when the DM is in fact wrong

[Corinth]

The Game Master Must Not Be God

It's been more than 20 years now for me. I'm still seeing the same horror stories now that I saw then, and I still wonder why there isn't a big push to actually train gamers in the skills needed to be a competant Game Master. I know that programs exist, but the scope is insufficient. Life is too short to tolerate wasting it on lame crap like bad GMs.

 

[mkletch]

The problem is though that too many people on this board and too many DM's in general take the statement below as meanign they are god and the players are nobodies and everything revolves around the DM.

A) It all does revolve around the DM - it is his responsibility to make sure that everybody has fun, usually by presenting a story or scenario.

B) A DM that POs all of his players has no players, therefore has no game, therefore is no longer a DM

There is a lot of responsibility to being a DM, but it is also rewarding and fun. If you handle the responsibility part well, the fun will follow on its own.

-Fletch!

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

In my experience the underlying cause of the worst DM calls is a DM who cannot resist railroading the players.

That is why the pet monster will get its save rolls fudged on the first and second round of combat. That is why information gathering fails and you are left with exactly one clue and no other options. That is why rules everyone understood and agreed on get completely reinterpreted on the fly. That is why arguing the rules or the facts or common sense will suddenly fail.

The other side of the coin is that real problems with a player are usually caused by an individual who wants to "win" and forgets to try and make the game fun for himself, other players, and the DM.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I've DMed, and played, and I have left several games where the DM really did think the game revolved around him and his "story" that he wants to tell, regardless of the players wishes.

I've also had DMs that think the way to "challenge" the players is screw them over in new and imaginative ways every session, breaking whatever rules get in his way, even if it's the Laws of Space and Time.

In either circumstance, I've tried communication and failed. I also have a couple of DM/ GMs that I've had talks with and continued in their games after a problem or two. Sometimes, personalities clash, and it's just easier to move on.

 

[Falcon]

I think it all revolves around communication in the end. Not just talking and trying to prove a point, but also listening and truly trying to work with each other and see where everyone is coming from and what can be done to make it work for the most people possible. I said most, not all. Sometimes, there are irreconcilable differences, which is fine; it happens.

In the end, this is supposed to be an enjoyable social activity. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother as a player or a DM.

 

[jollyninja]

here is a little bit of background information, other then drawing out maps, the homebrew world we play in is at least as much my creation as it is his. nearly all of the earth shattering events have been my idea, half the gods are my old characters, most of the ledgendary heroes are my old characters, the founding principles on which most nations within the world are based are either heavily influenced by me or stolen directly from the real history of earth, 90% of the plot hooks are based on my character backstories so i suspect that without me (the only player who throws him a bone as far as story lines go) the campaign would end. the loss of control of my characters actions (after attaining godhood or simply after the conclusion of his active adventuring career) has never been an issue and all of his previous rule changes seemed to be done with the goal of fitting everything into the setting. also, he was able to give reasonable reasons for making the changes to the rules.

this time however it was a change to a character class world wide to more acuratley depict a specific tag along npc concept he had in mind. and when i asked him why he had made the change, i was given some half assed response and he got really defensive. it virtually degenerated into a shouting match, virtually, i don't shout. to be completley honest, it's the fact that he made global changes for the sake of one npc that bothers me, i do not even play the class typically, it's not something that will make me break up our gaming group. together for 6 years now on and off, these are my comrades in arms. i can handle the fact that he allways feels the need to have a tag along npc who could single handedly kill the party. i can handle the fact that he tends to use the same npc's in every campaign. i can even handle the fact that he butchers my characters horribly when using them as npc's. but this bothers me. it eats at me that if i suggested a change to a class just to better reflect a single character concept, he would think i was a munchkin and say so right to my face but when he gets the idea to do it, it's ok just because he is the all mighty DM. screw that, without players a DM is a guy sitting alone in a room reading a rulebook.