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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6196473" data-attributes="member: 2656">For those that advocate "DM force" alone as a solution to every rules problem without context, be aware that you are at the same time advocating abusive DM force that deprotagonises PCs and negates players actions, whether you mean to or not. I think DM force on its own without attendant commuication and/or foreshadowing risks making the game capricious and dictatorial, damaging cause and effect and teaching players that they can't reliably affect the setting with their PC's actions. And appropriate use of DM force is a subjective thing, which will vary from game to game, player to player.As a D&D player I prefer spellcasters. Spell choice is a major part of the play experience of such PCs, and along with efficiency, personality, style, synergy and planning, knowing the DM is a significant factor in spell choice - it can be the most significant factor. If a DM always fudges Save or Die spells against big bads, they may not be worth memorising. If a DM doesn't enforce inaccuracy rolls for teleports, they are more reliable and useful. If a DM interprets a spell differently to you it may cause arguments and not be worth the hassle. Wish spells are actively detrimental to the user in many campaigns and something to be avoided like the plague. The more open communication is the more tolerable this sort of thing is, the worst case scenario being constantly hit with Gotcha's out of the blue, which can totally hamstring a spellcaster.Player tastes vary hugely. Some players prefer to minimize interactions with rules, others prefer to act through the rules.And obviously some DMs prefer to minimise player interaction with rules, while others prefer to interface through them. Most are in the middle somewhere.I prefer to act through the rules on both sides of the DM screen, as IMO it creates clear expectations and improves the clarity of communication. When I feel it necessary to resort to DM force, something I don't do often, I always try to accompany it with appropriate communication so they are aware this is an exception or a new houserule, and reestablish clear expections of cause and effect for the future.As a player I find DM force without appropriate explanations or communication to damage my play experience and make me feel I might as well not play my character as the PC's actions are regularly altered, negated or made detrimental in an unpredicable way at the whims of the referee. And I'm bad at reading people so DM force is more likely to appear capricious and inexplicable to me unless it's explained when necessary.Then again, I'm aware that I'm risk-adverse and favour slow steady reliability over unreliable gambles.In games where spellcasters are constantly stymied and marginalised, fighters may be a better option as a PC,as they are tougher defensively, but harsh rulings against spellcasters make it likely that they will also rule harshly on improvised actions by non-spellcasters as well.</blockquote>

Verification