Dragon magazine is considered official!

[buzzard]

I do accept that the DM and the player are equals. Not because of some lack of trust as you want to imply, but because the players put in as much time, money, and effort into the game as the DM does. So his opinion is equal. He also makes mistakes that he doesn't realize he makes as he decideds the direction of the campaign and its long term goals, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RULES.

You really make it sound like you guys barely value your DM at all. If you think players do as much work as DMs, then you have never run a game.

Also, if your policy is that everyone is equal, who makes rules decisions? It must be a concensus, I suppose. Those gaming sessions must be anarchy. Truly I would loathe to DM for such a group.

buzzard

 

[Psion]

Um, is the sarcastic sniping really necessary? Can we keep this thread flame free, please?

 

[Desdichado]

I said that the DM MAKES mistakes. And when making mistakes equals a 500 hit point blow, uh, yeah, forgive me for wanting to avoid those mistakes. Wow. So, if you double check your child's homework, it's because you don't trust him. Gotcha. Or maybe, hey! Maybe you just want to HELP your kid (read as DM) to BE the best student (read as DM) he can be. Sorry I had to annotate, but I'm being pendantic.

You say that your DM makes mistakes, so you built in all kinds of redundant checks and limitations. And then you say that it's not an issue of trust. You haven't addressed my statement that you have multiple contradictory statements; I even pointed several of them out to you.

Also, it's my firm belief that my kids will be better students if they learn to do their homework themselves and not count on me going back and checking it for them, but you probably didn't really want to talk about that, did you?

 

[Volaran]

This doesn't actually sound to me to be all _that_ far from the way I've seen games played in the past.

When I join a game, I make sure to ask the DM about any house rules, particularly those that see frequent use, as well as what resources the players are allowed to use for character creation. When I DM, I make sure everyone knows the rules of the house.

At Greymarch's/Ryard's table, it sounds like the answers would be something to the effect of "We prefer to keep house ruling to a minimum. Game mechanics are considered more important than 'on the fly' rulings. Players can use WotC material within context."

Not a big deal. It wouldn't be my policy as a DM, as I feel that non-core books, and surely Dragon articles don't get the same degree of play-testing that the core books have. I'm more inclined to go with my guts for balance issues. If a battle with a CR 13 creature felt more like a CR 15 creature, I'd adjust accordingly...if I was running a game where I was sticking to the CR system.

I've played in campaigns where the DM has inserted new rules to test out and loves to come up with his own odd creatures, games where players were encouraged to submit concepts, and I currently play in a game where everything is core only.

Certainly if I were to sit down at Greymarch/Ryard's table, I'd accept their house rulings, and that their DM seems more like a moderator than an absolute judge.

I'd be hesitant about _running_ for such a group, as I always feel that players are guests in a DM's world, rather than the DM being first among equals. However, even as a PC, I can't see that it would affect my play style much.

Anyway, there's my two cents.

 

[Arnwyn]

No, I'm just floored that people here can't see that maybe, just maybe, there's a group of people that can come to a consensus about the rules they choose to use. And apparantly, that's shocking.

No, it's not shocking. I, for one (and certainly a few others) believe in that concept, and do agree with your premise. I, for one, only allow books that I (as DM) own.

But, as Joshua notes above, the point that came out from this thread and a thread over at WotC shows that there *isn't* a consensus in your group (again, Joshua's post above is a good indicator on how the discussion went) about what rules to use. Greymarch seemed to be quite surprised (and, based on his posts over on the WotC boards, even a little perplexed) by the answer he received that Dragon was "official" (again, a definition not yet defined).

(Of course, there is also a bit of confusion on the boards here, because it seems that everyone taking part in this particular thread has never seen anyone limit what books the DM can use - so yeah, for us it does seem somewhat hard to believe. I'm afraid you just might have to accept our disbelief... it is quite a strange concept for all of us.)

I do think Greymarch has made this clear...Wizards-produced material.

No, he didn't... and thus another point of confusion. Dragon is not Wizards-produced material - it is Paizo-produced material. Only *some* of the articles inside Dragon are from WotC employees (writing on WotC company time, thus being Wizards-produced material) - most of the magazine is, in fact, from 3rd party authors and freelancers. So, by your somewhat vague definition, only *part* of Dragon is official.

So, you still have *not* defined "official", nor a reason why only "official" is used (availability in a small-town retail market, maybe? Beats me, since you haven't really said) - and thus we have no point of reference on what your group is doing.

So, that's why there are these 100+ posts - people are genuinely confused with the contradictory and vague answers.

 

[maddman75]

Well, we don't play in a world where the DM's whims change the fundamentals of the game for the rest of us. Why should we even play then? But anyway, what's with this "wargamey" assumption. As someone pointed out, even just using core Epic rules can be a nightmare, with the complexities. Try running a straightforward combat with 10 or more 30th level participants. If I hit a creature for 400 points of damage (utterly possible) then the DM should know how I reached that number. So I'll explain it. And if he tells me I take 350 points of damage, I need to know how that was calculated. Does my DR kick in? Is that one hit or four blows? There are dozens of little details when you're talking epic characters. A "simple" combat takes about an hour.

I'm with you as far as *character* abilities go. If you want to house-rule a spell, hey that's cool. Just let me know ahead of time. Players should know what their characters can do.

But that does not apply to the DM. I can't imagine tying his hands so that any new rules have to be approved by the players given the modular nature of 3e. What if my new villians are a group from a foriegn land with exotic fighting techniques (expressed as a feat chain or PrC)? Is that fair game? What if instead of making it up I snag it from a Mongoose book or something?

Take it easy on you coming back? So I just wasted an hour here watching everyone else play, and I could have asked when the guy activated his Displacement cloak, since he got five hits on me in the first round and killed me. But no, the DM jealously guarded his secrets.
I'll take actually PLAYING a game to flashy descriptions any day of the week.

Yeah, I'm human. And if I make mistakes I'll make it up to you somehow. These references to the ELH are irrelevent. I don't play that crazy verison, just regular D&D .

I do accept that the DM and the player are equals. Not because of some lack of trust as you want to imply, but because the players put in as much time, money, and effort into the game as the DM does. So his opinion is equal. He also makes mistakes that he doesn't realize he makes as he decideds the direction of the campaign and its long term goals, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RULES.

I can't believe this is a true statement. How many hours a week to you work on things for your game as a player? I might spend an hour recopying my sheet, or fleshing out some background, or looking up some abilities. Maybe. Most times, the player just shows up with his dice and games. The DM on the other hand spends hours of his free time constructing an adventure, working on NPCs, planning out his plot arc, contemplating rules issues, and more often than not works on player/player conflicts.

I believe the average for a DM is one hour of prep for every hour of play. Even if you run modules, you need to read through them, make notes, and tweak it to your preferences. I even find modules more time consuming than doing it from scratch. Are you honestly claiming that you spend this much time getting ready for a game?

And I'm not trying to say that my way is the right one, and others are wrong. I'm just having a discussion, trying to figure out where graymarch and ryard are coming from.

 

[Desdichado]

(Of course, there is also a bit of confusion on the boards here, because it seems that everyone taking part in this particular thread has never seen anyone limit what books the DM can use - so yeah, for us it does seem somewhat hard to believe. I'm afraid you just might have to accept our disbelief... it is quite a strange concept for all of us.)

Yes and no; while I find the idea extremely strange that the group would come to the DM and say "you can't use such and such book, and you can use such and such book" I do very much believe in the collaborative nature of the process. DMs need to make sure they're running a campaign that the players are interested in playing in. If I insist, as a DM, that I'm going to run Sailor Moon meets Call of Cthulhu and my players all want Forgotten Realms, then I'm not doing anyone any favors by coming up and saying BESM d20 for character creation and Call of Cthulhu d20 is my monster book. You are right, though, in that I'm genuinely confused by the thread and the contents therein, but find it intriguing in many ways, so I keep posting.

 

[Aaron L]

Well, I'd say that if your character just died because of something you don't think can happen by the rules, you look at the DM and say "Is that right? I think there might have been a mistake."

 

[CSB046]

Most times, the player just shows up with his dice and games. The DM on the other hand spends hours of his free time constructing an adventure, working on NPCs, planning out his plot arc, contemplating rules issues, and more often than not works on player/player conflicts.

Not to mention all the time a DM spends preparing a homebrew world, if he or she chooses to homebrew. Even if I use only "official" rules, I'll spend hours and hours working on fleshing out my next setting, and that's probably before I even know who all the players might be. (I don't have a steady group right now.)

During that time, I can pretty much guarantee my players-to-be aren't working as hard as I am. Gosh darn it, they're gonna owe me some hours! (Or at least some good snacks.)

 

[Henry]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to re-iterate the call for staying civil. We're getting into some "fringe name-calling here," and 9 times out of 10 that's the stage just before all-out flame wars. So let's remember that there's more than one gaming style viewpoint going on here.