Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 4119157" data-attributes="member: 704">I have yet to see any sort of D&amp;D expansion for any edition which adds rules that would interfere with DM Fiat.&nbsp; We may however, be using slightly different definitions.&nbsp; I do not think that new classes, races, feats or spells interfere with DM Fiat.&nbsp; To me, DM Fiat is a DM ignoring a rule because it is inconvenient to his plot or world view in some way.&nbsp; DM Fiat is the DM deciding behind the scenes that he does not want a monster to be dead&nbsp; in the first round before it even has a chance to act, so it will have extra HP even though he should have died on the most recent attack.&nbsp; Or it is the DM telling me I do not see anyone in a room despite hitting a 28 on a spot check against opponents who could not hit 29 on a hide check given their stats and skill ranks.&nbsp; It can also be the DM creating circumstances meant to railroad a player.&nbsp; &quot;No, you cannot sale to the other side continent right now because, umm, there are no ships sailing that way.&nbsp; The only way to get where your going is to travel through the Mountains of Obvious Peril&quot;.Some people advocate DM Fiat as a virtue, others, myself especially, do not.&nbsp; I am convinced that just as many games have been ruined by DM Fiat as there have been games that benefit from it.&nbsp; I am generally in favor of rules that overlap or codify things that many would be inclined to handle through pure role play for a few simple reasons.&nbsp; Such rules are often the easiest to ignore.&nbsp; You can ignore Bluff and Diplomacy in 3rd edition without breaking much of anything.&nbsp; You cannot do that with say, AoO's without heavy retooling.&nbsp; The other reason is that the very existence of these rules will suggest a course of action to players that they may not otherwise even think of.&nbsp; It may also remind the DM to account for certain courses of action.&nbsp; If Forgery as a skill did not exist in D&amp;D, then how often would someone try to write up fake documents in an attempt to trick the guards into letting them in?&nbsp; And how often would such a plan have any sort of success under a DM that was caught totally unprepared for it?If I were the sort to quote other people in a post sig, I would probably use that.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lord Zardoz, post: 4119157, member: 704"] I have yet to see any sort of D&D expansion for any edition which adds rules that would interfere with DM Fiat. We may however, be using slightly different definitions. I do not think that new classes, races, feats or spells interfere with DM Fiat. To me, DM Fiat is a DM ignoring a rule because it is inconvenient to his plot or world view in some way. DM Fiat is the DM deciding behind the scenes that he does not want a monster to be dead in the first round before it even has a chance to act, so it will have extra HP even though he should have died on the most recent attack. Or it is the DM telling me I do not see anyone in a room despite hitting a 28 on a spot check against opponents who could not hit 29 on a hide check given their stats and skill ranks. It can also be the DM creating circumstances meant to railroad a player. "No, you cannot sale to the other side continent right now because, umm, there are no ships sailing that way. The only way to get where your going is to travel through the Mountains of Obvious Peril". Some people advocate DM Fiat as a virtue, others, myself especially, do not. I am convinced that just as many games have been ruined by DM Fiat as there have been games that benefit from it. I am generally in favor of rules that overlap or codify things that many would be inclined to handle through pure role play for a few simple reasons. Such rules are often the easiest to ignore. You can ignore Bluff and Diplomacy in 3rd edition without breaking much of anything. You cannot do that with say, AoO's without heavy retooling. The other reason is that the very existence of these rules will suggest a course of action to players that they may not otherwise even think of. It may also remind the DM to account for certain courses of action. If Forgery as a skill did not exist in D&D, then how often would someone try to write up fake documents in an attempt to trick the guards into letting them in? And how often would such a plan have any sort of success under a DM that was caught totally unprepared for it? If I were the sort to quote other people in a post sig, I would probably use that. END COMMUNICATION [/QUOTE]

Verification