On taking power away from the DM

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Do DMs not have this ability? I've created new stuff (monsters, spells, etc.) for every game I've ever run (D&D or other), and I've seen new stuff in every game I've ever played in (D&D or other). The only times I've *ever* heard a complaint about the existence of new stuff for the monsters was, ironically, in two previous-edition games.

In a BD&D game (I was the DM), a Player complained about a "Dungeon Level II" monster appearing as a wondering monster on the first level of the dungeon.

In an AD&D1 game (I was not the DM, I was a Player), a Player referred to a special magic item the BBEG had as a "gimme" power.

That's simply a very different experience from mine. IME players argued less about the rules in 2e. If I gave a special magic item to a BBEG and it was a "gimme" (does that mean overpowered?) I would be more likely to hear about it in 3.x than in 2e. Of course, this doesn't mean that players argued every single time I went beyond the core rules, otherwise that would be more of a player problem.

(The Dungeon Monster II complaint sounds a bit like some CR complaints you find in 3.x, too. I don't recall such a rule in 2e, actually, but I've never played 1e/BD&D/whatever, but in 3.x, palyers are conditioned to think that anything they fight won't be more than EL +4 or thereabouts.)

(I would point out that I have very few rules arguments in my current-edition game, but I think that is more a matter of playing with older, more mature gamers now days compared to the previous days.)

My players stayed the same age Almost literally, as I have a new younger group, so clearly we have different experiences. Group differences obviously play a big role in gaming.

 

[Psion]

I can see one area that "power" has been taken away from DMs or at least lessens the cerebral play of yesteryear by way of the following example:

DM: You enter a 20' by 30' room from the south, a table and three chairs are in the center, a fireplace stands against the north wall, a picture hangs above the fireplace. A door leads to the west. What are your actions? DMs Notes: If the players look behind the painting they will find a wall safe, if they search the backwall of the fireplace specifically they will find a loose brick with a +1 dagger behind it.)

AD&D 1e Players
1 (Fighter): I check the table for any papers that the wizard may need to decipher.
2 (Thief): I listen at the door using my ear cone in case there are any enemies waiting in the hall.
3 (Cleric): I cast Detect Magic concentrating my search on the table and chairs, if nothing is there I move to the fireplace and do the same.
4 (Wizard): Describe the painting, please?

D&D 3.5 Players:
1 - 4: Spot check does anything look out of place? 1: 20 2: 35 3: 7 4: 41
2: I Search the fireplace and roll a 19 on my check with my modifiers that a 36.

While it may not seem like a big difference

It seems like a huge difference to me. And AFAIAC, for the better.

Some old dungeon crawls and many call of Cthulhu games (for those who played or have played) relied on players doing or saying the right thing. And if you missed out... too bad. (The old text adventure games like Hitchhiker's Guide and the classic Zork were this way, too.)

These sorts of puzzle games were interesting at first, I don't have the patience for it anymore. I don't want to listen to the players finessing their way though a mansion, turning over every vase and checking the flue in every fireplace if it's going to hold up the flow of the adventure. (RPGnet calls this practice in adventure design "pixelbitching" after later graphics adventures that require you to click on ONE PIXEL.)

Not directly related to the topic at hand, I just thought I'd bring it up.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

You can do both. If you say something specific (eg I look behind the painting, I look for signs that a lock may have been tampered with) you can get a +2 bonus if it's relevant.

IME player experience makes a big difference too. In one starting adventure, some inexperienced players complained that the first set of monsters (Sean K. Reynold's fleshbound vampires) were overpowered, but they couldn't say "why". It let me know to tone things down, but didn't involve players telling me "get rid of the non-core vampires" or what have you.

 

[Quasqueton]

D&D 3.5 Players:
1 - 4: Spot check does anything look out of place? 1: 20 2: 35 3: 7 4: 41
2: I Search the fireplace and roll a 19 on my check with my modifiers that a 36.

Um, well the Spot checks wouldn't reveal any info on the picture/safe or the loose brick. Only a Search check would reveal them, and only if directed at the proper place (a Search check only covers a 5'x5' area). I don't see your point.

If the Players say they Search the painting, or the wall with the painting, with a good enough Search check, the DM will say something like they note evidence that the picture is often moved (maybe scratches on the wall, a worn corner of the frame, you think something is on the wall behind the painting, etc.). They still won't find the safe until they actually move the picture. What DM would tell the Players, "You find a safe behind the picture," for just a high Spot check (or even a high Search check)?

If the Players search the fireplace, with a good enough Search check, the DM will say something like they note one of the bricks seems loose and probably removable. They still won't find the dagger until they actually remove the loose brick. What DM would tell the Players they find a dagger for just a high Spot check (or even a high Search check)?

Just throwing out a Search check, in general, doesn't get some kind of global information. Searching a 20'x30' room would require 4 minutes of searching just for the walls alone. Taking 20 would take 80 minutes just for the walls alone. (I think most would include the painting and fireplace as part of a wall search.) If the secret is in a piece of furniture, or the floor, or the ceiling, well, the Players must include those in their search or else they won't find anything regardless of their Search rolls. I've had Players "search the room, and everything in it" when they have plenty of time, and I'm fine with that in any edition. Do experienced DMs really still make the Players play "say the right thing"?

Some old dungeon crawls and many call of Cthulhu games (for those who played or have played) relied on players doing or saying the right thing.

Sounds like this: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=170443

Quasqueton

 

[LostSoul]

Please explain this idea of "DM power", and explain how DMs have lost it.

One person at the table has the authority to say what happens in the game world.

The rules of the game say, "This is how we determine what happens in the game world." The rules spread that authority around the table.

 

[Li Shenron]

I so often see comments about how the latest edition of D&D has "taken power away from the DM." This usually seems to be considered a sad thing (and sometimes a bad thing).

I don't understand this concept. Please explain this idea of "DM power", and explain how DMs have lost it.

Quasqueton

What power?

There is DM's burden and there is DM's fun. There is no DM's power.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Simple rules systems, such as Amber or B/X D&D, increase the power of the GM as a greater proportion of situations that arise are not covered and hence require adjudication.

1e D&D doesn't have simple rules but they are abstruse thus requiring more DM rulings than if they were clear.

 

[Doug McCrae]

But it's also true that no amount of emphasis on the rules can mitigate bad GMing

I don't think that's true at all. I've made errors running 3e - sending somewhat overpowered encounters at the PCs - that I wouldn't have made if I'd followed the CR system.

 

[Zogmo]

What the...?

This all sounds so alien to me. DM cheating? What the hell kind of game are people playing?

There are no rules, only guidelines. It's only a game and we are all on the same team.

I have always been a DM and I want to have as much fun as possible and so do my players. We have always worked together and the concept of the DM cheating is beyond me.

I've been playing since 1977 with hundreds of different people over the years and it just doesn't fit with my gaming experience.

I don't mean this to be an insult to anyone but it sounds like very young kids playing if this is a real concern in the game. It sounds like the players and DM are missing a key concept that is at the heart of the game.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Most of the posts on this thread have talked about rules arbitration as the key to "DM Power."

Really?

Personally, I think rules arbitration is one of the least important things I do at the gaming table (or in preparation for it). As DM, my "power" comes from control of the story arc, the game's pacing, the development and unfolding of interesting encounters, and the mood and atmosphere of the game. As far as I'm concerned, rules arbitration is a means to an end, and has always been a DM-player collaboration. The only effect of the highly-codified rules of 3E has been to make this collaboration occur more quickly and efficiently.