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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8398488" data-attributes="member: 7023840">This isn't easy, because the term is often thrown around by people who use it to simply refer to, "DMing styles I don't like." Which is a definition, just not a very helpful one! I think that there a lot of examples of DMs that abuse their authority that aren't adversarial DMs. For example, a DM that fudges in favor of monsters when the combat is "too easy" might be adversarial, but maybe she's more into illusionism and wants the combats to feel more meaningful. Or there's the classic "Give and Destroy DMs" - the DM that will Monty Haul a campaign, because it feels good to have the players happy and getting stuff, and then she will realize that the players are OP, so will devise a way to take the player's stuff away, but then repeat the cycle. That's really bad DMing, but not adversarial.Finally, there's the Killer DM. The Killer DM might be adversarial, but might just be running a really hard campaign and letting the dice fall where they may. They're not trying to kill the players, but death is by-product of their style (and surviving an accomplishment).If those examples (IMO) aren't adversarial DMing, then what is? I go to the root of the words- an adversarial DM is one who believes their role isn't to be a fan of the players, or to be neutral, but to actively oppose the players. It can take many forms- but the view is that the DM is the opponent (and the DM thinks that the players are the opponent). The DM isn't providing challenges for the players to overcome, but providing challenges to defeat the players. A DM that delights in "gotcha".It's a constellation of behaviors that usually go to the same problem; the DM views themselves as a participant in a zero-sum game, and that their role is to win.</blockquote>

Verification