If you emphasize both you emphasize neither right? The word focus implies a heavier weight given to one or the other. If you don't give more weight to one, then you would be in neither camp. But from everything you post it sure seems you are squarely in the Big Story Camp.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 5E Resting and the frikkin' Elephant in the Room
- Thread starter CapnZapp
- Start date
If you emphasize both you emphasize neither right? The word focus implies a heavier weight given to one or the other. If you don't give more weight to one, then you would be in neither camp. But from everything you post it sure seems you are squarely in the Big Story Camp.
Just a refresher of the series of posts that led to your comments Caliban:
Caliban - Outsider never talked about unilaterally going up to his DM and telling him he sucks as arbiter and that he is fired. He simply said that if the DM is not most knowledgeable about the rules, that he shouldn't take on the additional role of arbiter, and that such a role can be filled by a player. YOU are the one that created the scenario where Outsider goes up to his DM unilaterally like a jerk. Hussar's response was based on the actual content of Outsider's post, not on the inflammatory text in your response. So don't get all incensed with Hussar, he simply is saying he's OK with the best qualified guy, player or DM, getting the arbiter job. He is not advocating treating a DM like a jerk or not having team spirit.
I think one of the problems is that Big DM has a much more vested interest in keeping control of everything than DM Light. For me I am ok with the players having more control over their destiny.
Sure, tell your DM that you aren't comfortable with them making house rules or rulings. You just don't trust them to know how the game works and you should handle it for them. Tell me how it works out for you.
Really? Zero problems with one of your players telling you to your face that they don't want you making any rulings, and that they'll tell you how things work? Also, no house rules. They'll tell you how your game will differ from the core rules. Not you asking their opinion, but them telling you that you are no longer the final arbiter of the rules. *shrug* I'm just saying that I would find it more than a little bit rude, especially the way Outsider is phrasing it. I also really want them to try it with their DM and tell me what happens.
Caliban - Outsider never talked about unilaterally going up to his DM and telling him he sucks as arbiter and that he is fired. He simply said that if the DM is not most knowledgeable about the rules, that he shouldn't take on the additional role of arbiter, and that such a role can be filled by a player. YOU are the one that created the scenario where Outsider goes up to his DM unilaterally like a jerk. Hussar's response was based on the actual content of Outsider's post, not on the inflammatory text in your response. So don't get all incensed with Hussar, he simply is saying he's OK with the best qualified guy, player or DM, getting the arbiter job. He is not advocating treating a DM like a jerk or not having team spirit.
I think one of the problems is that Big DM has a much more vested interest in keeping control of everything than DM Light. For me I am ok with the players having more control over their destiny.
Last edited:
Really? Zero problems with one of your players telling you to your face that they don't want you making any rulings, and that they'll tell you how things work? Also, no house rules. They'll tell you how your game will differ from the core rules. Not you asking their opinion, but them telling you that you are no longer the final arbiter of the rules. *shrug* I'm just saying that I would find it more than a little bit rude, especially the way Outsider is phrasing it. I also really want them to try it with their DM and tell me what happens.
No, I don't - I merely based my statement on what you wrote....forgive me for not instead saying "Your language that appears to (in my opinion) indicate you are (but which does not necessarily mean you are) incensed with Hussar appears to be (but not necessarily is) misplaced given that he simply (to my understanding) is saying...." hmmmmm......seems a bit unwieldy eh?Please don't presume to tell me what I'm feeling. You really don't know.
*shrug* Since I wasn't "incensed", all I can conclude is that you are really bad at reading emotions based on text.
But hey, don't let that stop you from going all "Big DM" on me and telling me what I'm feeling.
*shrug* Since I wasn't "incensed", all I can conclude is that you are really bad at reading emotions based on text. But hey, don't let that stop you from going all "Big DM" on me and telling me what I'm feeling.
lol rigghhhttt....The point of my message was simple and clear - quit barking at Hussar over something you started. Go ahead and quibble with my word choice, and paint me as "that guy that tells people how they feel" - whatever bud ...... *shrug back*
I would generally not attempt to arbitrate as a player unless I was asked to do so by the DM even if my knowledge of the rules clearly exceeded the DM's system mastery.
Personally, I've been a player so few times in my years of playing D&D that I'm grateful that someone else is willing to attempt to run a game. I expect them to make mistakes. It's a skill that develops both through failure and success, and I would not presume to rob them of a growth experience just to maintain the "integrity" of the game.
Personally, I've been a player so few times in my years of playing D&D that I'm grateful that someone else is willing to attempt to run a game. I expect them to make mistakes. It's a skill that develops both through failure and success, and I would not presume to rob them of a growth experience just to maintain the "integrity" of the game.
Obryn
Hero
Really? You guys don't solicit player feedback when making rulings? Huh.
I do it all the time - I'll come up with something, and if it's particularly unusual, ask, "How's that work for you?" 90% of the time we're good, but the other 10% they may have seen something I missed (or understood the game-state differently) and we make a quick adjustment.
Also put me down as expecting the designers to design a pretty well-balanced game. The 6-8 encounter standard in 5e is both (a) essential for game balance, and (b) comically unwieldy for a lot of campaign styles. That doesn't really work out for me, so if I were running it, I'd probably decouple game mechanic 'rests' from the narrative 'resting.' You know, give a short rest refresh about every 2 encounters with a very brief breather, and a long one every 6-8.
It's fair, though, to criticize the game design itself, even when you can come up with house-rules to fix it.
I do it all the time - I'll come up with something, and if it's particularly unusual, ask, "How's that work for you?" 90% of the time we're good, but the other 10% they may have seen something I missed (or understood the game-state differently) and we make a quick adjustment.
Also put me down as expecting the designers to design a pretty well-balanced game. The 6-8 encounter standard in 5e is both (a) essential for game balance, and (b) comically unwieldy for a lot of campaign styles. That doesn't really work out for me, so if I were running it, I'd probably decouple game mechanic 'rests' from the narrative 'resting.' You know, give a short rest refresh about every 2 encounters with a very brief breather, and a long one every 6-8.
It's fair, though, to criticize the game design itself, even when you can come up with house-rules to fix it.
jasper
Rotten DM
WHAM WHAM WHAM WHAM. Break's both Caliban's kneecaps. WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!. Breaks Caliban's ribs and tosses him down the steps.Please don't presume to tell me what I'm feeling. You really don't know.
Jasper," Caliban, I think you are feeling great pains and feeling mighty low!"
Imaro
Legend
This is a really good point. It's a similar situation to players who come to depend on others at the table to tell them what to roll... what their abilities do... and so on. If you do this all the time how do you ever learn to actually play the game? I'd rather have a DM or player who tries and messes up (but is willing to concede when they do and take advice) than one who offsets learning the rules of the game to some one else. I also just don't see how a DM is prepping the campaign for play and yet somehow isn't learning the rules of the game. I mean it's almost a paradox in my mind.
Similar Threads
