Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RFisher" data-source="post: 3361682" data-attributes="member: 3608">Oh, disparage away. I'm a crappy DM. If that combat was interesting, it was in spite of me, not because of me.I guess you had to be there. Or maybe we just have very different ideas about what constitutes an "interesting combat". No edition of D&D would be my choice for swashbuckling Three Musketeers style.Whenever the DM sets a DC, when he adds circumstance modifiers, that's the DM determining the risk. Maybe things have changed a lot, but one complaint I've often read about 3e is that there aren't enough sample DCs. Sure, sometimes the DC is clearly specified by the rules, but it's often still the DMs call as to which of the DCs in the book apply to the situation at hand.And sometimes the rules do tell you "no".Seriously? I've never seen a DM refuse to let a PC do something on account of risk. Because he feels it is physically impossible, yes. Risk, no. (Heck, most DMs I've known will even allow PCs to try the physically impossible.)No, you don't have to guess. You just have to ask if the DM didn't volunteer it. Just like you have to guess or ask when DM sets the DC or applies ad hoc circumstance modifiers & doesn't bother to tell you.What if you & the DM disagree on which DC in the book applies to the current situation? What if you & the DM disagree on whether a modifier in the book applies? What if you & the DM disagree on whether something deserves an ad hoc circumstance modifier?If I & the DM disagree, we discuss it. If we can't come to consensus, I accept the DMs decision because he's my friend & a peer whose opinion is just as valid as mine. & because that's the respect I show him for taking on the job.We aren't 6 year olds anymore. We can come to consensus. We can strive to make unbiased decisions. We can ignore our ego & accept a friend's decision. We can settle the "I shot you/no you didn't" arguments because--if it comes down to it--we've agreed to let one person have the final say for this session.Yes, no rules are necessary.Well, I can mostly agree with that. Rules are fun. A game's rules tell you--or at least hint at--what is meant to be significant in that game. (& it's quite annoying when what a game claims is significant & what it's rules suggest is significant are different.) If I'm playing wuxia, I generally want some basic rules for at least three of those. If I'm playing Pendragon, I like having the passions, but I don't miss the magic or crazy combat stunts.But I want a balance between rules & DM judgement. Well, I guess we all do. We just have different ideas about how/where that balance should be struck.</blockquote>

Verification