How Hardline a DM are You?

[Thanee]

Just out of curiosity, do you also have your npc foes make genuine and realistic mistakes? Do they charge through an AoO zone when they could have gone around, or waste their entire action when slowed? If not, you are adverserial (and cheating), not hardball.

I do that, NPCs act according to their intelligence and training level usually.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Bardsandsages]

Just out of curiosity, do you also have your npc foes make genuine and realistic mistakes? Do they charge through an AoO zone when they could have gone around, or waste their entire action when slowed? If not, you are adverserial (and cheating), not hardball.

Excellent point. I've dealt with DMs who use all sorts of out-of-character information, or ignore the rules to support their "story", just to counteract PCs plans. Like the DM who, after a party member ended up with a ring of elemental resistance: fire, NEVER targeted a fire spell at said party member. I've never seen so many wizards with Cone of Cold, and they only used the spell on THAT character. Or when my rogue's backstab got so high that suddenly the only creatures we came across were oozes, constructs, and undead.

I'm a little bit of both as a GM. I have a basic plot, and I guide the players along, but not to the point that they can't freely screw up my plans . I'm not a rules lawyer, and if a PC gives me a valid logic for something, I'm inclined to let it go. Of course, I always remind them that what I allow for the PCs I also must then allow for the monsters and NPC's.

I try not to be too strict, because I just don't want to spend the session looking up obscure rules. The biggest problem is normally with spells/spell-like abilities, because I don't want to look up every damn spell somebody uses to see if they can. So if something doesn't sound right, I usually let it go unless it is really disruptive to the game, and I'll look it up later. If I discover the spell/ability could NOT have worked the way the player used it, they get a warning. If it happens again, they get stripped of the ability/spell.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm a DM. I'm not there to try to "win", but I'm not there to make all thier choices for them and make sure they never screw up or fail.

 

[Odhanan]

1) In terms of DMing, are you a referee or a guide?

I try to have a foot in both camps. This means I'm a Guide, by my book.

2) Do you play hardball with the players when it comes to adjudication.

Loads of descriptions with rules explanations following. So I guess I'm not playing hardball.

 

[ForceUser]

How rigid are you when applying the rules of the game as well as "helping" the players out?

Referee or Guide?
Somewhere in the middle. I consider myself a storyteller, but I rely upon the players' actions to determine where the story goes in many cases.

Hardball or Forgiving?
Perhaps not as forgiving as I should be. With regards to how combat plays out, I tend to play hardball--I roll in the open, and everything is as the die lies. Outside of combat, I'm much more flexible with the rules. I tend to roll behind the screen more, and though I don't fudge, I try to allow the players' plans opportunities to work, and I'm more forgiving when players say things like "No, wait, I changed my mind. I don't say that to the king."

I try to be descriptive. With regard to the nauseated example, I'd likely be descriptive, then say "your character is nauseated" once I'm done.

 

[philreed]

1) In terms of DMing, are you a referee or a guide?

Definitely guide.

2) Do you play hardball with the players when it comes to adjudication.

If your option "a" is hardball, then yes.

 

[gizmo33]

a) Tell the player that their PC feels really sick from the dozen beetles that just crawled into their open mouth) then ask them what they are doing.

I think this is bad DMing, rather than "hardball". It's misleading to say "you feel really sick" and expect PCs to decide their actions, only to spring on them that they can't do anything at all and they should have known that. I've felt really sick before and I could still swing a sword if I wanted to. Your idea of "playing hardball" seems really more like "DM vs. player" and not what I'd consider refereeing.

As the DM, you are THE conduit for the information that the players have about what is going on. Do you, as a DM, want to spend 15 minutes describing every detail of how they feel every time in an attempt to simulate real-life? I would rather just use the game mechanic term and figure that the PC would know what their capabilities are. If the PC is not supposed to know, I would expect the "nausea" game mechanic to include a chance of failure rather than 100% failure (or, just hide the saving throw result).

 

[danzig138]

Q1 - Referee. I don't shift story elements around for the enjoyment of the players. The story has a way it should go (assuming the characters weren't involved). Their actions will have an impact on the story, but I'll not jiggle the story for their needs.

Q2 - Both. It depends on the situation. Sometimes, I just don't fel like being descriptive. My group ranges from 4 to 8 players, and in some situations, I just can't spend enough time to ask a guy what he wants his character to do over and over until he hits upon something possible.

 

[DonTadow]

Just out of curiosity, do you also have your npc foes make genuine and realistic mistakes? Do they charge through an AoO zone when they could have gone around, or waste their entire action when slowed? If not, you are adverserial (and cheating), not hardball.

I do. If pcs can make mistakes so do NPCs.

That said,

1) I'm more of a guide, I like teaching new players and I enjoy

2) I would tell the pcs that they are submerged in the beetles and begin hurling uncontrolably. all they can think about is moving away from the disgusting creatures.

With that I've felt I hinted enough that moving is the onlything they an do. I want to keep the game submersive without getting into mechanics talk. Whenver someone brings up mechanics talk it can break away from the game. I believe a dm can accurately describe the mechanics without losing the atmosphere.

 

[Psion]

There are effectively two questions here, related but how I'm not exactly sure.
1) In terms of DMing, are you a referee or a guide?

Yes.

If I think the existing rule covers the situation at hand adequately, I usually use the rule as-is.

But if I think the situation is not fairly covered by the rules, I extend them or invent something appropriate.

I beleive the rules give players a sense of consistency and fairness (as well as absolving me from blame when their character gets hosed ), but I beleive the rules are limited and one of the principle roles of the GM is to fill in the blanks where the rules are not serving the purposes of the game.

2) Do you play hardball with the players when it comes to adjudication.

I don't think so, but in part 1 of the above response, I guess I am. But again, if I think that it's reasonable to let the PCs use an ability in a way that is not explicitly called out in the rules, I will usually allow it, possibly with a toll of one action point (after all, even if I think they are stretching it, I can summize that there is an unnamed feat out there that lets them do what they are trying to do.)

As for the nauseated example, I think the existing rule handles most cases fairly. If the player makes a fuss, I might imagine there is a feat out there that allows them to act when nauseated and let them spend an action point.

Action points are great, y'know?