Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 2243979" data-attributes="member: 2011">Ok, I only read the first and last few pages, but my 2 cents on this:1) DMs are not gods. They do not have the right to do anything they want. They get all of their authority to adjudicate the game from the players. The game is for everyone to have fun, not just the DM. The role of a DM is that of co-storyteller (with the players) and rules adjudicator, not that of event police.2) I consider fairness to be part of the fun. For fairness to occur, the rules should be followed. I have no clue why some DND players think that it is ok for the DM to change rules on the fly. In virtually no other game or sport played do rules change on the fly.3) I have no problem with a DM making an on the spot ruling in order to get the game moving. I do have a problem with a DM ignoring the rule as written in order to accomplish some goal of his.4) I have no problem with the DM and player disagreeing on the rule and the DM saying after a minute or so: "Ok, my ruling stands, let's move on and discuss it out of game". Remember, the game is supposed to be fun for all players, not just the DM. A reasonable short amount of time to discuss or quickly look up a rule is fine. But deciding to not allow a player any game time at all to question a rule in game is not fine.5) I do not think a DM should ever fudge dice rolls to accomplish a goal of his (whether it is to keep a storyline going, or to save a PC or to save a re-occurring NPC or whatever). This to me is an aspect of fairness. In my game, I roll combat rolls in front of the players. The only rolls I keep secret are ones that the players should not know of or know the result of (e.g. a Spot roll by a hidden NPC or some such). Risk is a part of the game and if a DM fudges, it becomes less an element of risk as it becomes an element of DM whim.6) Most of the time, the games I have played in as DM or player tend to be fairly reasonable. The people at the game are there to have fun and they give authority to the DM to adjudicate as he sees fit. I have had DMs abuse that authority in the past and when it happens, I step in as a player to stop it as I feel that is my right (e.g. I once quit a game in mid-session due to an extremely bad arbitrary DM ruling). Note, there is a difference between disagreeing on a rule and the DM making bad rulings because he wants to control the outcome of the game. I think most reasonable people can tell the difference.7) DMs should discuss all house rules ahead of time (i.e. before they are used) with the group and should discard any house rules that a majority of the players have a hard time with. And, house rules should apply equally to PCs as they do to NPCs (unless it is a character building rule or some such).To summarize, the DM should be fair across the board: no changing the rules, no fudging dice rolls. If the DM is fair, rules arguments tend to be few and far between. It is either when the DM does whatever he wants outside of the rules, or a player (or DM) does not know or understand a rule, that rules arguments occur. When that happens, the DM is the final arbitrator, but he should in all cases attempt to follow the rules when an argument comes up. If the player points to page 52 and states the rule on that page, if that is the proper rule, it should be followed by the DM. DMs should not change the rules (unless they have a previously defined house rule, or they get group agreement to make a house rule on the spot).</blockquote>

Verification