D&D 5E How do you roll, DM?

[Cadence]

1) It is not necessarily true that the GM's role is of "impartial arbiter between the rules and the players." That's one playstyle choice. Please let us leave room for other playstyles in the discussion.

That's the role the DMG defines (pg. 5) and is as a result one of my DMing principles as outlined in my second post in this thread. Stating what the DMG says and saying what I do is in no way shutting out discussion for other "playstyles."

The DMG doesn't say impartial arbiter though it says mediator...

Pg. 5 - "Dungeons & Dragons isn't a head-to-head competition, but it needs someone who is impartial yet involved in the game to guarantee that everyone at the table plays by the rules. As the player who creates the game world and adventures that take place within it, the DM is a natural fit to take on the referee role.

As a referee, the DM acts as a mediator between the rules and the players."

And now I'm pondering the choice of mediator. Can you have a mediator without two feuding parties (the rules and players) in this case? That seems odd.

In any case, it feels like page 5 should be read in light of what precedes it:

Pg. 4 - "And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them."

and, given a choice in how it is read, a reading which does not contradict what comes later would be preferred. In particular page 235 separates player and DM die rolling, and as others note allows fudging.

 

[iserith]

The DMG doesn't say impartial arbiter though it says mediator...

Pg. 5 - "Dungeons & Dragons isn't a head-to-head competition, but it needs someone who is impartial yet involved in the game to guarantee that everyone at the table plays by the rules. As the player who creates the game world and adventures that take place within it, the DM is a natural fit to take on the referee role.

As a referee, the DM acts as a mediator between the rules and the players."

And now I'm pondering the choice of mediator. Can you have a mediator without two feuding parties (the rules and players) in this case? That seems odd.

In any case, it feels like page 5 should be read in light of what precedes it:

Pg. 4 - "And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them."

and, given a choice in how it is read, a reading which does not contradict what comes later would be preferred. In particular page 235 separates player and DM die rolling, and as others note allows fudging.

I addressed this already upthread. The DMG lists rolling behind a screen or not as a table rule. I choose the latter.

As well, arbiter and mediator are synonyms, but you are correct that it says "mediator."

 

[Cadence]

As well, arbiter and mediator are synonyms, but you are correct that it says "mediator."

I thought so too, and it might be in this context, but the slight difference just had me pondering.

"The main difference between arbitration and mediation is that in arbitration the arbitrator hears evidence and makes a decision. ... In mediation, the process is a negotiation with the assistance of a neutral third party. The parties do not reach a resolution unless all sides agree."

I would fully believe the authors didn't choose one over the other for any particular reason.

 

[jasper]

I roll out in the open so I can't be accused of being evil to be evil. No it is the dice which are being evil to you.

 

[Monayuris]

IME, truly great DM's use the dice as a tool. Bad ones let the dice dictate the reality.

I don't necessarily agree with this.

Sometimes when you let the dice dictate the reality, you end up with situations and results that are unexpected. Sometimes they are bad... the whole party dies due to a string of bad rolls. Sometimes they are good, the orcs you encounter are friendly and aid you in your mission.

What makes a good DM is how they deal with the results of the dice to drive the game forward. Interpreting the results of the dice to create an exciting narrative takes as much skill (if not more) than conforming play to a predefined outcome.

Sometimes a TPK is good for the campaign. Let it happen.

 

[Flamestrike]

I don't necessarily agree with this.

Sometimes when you let the dice dictate the reality, you end up with situations and results that are unexpected. Sometimes they are bad... the whole party dies due to a string of bad rolls. Sometimes they are good, the orcs you encounter are friendly and aid you in your mission.

What makes a good DM is how they deal with the results of the dice to drive the game forward. Interpreting the results of the dice to create an exciting narrative takes as much skill (if not more) than conforming play to a predefined outcome.

Sometimes a TPK is good for the campaign. Let it happen.

There is always a time for that I agree. Like I said above, sometimes I'll toss those dice down on the middle of the table for all to see. There has to be risk (or at least the perception of risk).

It's picking and choosing your moments that is the key.

 

[Imaculata]

I roll almost everything out in the open, because I have nothing to hide, and I want my players to see that I play fair, so they can learn from my fine example.

I also want my players to share in the joy and horror of their DM rolling crits and fumbles. I find it helps build suspense as well as provide entertainment.

I'm also in favor of letting the dice fall where they may. There have to be stakes after all. Let them dread the dice.

 

[cmad1977]

Playing on roll 20 i asked if my players wanted public or private rolls. Seems that my players like seeing when they get crit. Or seeing the DC and total damage of Finger of Death...
“DC: 17??! 62 DAMAGE??!”
Rolls 18 on his con save...
Group: “ooooooooohhhhhhhhh!!!!”

 

[Zaukrie]

I always roll the opposite of my current DM, in secret. For me, I'm more interested in the players having fun (even dying can be fun) than the dice rolls deciding everything.

 

[Imaculata]

The advantage of letting the dice decide, is that a DM can be surprised as well. Plus, as a DM you still get a say when dice rolls are needed, so it's not like you abandon all control. If a monster rolls a crit on an already dying player-character, so be it. I like not knowing it in advance, so both my players and myself are equally shocked and surprised when it happens.