[Poll with discuss] What's your DM style?

[DDK]

Definitely a mix...

For the most part I stay neutral and simply present the world as I think it would be. If the players choose to go to the Heck Pits of Doomy, then they better expect to find lots of Doomy!

To me, it's up to the players to make the decisions about where they go and what they do. If they're so dumb as to walk into a snake pit without some mongooses to back 'em up, then that's there own fault.

However, in the background, I also like to work with the players to develop the story. I just try and do so in a non-invasive way. Usually this is through character history. I try and develop characters with the players so that I can garner at least two character based plot-hooks from the write-ups.

At some later stage, these come into play somehow. That way, the adventures are personalized every so often which helps to develop a characters... character. It also means I get new character based plot-hooks which can be used at an even later stage

That said, I pull no punches. The PC's in my PBP that I just started, have all spent at least two days living in a rat-infested inn, in a disease-ridden city... some of them have now got typhus and we haven't even officially started the game

 

[Desdichado]

The unsaid implication is that if you work with the PCs to develop a story then you are "easy" on the PCs, maybe pulling some punches or fudging some dice. I think how difficult you are on PCs and how story-oriented you are as a DM are two different vectors. There's not necessarily a correlation.

 

[myrdden]

The unsaid implication is that if you work with the PCs to develop a story then you are "easy" on the PCs, maybe pulling some punches or fudging some dice. I think how difficult you are on PCs and how story-oriented you are as a DM are two different vectors. There's not necessarily a correlation.

Yeah...you are right.

I chose very broad categories for simplicity. I was looking for more of a "which categoty do you tend to" sort of feel.

Myrdden

 

[Wormwood]

No story.

Just challenges and rewards.

 

[Barcode]

I really wanted to be the kind of DM that worked with the players to build the story. I really did.

But I have recently come to the conclusion, after about a year of playing in the same campaign, that I hate at least half of the PC's.

I think it began when the players cut me out of the intersession email threads, under the auspices of "not giving the DM any ideas". I felt kind of excluded, but I respected their wishes. Unfortunately, I am not a great tactician, more of a roleplayer, and with their six minds against my one they were constantly finding ways to easily beat the encounters. (That, and the CR system breaks down seriously when there are six PC's plus cohorts, and 6/8 are spellcasters of some sort). Then when the cheering and in-character gloating began, complete with the Bard composing derisive ballads about how easily the bad guys were defeated, I found myself feeling kind of defensive.

Now since this is all in character, I don't really feel any serious personal rancor towards the players, but a couple of the PC's are really starting to piss me off. I have started upping the difficulty of the encounters, and last week I killed a PC and one of the cohorts (the Bard's Devoted Defender). I have to admit I am feeling kind of a guilty pleasure. I still think the encounter was fair, but it was designed to make their favorite tactic (nuke them from orbit) fail with severe consequences.

So it is them against me, and I am barely holding on to my impartiality. This can only end in tears...

 

[Skade]

So it is them against me, and I am barely holding on to my impartiality. This can only end in tears...

That, or a good bloody massacre. If they don't post here you should see about getting help from some of the more vicious DMs around here. Come up with some truly devious encounters, and power play your monsters and NPCs to the hilt. I'm all for a good time, but the DM must have respect...

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I dare say I'm a cooperative DM, more often sided with my Players. Of course, I've got Players that think their way through situations rather than hack their way through, and would rather spend a night RPing an investigation for lore, knowledge and clues than crawling through the Infinite Dungeon of Doom.

I do tend to take the adversarial position with primary villains, however, to ensure that such final battles, whether ending in glorious victory or horrid defeat, are always memorable.

I also take an adversarial position with Players that play in a manner of rush-in-and-hack, although I've thankfully not had to suffer the burdeon of such Players in quite some time.

 

[Psion]

Yet another poll without answers I like, though at least this one has "other" options.

I think your poll is sort of on two axes. Challenge wise, my job is to present PCs with challenges. That doesn't mean I don't work with the players to make the story interesting.

I have simulationist leanings. I try to play villains and other NPCs to their true motivations and doing what they would logically do, even if it means a hard time for the PCs. I do try to interperet their motives in such a way as to produce interesting scenarios. But I typically let the dice fall where they may and seldom fudge to favor a player because of some notion of it making a better game. Rather, if I don't think an encounter makes for an interesting contribution to the game, I don't throw it in (now if the players get themselves into a mess, that's their own problem.)

 

[ForceUser]

I work with the PCs on their backgrounds within the context of the setting I present to them. Once the campaign starts I throw situations at them impartially and let them make their choices. NPCs within their sphere react to those choices; likewise, the PCs react to the NPCs doing their thing. And that's what shapes the campaign. Combat encounters are usually impartial inasmuch as I pick monsters based on CR with absolutely no regard to the specific capabilities of the player group. It's not my problem HOW they overcome their foes, only that their foes are generally within their ability to handle.

 

[Nifft]

When I DM, I tend to make a world with a complete history going on in the background. The players will have an effect, but the world doesn't revolve around them... unless they truely do epic deeds which will reverberate unto the end of time. Well, more like "until" than "unless"...

-- Nifft