D&D 5E Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e

[Lanefan]

Perhaps a clearer metaphor: In my experience of published adventures, the PCs are passengers; I strongly prefer for them to be drivers. I don't feel as though this is incompatible with your ideas about believable settings, though our games are different enough that I'm plausibly missing something.

Maybe I misread your intent, then. I took you to be saying the setting/adventure/etc. should be taiolred to suit the particular PCs being played at the time, which is where my issue lies.

If I misread, my apologies.

 

[Fenris-77]

They have permission to change any rule for any reason at any time.

Just out of curiosity, I added something to your quote above. Would you still describe that as an accurate statement concerning the 5E D&D rules? I'm just trying to figure out where the edges of this disagreement are.

Edit: Sorry, posted without seeing the red text. Not sure if you mean me or not but I'll let it go either way.

 

[Aldarc]

Here are my final 2 cents before the inevitable heated exchanges gets the thread closed.

 

[Lanefan]

IMO, if you set up an "uber-arc" before Session One, and the campaign follows that arc, the game is about that arc, not about the PCs.

Context matters here: in my case if I'm setting up a campaign I know (or assume) that game/campaign is 99+% likely to outlast any of the PCs who appear in it; meaning that yes, the party's story (which may or may not follow any pre-intended story arc) is more important than that of any one PC.

 

[prabe]

Maybe I misread your intent, then. I took you to be saying the setting/adventure/etc. should be taiolred to suit the particular PCs being played at the time, which is where my issue lies.

If I misread, my apologies.

I do think that adventures should be interesting to the players and/or characters. That can but doesn't have to mean there's some tailoring. Tailoring the adventure doesn't have to mean tailoring the setting.

I'm nowhere near as opposed to tailoring things for the PCs as you are, but that's a difference I'm clear exists, and absolutely wouldn't correct you on it, or take offense to your having a different (strongly-held, I know) opinion.

Context matters here: in my case if I'm setting up a campaign I know (or assume) that game/campaign is 99+% likely to outlast any of the PCs who appear in it; meaning that yes, the party's story (which may or may not follow any pre-intended story arc) is more important than that of any one PC.

If the game features that kind of PC mortality, then I agree: the party's story will be more important than any PC's. I'd still be reluctant to have anything overarching, but that's kinda orthogonal, I think.

 

[prabe]

The mere potential for something to be abused is not a guarantee that it will be, unless you choose to make the most uncharitable reading possible.

As I said, I think there implicit understandings that matter.

Along with all that authority the DM also has a remit to make the game fun for the players at the table. And yes, the social contract is quite important.

Then it seems as though you see a difference between the authority the DM has in principle (as written), and the authority the DM has in practice (as played). I think the latter matters more.

 

[Lanefan]

Well, as I posted I don't play RPGs to be entertained.

I do.

If I didn't find playing RPGs to be entertaining, I wouldn't bother.

That said; I also see it as my duty, whether as player or DM, to provide entertainment in return.

 

[Lanefan]

Weird. You sound like you'd love FKR games.

Second or third time I've seen this reference round here recently, so I'd better ask: what's "FKR"?

 

[Lanefan]

If the game features that kind of PC mortality, then I agree: the party's story will be more important than any PC's. I'd still be reluctant to have anything overarching, but that's kinda orthogonal, I think.

Not all due to mortality. Over a ten-year campaign, long-term players are almost certain to want to cycle out their established PCs in order to try something new; and-or will be forced to roll up something new because their existing PC(s) is/are already in the field and another party is forming at the same in-game time, for a different mission or adventure. And of course some die off as well....

There's also certain to be player turnover as well during a timespan that long. End result: I've learned that focusing too much on any one PC is generally doomed to failure.

 

[prabe]

There's also certain to be player turnover as well during a timespan that long. End result: I've learned that focusing too much on any one PC is generally doomed to failure.

Yeah. If I'm putting something in front of the PCs that ties to, say, one PC's backstory, I'm doing that now, not planning to do it in the future. PC mortality aside, the PC (and/or the party) may be in a different place later and that something might be less appropriate for them, then.