D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Faolyn]

All over the game, all over the books, they talk about having fun and imagination. I don't get the feeling from any forward in any core rulebook from any edition of D&D that the authors took the rules as seriously as many of us do now.

I think they'd be like, "You do you! Change what you want! Above all, enjoy yourself!" That's the vibe I've always gotten from D&D.

But strangely, some people don't want to take that advice to any other game.

D&D is allowed to be weird and goofy and rules can be ignored and replaced at a whim, but other games must be adhered to exactly.

 

[Hussar]

It doesn't because it's not true.

Think of any amateur hobby. Sports, creative, anything. Do you honestly believe that less than 25% of tennis players are bad? That less than 25% of miniature painters are bad? Heck, if 1 in 4 tips you over, let's say 1 in 5. 80% are middling or good, and 20% are bad. Seems like a pretty reasonable ratio to me. But, somehow less than 1 in 5 DM's are bad? Really?

The biggest issue with that thread is that it doesn't define good and bad. Is a bad DM simply one that is boring? Or is a bad DM one who railroads and drops comets from the sky on a party when a player annoys him? I'd argue the former isn't a bad DM and the latter is.

I'd say a bad DM is one where the players are not having a good time. A boring DM is bad. Maybe not as bad as the second one, but, would you characterize a boring DM as good?

Like I said, in any hobby, presuming that 20% of the participants are bad doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

At my table, when we play D&D and Level Up, we let you have up to three points of inspiration at a time. The game says one. Are we playing D&D/Level Up wrong?

I mean, there's a big tangent on this thread about house rules. I think we agree that most tables use at least one. Are millions of gamers playing wrong by not doing what the game says?


D&D says (or said, in 5.14) that druids can't wear metal armor. If you disagree and think they should be able to wear metal (metal is natural!), is that a slap in your face?

D&D says that a spellcaster can cast one spell per round (with an exception for bonus action cantrips). If you disagree and think they should be able to cast more, is that a slap in your face?

D&D says that any race can be any class. If you disagree and think there should be limitations on what race can be what class, is that a slap in your face?

D&D says that paladins are expected to follow an oath (or be Lawful Good, in earlier editions). If you disagree because want to be able to smite your enemies and get a cool warhorse but don't want to be bound by an oath or alignment, is that a slap in the face?

No, and it's utterly ridiculous to think that. The game isn't insulting you by writing down how it expects to be played.


...do you really think you're going to get players who are actually playing a PtbA game say "you're not being enough of a fan"? I mean, really? Has this ever actually happened, or are you just making this up?

And if it did happen, did it happen because the GM was being antagonistic or because you had a jerk of a player who wasn't playing the game themselves correctly by assuming that "be a fan" meant "kowtow to the players"?

None of the examples you're using are rules governing GM behavior. That, specifically, is what I have a problem with. I'd rather have advice.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But strangely, some people don't want to take that advice to any other game.

D&D is allowed to be weird and goofy and rules can be ignored and replaced at a whim, but other games must be adhered to exactly.

Not necessarily, but I've read a lot of games and many, many of the non-D&D-based ones take themselves pretty seriously.

 

[Maxperson]

I'd say a bad DM is one where the players are not having a good time. A boring DM is bad. Maybe not as bad as the second one, but, would you characterize a boring DM as good?

That's likely the disconnect you are having with a lot of us here. Bad DMs are the ones who abuse authority, railroad, etc. Boring ones aren't good, but they aren't bad, either. If you are including that type, it's no wonder you encounter so many more than us.

When each side is using different definitions, it makes really hard for the conversation to make much sense.

 

[kermit4karate]

ince both those things are far more powerful than any other racial statblock, that's blatantly unfair to the other players. That's where the line is. If that player doesn't get it or doesn't care, then they don't have to play.

Or, you play a game like GURPS where everything is built on points and you can actually build a dragon or lich character that's equal to the others.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I haven't let players play dragons, etc. in D&D. I have. It takes work to ensure that it's in service to the campaign and doesn't lead to other players feeling left out.

It usually comes down to Spider-Man for me.... With great power comes great responsibility. That plus disadvantages. I make sure the player is well aware that their choice will come with certain consequences. Not just the peaches and rainbows and the breath weapon.

 

[kermit4karate]

But strangely, some people don't want to take that advice to any other game.

D&D is allowed to be weird and goofy and rules can be ignored and replaced at a whim, but other games must be adhered to exactly.

If that's true it isn't D&D's fault.

 

[kermit4karate]

Think of any amateur hobby. Sports, creative, anything. Do you honestly believe that less than 25% of tennis players are bad? That less than 25% of miniature painters are bad? Heck, if 1 in 4 tips you over, let's say 1 in 5. 80% are middling or good, and 20% are bad. Seems like a pretty reasonable ratio to me. But, somehow less than 1 in 5 DM's are bad? Really?



I'd say a bad DM is one where the players are not having a good time. A boring DM is bad. Maybe not as bad as the second one, but, would you characterize a boring DM as good?

Like I said, in any hobby, presuming that 20% of the participants are bad doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me.

Uh, yes. I honestly believe that fewer than 25% of miniature painters are bad.

I mean, just based on the fact that a tiny person is even able to hold a paint brush is amazing to me!

It's just a game.

 

[Enrahim]

That's likely the disconnect you are having with a lot of us here. Bad DMs are the ones who abuse authority, railroad, etc. Boring ones aren't good, but they aren't bad, either. If you are including that type, it's no wonder you encounter so many more than us.

When each side is using different definitions, it makes really hard for the conversation to make much sense.

Even saying boring GMs aren't good is problematic. I can recognise the likes of Matt Mercer, Matt Colville, and Brandon being good at what they do. But whenever I try to watch any of their "actual plays" I give up as it is just FAAR too long winded for me. Get to the case, and the interesting decissions please!

 

[Maxperson]

Even saying boring GMs aren't good is problematic. I can recognise the likes of Matt Mercer, Matt Colville, and Brandon being good at what they do. But whenever I try to watch any of their "actual plays" I give up as it is just FAAR too long winded for me. Get to the case, and the interesting decissions please!

I can't watch them at all. However, I have discovered that listening to Critical Role while driving works for me.