D&D General The DM is Not a Player; and Hot Topic is Not Punk Rock

[Guest User]

I mean, if we are quoting Gygax ...

Snarf, honestly, I am barely reading your posts. Your ability to accurately quote is suspect at this point. On post 79 I stated, (in part), this:

A DM, is fulfilling the role of arbiter, but no reasonable person would classify the DM as a neutral arbiter.
(reasonable, in the legal sense...not intended to imply unreasonableness on anyone's part)

On post 86 you quoted my post 79 and left out the sentence in parenthesis.
You responded as if the disclaimer was not present.

At best this was an intellectually dishonest response in order to make a joke.
At worst, your actions were intellectually dishonest response to spread slander and calumny.

I ignored it before, and did not report it. The consequence is I'm not reading your responses. I like the thread topic...but you acted in bad faith towards me, for no other reason than you could.

Well, there's me.

Then there's this ...

"In all cases, the GM must do his best to remain disinterested while retaining the power of absolute arbiter."

That's some dude who wrote a book. .... think it was something something Mastery by Gygax.

So there is two people!

 

[bulletmeat]

Don't have time to read the whole thread, but a DM in D&D is not a player. The DM is a presenter. They can be a story teller just like the players are story tellers, but the DMs, for lack of a better term, have more power than the players in the story:

DM: there is a 100' chasm in front of you.
Player: I fly across the chasm.
DM: do you have a magic item or equipment that let's you fly across?
Player: No, I can just fly.
DM: No, you can't.

The problem with the power role is a DM who does not use this power responsibly. Everyone does it, it's an easy mistake to make. Games have been created to mediate/change this but in D&D that's kind of how it's run.
If a player says they can do something for no reason a DM has the right to say no. If a player rolls a nat 20 for his persuasion to have the dragon to give up all it's gold the DM has an ability to say, "that choice is not possible so that roll does not work." Player's are equal, DM in D&D is not.

And as much as I can appreciate the work Dave & Gygax did to create this game I don't care what they said. At least in the four corners of the US with the frew nationalities I have played this game with (US, Vietnamese, British, Ethiopian) this was the silent agreement that allowed them to enjoy the game when I DM'd correctly (or at least learn it wasn't satanic).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

At worst, your actions were intellectually dishonest response to spread slander and calumny.

Please do not respond to my posts again (and I will reciprocate). Thanks!

 

[Sacrosanct]

So, do you want us considering the GM a non-sentient being that fundamentally cannot feel enjoyment? Or disappointment, frustration, or physical pain? A thing that can be engaged at any time day or night, to do our bidding and entertain us? And when they frustrate us, we start cursing them out, throwing things at them?

Maybe that nonsensical analogy does not serve your purpose very well.

It's not nonsensical if you don't use a straw man

Also, you didn't answer the question. What does NPC stand for? Who controls NPCs? What does PC stand for, and who controls those?

There is the answer

 

[MGibster]

I think that we can all agree that, regardless of where we stand on the underlying debate of whether the DM is a player, Gary Gygax was most assuredly an a**hole. Not saying that's a bad thing. Some of my favorite people are a**holes. Then again, I am one of my favorite people (where would I be today were it not for me?). And I doth not protest being thought of as an a**hole.

If I ran my 5E games the way 1E was often run I think my players would mutiny. But some people love that style and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[happyhermit]

You seem to be attaching a lot of baggage to the term “player.”

No, I'm saying that arguing that the GM is a Player because they play the game is pointless. If people want to say "the GM is not a player" or "the GM is a player" to make a point about their roles, then that's something, but arguing the ipso facto nature of playing a game ignores how we typically use language in context.

...
Our different ideas of what a statement like “the DM is a player” implies are getting in the way of us having an interesting discussion about DM/player power dynamics. So we should really set aside the question of whether the DM is a player or not and talk directly about the things we are actually using that phrase to express.

So I gather your answer to the question; "why is it important to you the the GM be called a player?" you answer would be something along the lines of "I am playing, so I must be recognized as a player." fair enough I guess, just seems unnecessary to me. Almost like someone needing to point out that the participants in a game of tag are all in fact players, even if they aren't usually described as such, because they are playing a particular game as opposed to more freeform play where the individuals aren't players.

 

[embee]

If I ran my 5E games the way 1E was often run I think my players would mutiny. But some people love that style and there's nothing wrong with that.

1E and 2E had the distinct advantage of existing before YouTube and Twitch. Unless you were one of the rare birds who played at GenCon, they way you played in your basement or dorm room was THE WAY that D&D was played.

I've never seen Critical Role. I have no interest in it. And I find a lot of actual play videos to be tough to watch too. I'd rather just play the way I play. Hitting folks up for advice is one thing. But I don't think any online DMs are god or anything.

 

[prabe]

I've never seen Critical Role. I have no interest in it. And I find a lot of actual play videos to be tough to watch too. I'd rather just play the way I play. Hitting folks up for advice is one thing. But I don't think any online DMs are god or anything.

I'm the same when it comes to actual play videos/streams, though for me it's more a matter that after about five minutes I wanna turn that noise off, get out the books, and play. OTOH, about half the people in my two campaigns love the show, and at least two of them were introduced to D&D by it, so I'm even less inclined to snark about something not to my tastes than normal.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

No, I'm saying that arguing that the GM is a Player because they play the game is pointless. If people want to say "the GM is not a player" or "the GM is a player" to make a point about their roles, then that's something, but arguing the ipso facto nature of playing a game ignores how we typically use language in context.

Agreed. To use a recent (and perhaps more relevant) example:

In America, we sometimes call those who have doctorates (PhDs, EdDs, etc.) as "Doctor So and So," depending on context and what the person requests to be called. However, if the person is granted the doctorate (an honorary doctorate), then as a matter of custom we do not call them that.

We always call medical doctors (MDs) "Doctor So and So".

We never call attorneys (JDs) "Doctor So and So."

But that's America; it's my understanding that in England, for example, Medical Doctors are called Doctors but Surgeons do not have that honorific (for complicated historical reasons), so that you have the situation where a person can go from "Mr." to "Dr." to "Mr."

So the question of who is, and who isn't, a "doctor" isn't some descriptivist formula, but is instead understood through context. Same with player.

 

[embee]

We never call attorneys (JDs) "Doctor So and So."

And we attorneys call chiropractors "Mister" when they're on the stand.

It gets a little rise out of them and, if they put up a fuss, we say "Yeah, but you're a Doctor of Chiropracty. You're not a licensed medical doctor or osteopath, are you?" And when the answer is "no," we go back to saying "Mister."

Ph.Ds, on the other hand, we always call "Doctor." Unless they're also a Professor, in which case, we might go with that as well.