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
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
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
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.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Hope?
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3813721" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I'm with Monte on this. DM and player parity isn't necessarily good for the game. Good DM's are good for the game. Rules that attempt parity don't actually mitigate the problems of a poor or inexperienced DM, which is what they are trying to do.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is the sort of anti-DM sentiment that I find extremely destructive to the game. If you can't trust the DM, having some rules to bash him over the head with won't fix your game.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Social skills can have a role, but a system that replaces roleplay with systematic mechanical rollplay makes for a very uninteresting game. I want to have conversations in character with the DM in the role of an NPC and with my fellow players. I want to as the DM bring to life richly detailed and memorable NPC's and I don't want them to do completely illogical and out of character things just because the player rolled a dice and the diplomacy mechanics says that he should.</p><p></p><p>See, the thing about social skills is that the sort of players that clamor for them NEVER believe that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. The sort of players that clamor for hard and fast social rules would throw a fit if my NPC's used skill roles to override player choice. They would (rightfully, I think) become outraged if I began to play thier characters for them and told them what thier characters did just because the NPC had a +20 bonus in intimidate, bluff, or diplomacy. For all the pretensions that player crowd has for DM/player parity, they aren't really interested in true simulation or PC/NPC parity.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, but then you are back to DM fiat again. You've just disguised it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you think that you are slaves to the DM, it's a problem with the DM or player that the rules can't fix.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3813721, member: 4937"] I'm with Monte on this. DM and player parity isn't necessarily good for the game. Good DM's are good for the game. Rules that attempt parity don't actually mitigate the problems of a poor or inexperienced DM, which is what they are trying to do. This is the sort of anti-DM sentiment that I find extremely destructive to the game. If you can't trust the DM, having some rules to bash him over the head with won't fix your game. Social skills can have a role, but a system that replaces roleplay with systematic mechanical rollplay makes for a very uninteresting game. I want to have conversations in character with the DM in the role of an NPC and with my fellow players. I want to as the DM bring to life richly detailed and memorable NPC's and I don't want them to do completely illogical and out of character things just because the player rolled a dice and the diplomacy mechanics says that he should. See, the thing about social skills is that the sort of players that clamor for them NEVER believe that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. The sort of players that clamor for hard and fast social rules would throw a fit if my NPC's used skill roles to override player choice. They would (rightfully, I think) become outraged if I began to play thier characters for them and told them what thier characters did just because the NPC had a +20 bonus in intimidate, bluff, or diplomacy. For all the pretensions that player crowd has for DM/player parity, they aren't really interested in true simulation or PC/NPC parity. Sure, but then you are back to DM fiat again. You've just disguised it. If you think that you are slaves to the DM, it's a problem with the DM or player that the rules can't fix. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Hope?
Top