Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7727408" data-attributes="member: 42582">Those things would have no bearing on the object of play. Whereas the GM exercising the sorts of powers I describe is obviously and tightly relevant to what the 5e Basic PDF describes as the goals of playing D&D (p 2):Together, the DM and the players create an exciting story of bold adventurers who confront deadly perils.Deciding that there is a dragon rather than an ogre in the room, if that will be more interesting, actively contributes to that goal of play.Where?I've already quoted text from 4e and 5e that indicates otherwise (in its description of the role of the GM).Here is more from 4e (PHB p 258; DMG pp 102, 125):You [the player] can also, with your DM’s approval, create a quest for your character. Such a quest can tie into your character’s background. . . . Individual quests give you a stake in a campaign’s unfolding story and give your DM ingredients to help develop that story. You [the GM] should allow and even encourage players to come up with their own quests that are tied to their individual goals or specific circumstances in the adventure. . . . The trickiest part of awarding treasure is determining what magic items to give out. Tailor these items to your party of characters. Remember that these are supposed to be items that excite the characters, items they want to use rather than sell or disenchant. If none of the characters in your 6th-level party uses a longbow, don’t put a 10th-level longbow in your dungeon as treasure. A great way to make sure you give players magic items they’ll be excited about is to ask them for wish lists. At the start of each level, have each player write down a list of three to five items that they are intrigued by that are no more than four levels above their own level. You can choose treasure from those lists . . .Those passages make it very clear that the GM is expected to author story elements having regard to the degree of interest they will have for the players.Here is a passage from the AD&D DMG (pp 9, 110):[T]he rules call for wandering monsters, but these can be not only irritating - if not deadly - but the appearance of such can actually spoil a game by interfering with an orderly expedition. You have set up an area full of clever tricks and traps, populated it with wellthought-out creature complexes, given clues about it to pique players’ interest, and the group has worked hard to supply themselves with everything by way of information and equipment they will need to face and overcome the imagined perils. They are gathered together and eager to spend an enjoyable evening playing their favorite game, with the expectation of going to a new, strange area and doing their best to triumph. They are willing to accept the hazards of the dice, be it loss of items, wounding, insanity, disease, death, as long as the process is exciting. But lo!, everytime you throw the ”monster die” a wandering nasty is indicated, and the party’s strength is spent trying to fight their way into the area. Spells expended, battered and wounded, the characters trek back to their base. Expectations have been dashed, and probably interest too, by random chance. Rather than spoil such an otherwise enjoyable time, omit the wandering monsters indicated by the die. No, don’t allow the party to kill them easily or escape unnaturally, for that goes contrary to the major precepts of the game. Wandering monsters, however, are included for two reasons, as is explained in the section about them. If a party deserves to have these beasties inflicted upon them, that is another matter, but in the example above it is assumed that they are doing everything possible to travel quickly and quietly to their planned destination. If your work as a DM has been sufficient, the players will have all they can handle upon arrival, so let them get there, give them a chance. The game is the thing, and certain rules can be distorted or disregarded altogether in favor of play. t is your right to control the dice at any time and to roll dice for the players. You might wish to do this to  . . . give them an edge in finding a particular clue, eg a secret door that leads to a complex of monsters and treasures that will be especially entertaining.Gygax's advice shows some tension between his mechanical design - which calls for a large amount of random determination of content introduction (by way of random encounter checks, searching checks, etc) - and the goals of play: he recognises that, in a RPG, random content introduction may not always produce an interesting gaming experience. Whatever the merits of his solution - to suspend rather than revisit the mechanics - he makes it clear that the GM is enttiled, and even expected, to manage content introduction having regard to what will be interesting for the players. (He is als, very clearly, aware of the difference between managing content introduction - which he encourages - and managing action resolution, which he discourages as "contrary to the major precepts of the game." Ignoring this distinction is fundamental to the "fudging"/"golden rule" ethos of 2nd ed AD&D and other late-80s/90s RPGing; and recovering it is fundamental to the "indie" revolution in RPGing.)The two systems that have been most discussed in this thread are AD&D and 4e. Although different in many ways, both have rulebooks and GM advice that clearly contradicts your claim that the GM is not allowed to make decisions having regard to metagame considerations (ie what will be of interest to the players).And, as promised upthread, here is an example from a different RPG (Classic Traveller, Book 3: Worlds and Adventures, p 19):The referee is always free to impose encounters to further the cause of the adventure being played; in many cases, he actually has a responsibility to do so.And this is is one of the most hardcore simulationist RPGs ever written!You seem to be projecting one significant aspect of the "player" role onto the gamemaster/referee. The GM is not in general pretending to be a character, and is not in general pretending to make decisions from a character's perspective. To quote from the 5e Basic PDF again (p 2):One player, however, takes on the role of the Dungeon Master (DM), the game’s lead storyteller and referee. TheDM creates adventures for the characters, who navigate its hazards and decide which paths to explore. The DM might describe the entrance to Castle Ravenloft, and the players decide what they want their adventurers to do. Will they walk across the dangerously weathered drawbridge? Tie themselves together with rope to minimize the chance that someone will fall if the drawbridge gives way? Or cast a spell to carry them over the chasm?Then the DM determines the results of the adventurers’ actions and narrates what they experience.The GM establishes the nature of the ingame situation, and adjudicates the action declarations that the players make for their PCs in response to that situation. These are the fundamental roles of the GM in all mainstream RPGs, from the early days of D&D through to indie RPGs like Over the Edge or Burning Wheel.How the GM establishes the nature of the ingame situation; and what techniques the GM uses to adjudicate action declarations; are things on which preferences differ. And have done since 1974.Never trust a GM to do what?You seem to be equating meta-gaming with lying; to be imagining that a GM who places a dragon rather than an ogre pretends to the players that it was written in advance, or that it was rolled on a table, when in fact it was made up by the GM on the spot. Do you know how my players know the basis on which I make decisions about content introduction? Because I tell them. The players know that if they fail checks, I will introduce content into the fictional situation that runs against the interests of their PCs. And when this happens, I taunt them about it!What you call "egregiously offensive" I just call refereeing the game.</blockquote>

Verification