D&D General The DM Should Only Talk 30% of the Time... Agree or Disagree?

[prabe]

That's why create ranch dressing is, by far, the most potent 1st-level spell in the multiverse.

THE HUNGRY PLANTS ENJOY CONDIMENTS

 

[Oofta]

Hey now, I saw a documentary on plants once that was truly terrifying. Did a quick google and found an image:

 

[Lanefan]

That presumes that the DM is speaking after every player speaks. What happens when you have two PC's talking to one NPC? Do none of your players talk to each other in that conversation?

IME it's surprisingly rare, now I think about it.

The point is, DM's should try to talk less so that the players talk more. Heaven knows I've had more than a few players who are virtually catatonic at the table and only react when directly spoken to. Having players be a bit more willing to initiate things rather than passively waiting for me to roll up the plot wagon isn't a bad thing.

Thing is, IME those catatonic players tend to remain catatonic even when the DM stops speaking; meanwhile the non-catatonic ones take the conversation gap as an opportunity to dive in with non-game chatter which, once started, is a beast to stop.

 

[Lanefan]

"Flora"? Seriously? What self-respecting DM puts "flora" in a traditional game of spattered blood, rended flesh, and murderous carnivores??
D&D is a serious game, good sir, not a salad bar!

There's a small cadre of Shambling Mounds in the next room. They'd like a word...

 

[Hussar]

So in your view of D&D, everyone is a DM, making base content. Sorry, that is not D&D. There is one DM, not everyone.
And as stated by others, many, if not most, players would be very uncomfortable coming up with stuff, even if I gave them a week to do it.

And my "die in a fire" comment, have a look at the original comment I replied to.

Hey @Imaro - how come you're not jumping all over this bit of onetruewayism? I suggest that the game is better when players actively participate, and I'm accused of onetruewayism, and yet here we have someone flat out stating that something is NOT D&D.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Hey @Imaro - how come you're not jumping all over this bit of onetruewayism? I suggest that the game is better when players actively participate, and I'm accused of onetruewayism, and yet here we have someone flat out stating that something is NOT D&D.

Onetruewayism and badwrongfun are both just weapons to direct at positions you don't like or whose holder didn't ask your express permission to state.

 

[Helpful NPC Thom]

To comment on the original post more seriously, I think the GM's voice should take precedence over the other players' as a matter of his privileged position. However, allowing the players more opportunities to speak and author the game is a viable strategy, though it is going to depend heavily on the group. Some players will be deeply uncomfortable with taking that level of control, whereas others will thrive. From my perspective, an important consideration will be ensuring that all players are in agreement with the meaning, interpretation, and outcomes of dice rolls--everyone must be on the same page--which could cause friction.