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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BroccoliRage" data-source="post: 3095081" data-attributes="member: 38402">To be honest, I haven't changed much in regard to how I run games as much as added to it. I liked Chaosium's SAN stat, yoink! Hackmaster's improvement of stats was a little fast for my taste, but every three levels allowing percentile roll could work. Yoink! Oooh, Dragonfist has a wuxia ability, yoink! B/X allows races to be played as classes, so I can use those as a basis for a race's natural tendencies, and have those who choose to class their elf as anything other than an elf be a sort of deviance, allowing almost any type of race/class combination that fits within the milieu, yoink! Bard Games' Arcanum has Andamen? Yoinkity yoink yoink!Of course, I'm not an unbiased source. My games aren't quite as combat-heavy as they were in those heady years of boy-dom, but at the core I don't think my attitude has changed much. I started playing when I was 7 years old and ran my first games when I was eight. I had the benefit of a step-dad who allowed me to sit at the table with his pals on Saturday nights, and I learned from folks who had been playing for a long time. My AD&D experience has been lucky enough to be augmented by players with plenty of background. I haven't kept a record of what all has changed in that time, so you're probably right. I'm sure some things have changed, but my basic style has remined the same from what I can tell.  [qoute]Well, frankly if that works for you, that's great...but I'd never run a game where I didn't implicitly trust my players (who are my friends).  Under 3.x, you rarely have to improvise so dramatically as you did under AD&D, for example.  Using stat checks covered an awful lot when there was no system for skills, so often proficiencies were used as a 'best guess'.  "Well, I was a blacksmith's son, so I should be able to repair my sword if I can use the forge."In your example, you pull the numbers out of the air for what feels right.  That's fine, but I prefer having some guidelines so I, as DM, can stay consistent.  Consistency allows my players to rightfully gauge what they can and cannot do in the game world.  3.X offers use the <a href="http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/skillsAll.html#balance" target="_blank">balance check</a>, which gives pretty darned good guidelines for the situation you described.  I just think it odd that the implication is that by having rules that detail some of these things, that somehow they remove the DM's authority.  Those were never invested in the rules.  I saw AD&D DMs who were routinely bullied by their players, and I've seen authoritarian 3.X DMs who won't yield on their personal house rules, regardless of how they jibe with the existing rules.Of course, as often as not, these discussions seem to highlight how many people play with other gamers who they aren't friends with, which to me is part of the difference in viewpoint.</blockquote>That's all well and good, but i don't understand what that has to do with me not liking endless debate interrupting games..[/QUOTE]

Verification