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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 3057627" data-attributes="member: 3887">I like that too.I'm not sure I agree that "Chez DM" should be characterized by a lot of ad-hoc rulings, or house rules. I can see where you're going with this: an 'artisan DM' (note that ain't the same thing as 'artist) by my thinking, is going to put players in a wider variety of situations that a "McDm". The question is 'Will those situations fall outside the resolution mechanics as written?". I don't see why they'd have to, at least often. 3.5 is a nice combination of robust and abstract, I think it can model/handle a lot of situations satisfactorially. Its more a matter of creating that wide variety situations, and, of course, an interesting supporting cast to fill them out.Think about the Bravo hit "Project Runway". Each designer has, more-or-less, the same stock of materials to work with. What matters most is the designers skill to work those materials.(I am now hearing Tim Gunn say "Make it work" in my head. Thanks, Bravo...)What I was objecting to in Firelance's post was the idea that removing the 'DM from game', which sounds to me like removing the specific creative input of the designer, makes for a better game. It certainly makes for a more similiar, more predictable game (the McDM), but I'm not sure why that's a worthwhile goal.Then again, I run a campaign that's most distinctive, and successful component is best described as its tone. That should be clear if you've read any of the Story Hour. I realize that kind of game wouldn't work for everyone. But what kind of game does?</blockquote>

Verification