Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8581684" data-attributes="member: 93670">It's all well and good that players want to play u that way, but you present a conflicting set of positions that only resolve themselves if you admit that the DM is not technically &quot;playing&quot; d&amp;d.Rules that granted ability for players to die by accident insulated the gm from blame for killing a pc that is no longer present with the modern bar of flat out deliberately choosing to execute a pc.Saying that the game is &quot;more about role play and story telling&quot; sure sounds good &amp; might even be one of the design goals that was aimed for at some point, but like the gm insulation above it requires a caviat &amp; Mearls even mentioned it in the 5 generations of d&amp;d recording someone posed earlier* where the compel against BIFTS didn't make it from testing into 5e .&nbsp; Story telling requires either shared narrative control or a story teller and the gm in modern d&amp;d has been stripped of so many tools standard to past edition's like the influence that players needing magic items gave the gm at the table, no longer present purview over recovery, plausible encounter expectations, &amp; actual chances of lethality players are now insulated from while failing to give the gm tools like compels &amp; such commonly present in shared narrative ttrpgs.&nbsp; Sure it's &quot;more about role play and story telling&quot;&nbsp; but the GM's only role in that story is as life support or cruise ship staff. Unlike life support and underpaid cruise ship staff the gm is rarely paid more than maybe pizza or soda/beer &amp; often expected to provide that pizza or soda/beer.Splitting gm into a group separate &amp; distinct from &quot;players&quot; solves those problems, but wotc keeps&nbsp; either omitting GM needs interests &amp; feelings from polls or refusing to do that by limiting questions to playing d&amp;d.&nbsp; It's understandable that wotc would be reluctant to shine a spotlight on that sort of split though since it raises the question of exactly what role the gm is expected to fill in that &quot;story telling&quot;.... Is it Cruise ship guide &amp; life support for wish fulfillment or participant? *on my phone so not linking it all fancy in line but its a good listen. Mearls(?) talks about compelling a greedy rogue into doing something fate style &amp; that rule not making it into 5e among other great discussions including nebulous undefinable gm&nbsp; blessed limitations of magic item crafting components &amp; more. [URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-has-d-d-changed-over-the-decades.686433/post-8573899[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 8581684, member: 93670"] It's all well and good that players want to play u that way, but you present a conflicting set of positions that only resolve themselves if you admit that the DM is not technically "playing" d&d. Rules that granted ability for players to die by accident insulated the gm from blame for killing a pc that is no longer present with the modern bar of flat out deliberately choosing to execute a pc. Saying that the game is "more about role play and story telling" sure sounds good & might even be one of the design goals that was aimed for at some point, but like the gm insulation above it requires a caviat & Mearls even mentioned it in the 5 generations of d&d recording someone posed earlier* where the compel against BIFTS didn't make it from testing into 5e . Story telling requires either shared narrative control or a story teller and the gm in modern d&d has been stripped of so many tools standard to past edition's like the influence that players needing magic items gave the gm at the table, no longer present purview over recovery, plausible encounter expectations, & actual chances of lethality players are now insulated from while failing to give the gm tools like compels & such commonly present in shared narrative ttrpgs. Sure it's "more about role play and story telling" but the GM's only role in that story is as life support or cruise ship staff. Unlike life support and underpaid cruise ship staff the gm is rarely paid more than maybe pizza or soda/beer & often expected to provide that pizza or soda/beer. Splitting gm into a group separate & distinct from "players" solves those problems, but wotc keeps either omitting GM needs interests & feelings from polls or refusing to do that by limiting questions to playing d&d. It's understandable that wotc would be reluctant to shine a spotlight on that sort of split though since it raises the question of exactly what role the gm is expected to fill in that "story telling".... Is it Cruise ship guide & life support for wish fulfillment or participant? *on my phone so not linking it all fancy in line but its a good listen. Mearls(?) talks about compelling a greedy rogue into doing something fate style & that rule not making it into 5e among other great discussions including nebulous undefinable gm blessed limitations of magic item crafting components & more. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-has-d-d-changed-over-the-decades.686433/post-8573899[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification