Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wicht" data-source="post: 6197147" data-attributes="member: 221"><p>What you are describing sounds like typical DMing to me. I am not sure why you keep insisting others of us would try to 1) be arbitrary in including the chamberlain, or 2) have a preconceived idea of how the whole situation would turn out.</p><p></p><p>Nor am I sure why you would hesitate to take me at my word that different play styles will produce different game experiences. </p><p></p><p>I think most of the contentions are coming from people assuming things about other people's games which are not implied. </p><p></p><p>To the point of your confusion, what I have been disagreeing with is </p><p></p><p>1) that DM's have not traditionally been given the authority to change or ignore rules as they deem necessary (which does not imply they will do so arbitrarily, but may do so if they feel it is necessary); and by traditionally, I mean it is a philosophy of play inherit in every edition of the game prior to 4e.</p><p></p><p>2) That a DM must always allow players to fully utilize the skills they choose to use in the way the player wants to use them. As in the chamberlain example, there may be mechanical, in-game, pre-planned reasons why diplomacy will not work on the Chamberlain and a player attempting to use diplomacy might not, per the rules, be allowed to and that this does not constitute DM Force as defined earlier in this thread. </p><p></p><p>Thus my assertions are, in the main, that</p><p></p><p>1) DMs are the final arbiter of the rules and events within the game, per the traditional rules and play-styles of Dungeons and Dragons, and that departing from this one rule/tradition/expectation, in any ruleset prior to 4e is a fundamental shift in the dynamics of the game. (And this says nothing about the casual use of DM force, which is apparently defined as something else). </p><p></p><p>2) The rules as written allow a DM to exercise and maintain a control of the in-game world in a manner that will, in the normal course of events, prevent players from running rough-shod over the campaign world. That is, the rules for diplomacy, the spell description of <em>charm</em>, et. al., contain enough guidelines to satisfactorily prevent players from gaming the system in such a way as to break the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wicht, post: 6197147, member: 221"] What you are describing sounds like typical DMing to me. I am not sure why you keep insisting others of us would try to 1) be arbitrary in including the chamberlain, or 2) have a preconceived idea of how the whole situation would turn out. Nor am I sure why you would hesitate to take me at my word that different play styles will produce different game experiences. I think most of the contentions are coming from people assuming things about other people's games which are not implied. To the point of your confusion, what I have been disagreeing with is 1) that DM's have not traditionally been given the authority to change or ignore rules as they deem necessary (which does not imply they will do so arbitrarily, but may do so if they feel it is necessary); and by traditionally, I mean it is a philosophy of play inherit in every edition of the game prior to 4e. 2) That a DM must always allow players to fully utilize the skills they choose to use in the way the player wants to use them. As in the chamberlain example, there may be mechanical, in-game, pre-planned reasons why diplomacy will not work on the Chamberlain and a player attempting to use diplomacy might not, per the rules, be allowed to and that this does not constitute DM Force as defined earlier in this thread. Thus my assertions are, in the main, that 1) DMs are the final arbiter of the rules and events within the game, per the traditional rules and play-styles of Dungeons and Dragons, and that departing from this one rule/tradition/expectation, in any ruleset prior to 4e is a fundamental shift in the dynamics of the game. (And this says nothing about the casual use of DM force, which is apparently defined as something else). 2) The rules as written allow a DM to exercise and maintain a control of the in-game world in a manner that will, in the normal course of events, prevent players from running rough-shod over the campaign world. That is, the rules for diplomacy, the spell description of [I]charm[/I], et. al., contain enough guidelines to satisfactorily prevent players from gaming the system in such a way as to break the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
Top