NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gardens &amp; Goblins" data-source="post: 6994472" data-attributes="member: 6846794">Eh. If a player has a problem with how a DM is running a game, they can always DM themselves. To each their own. Of course - there's always the nightmare DM scenario where fiat is applied like a sloppy, iron fist, and not everyone has the luxury of being able to choose who they play with.Still, I've always felt D&D works best when a DM is trusted enough to step away from the rules, for the sake of play (with the obvious caveats). I remember in the old Dragon magazines where they were pushing DM's to assign % chance of any action, promoting the idea of not saying 'no' but saying 'yes, but' and so on. I really enjoyed all that![sblock]Personally we prefer a human arbitrator who can lean on rule sets if required, rather than fussing with adding additional rule sets. Wasn't always like this with our lot - we went through about a decade of trying to codify everything. In the end, we determined that, while the intent was consistent (and arguably obvious - 'to have fun'), the behaviour tended to bog things down. For us, that was the kicker - we prefer fast pace play, be it social/exploration/combat, with minimal book/table/rule checking.Of course, we do have the advantage of having a group of between 5-6 players who have played together for twenty five years plus, where everyone has taken a turn DMing. As such, there's a lot of love and support for who ever DMs and we know what to expect in terms of fiat/judgment/arbitration.[/sblock]</blockquote>

Verification