The DM's Province

[Mark]

There are many different ways to play the game, so let's not allow this to devolve into a "I'm right, you're wrong" thread, please. I'm simply curious as to how many variations come up in the way various groups play the game based on how much input a DM has in molding that style of play or type of game.

Some DMs run campaigns where evil is not an option for players. Some games are run mostly by committee, where a campaign world is chosen by the group and the DM acts more as arbitor only, never leading the group toward adventures but only detailing what happens after they decide what to do. In some groups the DM determines what third party material might be allowed while other groups do so collectively.

All of that said, what are your feelings about what should remain completely in the province of the DM to determine?

 

[Belen]

I definitely think that the GM is in charge of the world. We have to remember that the GM's only source of fun remains the world and the story that he creates for the PCs to interact with. I certainly would have zero fun if my players took away a lot of my decisions.

However, a GM should listen to the players with regards to their character. He should try and find out the things that will make a PC's adventuring life worthwhile and incorporate that into the game.

So, No, the players should NOT have a say in the world, but their feelings should be incorporated within the game. If that makes any sense at all.

Dave

 

[Desdichado]

I've done both, but when I GM, half the fun is "creating" the campaign, so I always reserve the final word on setting details, rules allowed, and the like.

 

[DaveMage]

My group discusses the style of the game before we play, including the setting and character motivations.

As for what should remain solely the province of the DM, I would say the decision on what to run for the actual adventure as well as the design/running of the NPCs and monsters.

As a DM, I like my players to help with as much as possible before we start play, but once we start it's up to me to handle everything.

 

[Barak]

Indeed, players should at least get a say into the -type- of campaign to be run, otherwise the DM won't have anyone to run, if his choices are too far away from the players tastes. I would hate, for example, for my DM to spend his valuable time creating a Spelljammer-type campaign, only to find out that none of the players enjoy that type of adventuring.

Once that's settled, however.. Whatever the DM wants to do is fine by me. Well, except forcing players into a Spelljammer-type setting.

 

[NewJeffCT]

We tend to play it by ear in our group. Sometimes, the DM will come to us and say, “I have this really cool idea I would like to run for a campaign…” and we will trust him enough to let him go with that, be it his own homebrew world, the Kingdoms of Kalamar or Midnight. Well, actually I gave the group DM a bit of background on Midnight, he browsed through the book and loved it, and now will run a campaign there when he recovers from his recent surgery…

But, other times, we have said to the DM that we are looking for a different type of campaign and he will accommodate the group. Or, we all get together and hash it out, and basically each person tries to say what type of campaign (or non-campaign – we have a few that occasionally want episodic adventures like a TV season) they want. We talk it over for a while and decide what would be best. Normally, somebody will eventually come up with an idea that will get everybody to agree that this is what we want to do.

But, once the campaign starts, the DM is in charge, and it is his world to do with as he sees fit. But, we trust him enough to where we believe he will not ruin the dark atmosphere of Midnight, or whatever world we are in (the group has had two terrific long term campaigns in Kalamar, one was low magic, the other high magic)…

 

[DonAdam]

Since we have a pool of players to draw from, the DM is in total control.

"I'm running game x, it will involve elements a, b, and c."

This is good, because anyone that's willing to put in the effort to run a campaign should get to pick the campaign.

 

[Desdichado]

In my opinion, if the game is going to be any good, the GM has to be enjoying himself. Some GMs can enjoy themselves running anything the players want, but most have to run something they find interesting, for whatever reason that may be.

So as a player, I'm pretty lenient and flexible in terms of what GMs want to run. However, at the same time, if the GM wants to run something no one wants to play, no one will have fun with that either -- so he can't be too far afield from what the players are looking for. And any halfway decent GM is looking to incorporate things the players enjoy as well.

But really, it's only ever been an issue for me where the tastes within a group vary quite widely. That's actually only rarely happened to me.

 

[Buttercup]

All of that said, what are your feelings about what should remain completely in the province of the DM to determine?

I can only answer this for myself and my gaming group, because I think it is a local decision.

The world we play in is my vision, as DM. Players give me their backgrounds based on the packet I give them. These backgrounds help me add to the world. It continues to evolve through the course of the campaign, as PCs encounter certain things, and depending on how they react. I have frequently gotten great ideas and gone in completely new directions based on things the PCs *thought* were going on. So while the world is mostly my creation, it's organic and there is a great deal of give-and-take.

As for which rules we will use, and what supplements to allow, I get final say, though I try to be reasonable. Some concepts won't fit in my world, so we can't include those PrCs or whatever. But often we can come up with something that has a similar flavor, so the player gets what they want without straining the parameters of the campaign setting too much. During the game sessions, we don't argue about rules. If I need a clarification on something, I'll ask a player to look it up, but then I make my decision, and we move on. We can talk about it later if someone objects, but we don't have arguments during the session. Period. If I had a player who couldn't abide by that rule, I'd boot them, probably right in the middle of the session. It would suck too, because they're all friends and/or coworkers. Fortunately we see eye-to-eye on game ettiquite, if not on always on rules, so it's all good.

I guess it boils down to this: I do all the work between sessions, and I spend all the money on gaming materials. So my vote counts way more than everyone else's. They are, of course, free to walk if they don't want to play in my world. So far none of them have, and I"ve got several people who would like to play if we had an opening. It's gratifying, because honestly I don't think I'm that good of a DM.

 

[DaveMage]

Re: Re: The DM's Province

I guess it boils down to this: I do all the work between sessions, and I spend all the money on gaming materials. So my vote counts way more than everyone else's. They are, of course, free to walk if they don't want to play in my world. So far none of them have, and I"ve got several people who would like to play if we had an opening. It's gratifying, because honestly I don't think I'm that good of a DM.

Why don't you think you're a good DM? If no one has ever left your game and there are people who would love to join your game, it sounds like your players are having fun (which, to me, is the #1 consideration).

What makes a good DM?

And, in relation to this thread, is being a good DM determined by how much of the game you control? Or does it matter?

A campaign I played in about 13 years ago was run by a DM who controlled almost everything. He was a very creative-type, who developed everything from scratch. While the game only lasted about 6 sessions, I really enjoyed his style because he knew *everything* about his world. On the other hand, I've played in games where a DM has placed us in a very generic world, with very few details and the PCs helped to define the place. I enjoyed that too.