Take the GM out of the Equation- A 3e design philosophy

[BryonD]

A DM has two major jobs:

Establishing the motivations of npcs and what conflicts are available for the PCs to engage.

and

Ruling authority on conflict resolution (be it combat, social, whatever).


I do not think the statement above was refering to the first item. On the second item, the less the resolution depends on the whim of the DM, the better it is for the game. So, in the context I believe it was intended, I support this design approach.

 

[Belen]

Incorrect, and irrelevent. It doesn't matter if I feel the need to stat out everything that the PCs might encounter, or only the most vital NPCs and enemies. If that rate of detail is the same, it takes me about 1/2 the prep time to run a Storyteller game or 1/3 for a Unisystem game. For a six hour game, its either going to be six hours prep for D&D, three hours prep for Exalted, or two hours for AFMBE.

And I'm inherantly lazy, so if the group wants to play D&D one of them can do the work to run it.

I feel your pain. However, e-tools cut my stat prep time down from 3 hours for a session to around 20 minutes. So now I spend more time on the story or focusing on the goals players have for their characters.

However, it is nuts that you have to use a PC to properly run the game.

 

[Berandor]

I can understand why they went that route. If the rules don't cover "nearly everything" *and* you don't have a skilled DM around, then that means D&D is not going to happen for you. But if you have rules that allow a newbie DM to run the game, then D&D is more likely to happen.

I also think this is why they keep moving toward the miniatures game -- it's like D&D without the DM.

But... but I like the DM!

I am with maddmann here, and francisca. (broken record: except that i still DM because our D&D group is so cool I doin't care about all the time I put in, it's too much fun)

 

[BryonD]

The stance that I've adopted is that the rules are there as a guideline for me, but not a rigid one. Last session we had a situation where an enemy combatant had climbed atop a low hut and was being attacked by a PC with a spiked chain. Another player asked, "Do I take the -4 for Firing Into Melee even though she's 8 feet off the ground and ten feet from the Psi-Warrior who threatens her?" The rules say yes but those sound like reasonable grounds on which to bend them. I ruled, "I'll split the difference with you and make it a -2."

Without changing my prior statement, I certainly agree with this.
I like the idea of a no DM judgement required design goal.
But I have no expecatation that it would ever be fully acheived.

Trying to make the game as mechanically elegant as possible and keeping whims to a minimum, in no way means that DM judgement will ever go away.
It is purely a matter of finding a DM whose judgements are consistently the most fun for everyone at the table.

 

[Squirrel Nutkin]

Yeah, but then you're back to DM's Fiat. It's a viscious cycle, really.

It may be a vicious cycle but it's a kewl ride.

 

[sjmiller]

The only way I can still GM 3e (3.5) is to use a computer program to stat encounters. Otherwise, I would use the d20 modern rules. It is impossible to GM a 3e game without support these days.

I will strongly disagree there. Unless, of course, you call paper, a few notecards, pencils, dice, and my corebooks as support. I don't use any computer programs (no laptop for use at the game), no mapping programs (I use SkeletonKey Games tiles), just the stuff I mentioned. I have no problem running a game. It takes me maybe 20 minutes to an hour typically to set up a game session. it might take a bit more if I have something big planned where I make visual aides, but that's about it. Really, it's not impossible!

Maybe 25 years of gaming experience helps here, I'm not sure.

 

[maddman75]

But... but I like the DM!

I am with maddmann here, and francisca. (broken record: except that i still DM because our D&D group is so cool I doin't care about all the time I put in, it's too much fun)

That's another issue. I might be more willing to put the effort into the game if I had a group that took it more seriously. We have some beer & Pretzel gamers, and I end up getting pissed off if I put all the work involved into a long D&D campaign only to have it derailed by a bunch of stupid jokes. The other games I don't have to work so hard at, and so I don't get as ticked off when the joking and goofing start up.

 

[Belen]

Hey, not saying I like it! But the requirement to have a "controlling expert" participate, without whom the game cannot function, is a major hindrance to our hobby (even if it is the very thing that makes the experience unique and special and fun).

I don't know about that one. I think that the $100+ dollar buy-in for a potential GM and the sheer number of rules to master to be an expert are more of a hindrance than needing a GM. Why spend that type of money when a video game is cheaper?

I do believe that the next edition will virtually elminate the GM. However, I also believe that will kill the D&D RPG. The minis game will survive and so will the MMORPG, but the hobby will begin to die as 0 new players enter. Even our kids will probably not play for long without companions of their own age to play.

The net may help by keeping the SRD alive, so there is some small hope.

 

[Belen]

I will strongly disagree there. Unless, of course, you call paper, a few notecards, pencils, dice, and my corebooks as support. I don't use any computer programs (no laptop for use at the game), no mapping programs (I use SkeletonKey Games tiles), just the stuff I mentioned. I have no problem running a game. It takes me maybe 20 minutes to an hour typically to set up a game session. it might take a bit more if I have something big planned where I make visual aides, but that's about it. Really, it's not impossible!

Maybe 25 years of gaming experience helps here, I'm not sure.

If you have multiple encounters in a session, it takes longer than that just to copy the stats out of the MM!

You may use the MM and have no trouble. However, I find it to be a clunky resource with stat blocks that make some things hard to find and it just takes to long when the special abilities, qualities, DR, SR, special attacks etc are added into the mix.

 

[Belen]

Without changing my prior statement, I certainly agree with this.
I like the idea of a no DM judgement required design goal.
But I have no expecatation that it would ever be fully acheived.

Trying to make the game as mechanically elegant as possible and keeping whims to a minimum, in no way means that DM judgement will ever go away.
It is purely a matter of finding a DM whose judgements are consistently the most fun for everyone at the table.

Yet they are not making it more elegant. The end result is that the rules are heavier. Elegant is having one or two mechanics that can support a variety of actions. Not using one mechanic, then modifying it every time you think of something else that can happen in a game.

The d20 mechanic is elegant. Stacking rules, AoOs, advanced combat etc are additions that take elegance into a dark alley with a crowbar and murderous intent.