyah nyah [/whiny voice]
In 1st and 2nd edition at the very least I could say, "you have offend the gods, you are hit with 1 million, 1 millionth hp lightning bolts...take 1 hp of damage and make 1 million saves for all of your equipment", but now with object DR, and such, you can't even do that....
Granted MOST people do not try to unbalance the game with unfair knowledge; MOST people know when to separate player form character info, MOST people have the common decency to try to at least hide their copy of the forbidden tomes.... It is however the Lowest Common Denominator for which the no way, now how, no why rules existed. Frankly, I want them back!
