Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Daztur" data-source="post: 5885006" data-attributes="member: 55680">For me at least, I like a lot of the spells and other effects that require DM interpretation even if everyone at the table has a D&D encyclopedia in their head (3.0ed and earlier Command etc. etc.).As for "creating all sorts of stuff for the players to play in" I think there's a important distinction to draw between stuff that you make up during prep time and stuff that you make up at the table. If I write up a location ahead of time (as I'm doing right now even though I can't play D&D for another few months because my wife would not be pleased if I left her alone regularly with an infant) I create it independently of the players. But if I'm making stuff up at the table, I'd much rather have random tables to do the Storyteller job for me since that would make it easier for me to maintain impartiality.Or to put it another way, if I make up a location in my setting right now and place a Monster of Killer Death somewhere random and scatter some clues about that it's there and if the players stumble across it anyway and get killed I feel like I'm being impartial. But if the players wander off the edge of what I've prepared and I make up "there's a Monster of Killer Death over the next hill" then I feel like I'm being a bastard who's being mean to the PCs, if that makes any sense. I want the players to feel that if they run across something that gets them killed it's because they were dumb or unlucky, not because I'm a bastard DM and doing less on the spot Storytelling helps with that.Well at least for me 3.5ed was the least predictable adjudication-wise, especially the skill system since at least with 1ed you KNOW that the DM is going to be making <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> up if you do certain things, but with 3.5ed I never knew when the DM would follow the rules and when they'd make <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> up since none of the DMs I ever played with (including me <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )could keep track of all of the rules for things like generating DCs.Good points. I was wrangling with how to deal with this (which could also include acting out non-hostile NPCs) in my head. So if you assum that the IM is part of the DM's role instead of an additional player you'd have:1. Rules Adjudication Guy who must be impartial.2. Guy running the opposition who must be something of a bastard.3. Guy making up <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> on the fly.To some extent combining them all into one person runs the risk of undermining the impartiality of 1., which is important if you like rule systems with lots of subjective effects. Being a bastard (role 2) can undermine the impartiality (or at least the appearance thereof) of role 1 and it's really hard to be constantly making <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> up on the fly while still being impartial. That's why I like stuff like FATE points (spreads the power of role 3 around the table) and random tables (random wandering monsters etc. etc.).I'm more or less the opposite. I got to the point where I could stat out d20 characters in my head (as long as they weren't too high in level) but I'm more than happy to offload on the fly worldbuilding onto the players <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yeah, my last DM did that all the time. Whenever he made <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> up about the world he'd come up with a range of probabilities in his head and then roll a d6 or d100. That way, of course, still has come subjectivity but it worked really well to communicate a feeling of "the DM is a neutral and uncaring god who cares not whether you live or die" that was a good fit for the campaign.An idea that's been floating around in my head is to give critters a list of desires (possibly randomly determined) and use those to help determine NPC behavior along with rules like random reaction tables and/or Diplomacy. For example if the ogre has the desires of "hunger," "kill kobolds" and "find wife" and the PCs offered to let him eat all of the kobolds and all of their pet weasels if he helped them kill the kobold tribe that is holding a beautiful ogress captive then he'd be gung ho to join them (as long as he didn't attack them before hearing them out, as determined by the reaction roll) but if they offer him bags full of gold he'd be a lot more leery. The idea would be to give the DM something to base their adjudication off of while avoiding both "I roll 30 on Diplomacy, he does what I says" or the DM just pulling random stuff out of his butt extremes. Perhaps player social skills would provide them clues about what the ogre wants.As you say the agenda of the critters is vital.If the PC's saw an ogre in a town (not likely in my campaigns) and tried to hire him, a reasonable offer and a Diplomacy check, plus some thought by me about who the ogre is and why he's in town, would decide it.That's the other key of my DMing style: I always ROLEPLAY every monster and NPC to its own agenda.  The monsters and NPC's aren't necessarily supportive of nor antithetical to the PC's agendas -- often, they are interested in something quite different, most often survival!</blockquote>

Verification