Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"Labels" and D&D Gaming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 7949871" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>Well yes. If you think a meatgrinder is the only way things should be run the DM screwed up by deciding to run something else.</p><p></p><p>But there are times and groups where I want to run Blades in the Dark for a heist game complete with derring do and flashbacks to explain what's really going on. There are other times I want to run a comedy game with piling up of consequences but no one actually dying (I use Firefly for this). There are other times I want to run Monsterhearts - a game about teenage monsters, sex, violence, and tons of angst. If I'm running that I want to make sure in advance that my players are all on board.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This applies if <em>and only if </em>there is only one type of game the DM wants to run and they can be trusted to always run the same type of game. Meanwhile <em>even within the scope of D&D</em> I can think of at least four types of game I run from sandboxing and dungeoncrawling while letting the PCs live or die depending on their choices to epic adventure paths with the end goal of saving the world and that are largely driven by the bad guys.</p><p></p><p>If the DM only runs in one style and works to build up an audience they may never be at a loose end. But if I were to switch up what I do and not match what I did to the players I'd be producing a game that might well not work with some of them and it would give them bad experiences. Meanwhile if I play to their strengths we all have much more fun. And I get far more out of running for them and they get more from playing in my game.</p><p></p><p>This can occasionally lead to clashes; two of my favourite players to run for ever (one of whom has alas moved across the country) were in the same group but had completely different playstyles and things they were looking for in a game. One likes a tight fairly heavy and defined game, and the other is just this side of freeform (and they both run in their styles; both are experienced GMs). And playing with either of them in their style is amazing - but playing with both always made me feel I could do better. Which set a challenge for me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's a good way to filter your players. Some of my favourite players (including the freeform one above) would probably have dropped out after the second PC death. Not that he minds the occasional dramatic PC death - but a graveyard full is not what he wants. </p><p></p><p>So the DM screwed up in session 0. D&D is broader than just one thing. You don't need much of a session zero because you have a simple pitch. But yours is not the only way to do things. And frankly if I ran the way you did I'd have given up and moved to other hobbies after about three years. Which isn't to say you're doing it wrong - just that sticking to one way is not for me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 7949871, member: 87792"] Well yes. If you think a meatgrinder is the only way things should be run the DM screwed up by deciding to run something else. But there are times and groups where I want to run Blades in the Dark for a heist game complete with derring do and flashbacks to explain what's really going on. There are other times I want to run a comedy game with piling up of consequences but no one actually dying (I use Firefly for this). There are other times I want to run Monsterhearts - a game about teenage monsters, sex, violence, and tons of angst. If I'm running that I want to make sure in advance that my players are all on board. This applies if [I]and only if [/I]there is only one type of game the DM wants to run and they can be trusted to always run the same type of game. Meanwhile [I]even within the scope of D&D[/I] I can think of at least four types of game I run from sandboxing and dungeoncrawling while letting the PCs live or die depending on their choices to epic adventure paths with the end goal of saving the world and that are largely driven by the bad guys. If the DM only runs in one style and works to build up an audience they may never be at a loose end. But if I were to switch up what I do and not match what I did to the players I'd be producing a game that might well not work with some of them and it would give them bad experiences. Meanwhile if I play to their strengths we all have much more fun. And I get far more out of running for them and they get more from playing in my game. This can occasionally lead to clashes; two of my favourite players to run for ever (one of whom has alas moved across the country) were in the same group but had completely different playstyles and things they were looking for in a game. One likes a tight fairly heavy and defined game, and the other is just this side of freeform (and they both run in their styles; both are experienced GMs). And playing with either of them in their style is amazing - but playing with both always made me feel I could do better. Which set a challenge for me. That's a good way to filter your players. Some of my favourite players (including the freeform one above) would probably have dropped out after the second PC death. Not that he minds the occasional dramatic PC death - but a graveyard full is not what he wants. So the DM screwed up in session 0. D&D is broader than just one thing. You don't need much of a session zero because you have a simple pitch. But yours is not the only way to do things. And frankly if I ran the way you did I'd have given up and moved to other hobbies after about three years. Which isn't to say you're doing it wrong - just that sticking to one way is not for me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"Labels" and D&D Gaming
Top