Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7000774" data-attributes="member: 97077">I've given other reasons why I think it's a good practice in this thread, not just that it's compatible with that the game tells us to do. The DMG gives some other good reasons why it is this way. Whether or not anyone agrees that it's good or that the reasons make sense is, of course, a different story. I myself go with the path of least resistance when it comes to choosing my games: I adjust my expectations and change the way I play based on the game so that everything works smoothly without needing to work on changing the game. If I don't like the outcome, then there are always other games.I'm running a D&amp;D 4e one-shot next month and I'm having to tell my D&amp;D 5e players who want in on it that all those guidelines for play I gave them for our regular 5e campaign mostly don't apply. I certainly don't want them trying to play D&amp;D 4e as they play D&amp;D 5e because I won't be DMing it the same way.There is no debate though in my experience, if your players trust you. So obviously one of my major focuses is on being trustworthy as DM. I can't have the players thinking that what I (the DM, not some NPC) am saying is always true. And even if there is an objection by the player, then that suggests to me some other issue, typically of the DM and player not being on the same page as to the context of the situation which itself could have arisen due to some other issues at play (player not paying attention, DM not being clear, etc.). In cases where the DM isn't sure he or she adequately communicated the context, it's easy to just go with the player's understanding.It's all connected, man. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7000774, member: 97077"] I've given other reasons why I think it's a good practice in this thread, not just that it's compatible with that the game tells us to do. The DMG gives some other good reasons why it is this way. Whether or not anyone agrees that it's good or that the reasons make sense is, of course, a different story. I myself go with the path of least resistance when it comes to choosing my games: I adjust my expectations and change the way I play based on the game so that everything works smoothly without needing to work on changing the game. If I don't like the outcome, then there are always other games. I'm running a D&D 4e one-shot next month and I'm having to tell my D&D 5e players who want in on it that all those guidelines for play I gave them for our regular 5e campaign mostly don't apply. I certainly don't want them trying to play D&D 4e as they play D&D 5e because I won't be DMing it the same way. There is no debate though in my experience, if your players trust you. So obviously one of my major focuses is on being trustworthy as DM. I can't have the players thinking that what I (the DM, not some NPC) am saying is always true. And even if there is an objection by the player, then that suggests to me some other issue, typically of the DM and player not being on the same page as to the context of the situation which itself could have arisen due to some other issues at play (player not paying attention, DM not being clear, etc.). In cases where the DM isn't sure he or she adequately communicated the context, it's easy to just go with the player's understanding. It's all connected, man. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification