D&D General Why do people like Alignment?

[AlViking]

Because the DM's role is different, right? They effectively are the judge, jury and (figurative) executioner. Even in a creative endeavor like a sketch comedy show (let's say SNL), there's still going to be someone like Lorne Michaels who oversees things. Otherwise, it's chaos.

I'm not saying a group of people can't all come to consensus on their own sometimes, but I am saying that they won't come to consensus all the time without a DM.

I don't know how many times at work we were told there was no manager, no project leader. But before too long there always was a de facto leader, usually the one that spoke loudest or refused to compromise.

 

[Clint_L]

The group can't kick out other players.

They can tell the DM that unless the problem player is removed that they'll leave but otherwise final say is with the DM.

That's how the D&D social contract works.

DMs have the freedom to run campaigns however they want and players have the freedom to leave.

Speak for your own D&D social contract. We see it as a cooperative game, not a dictatorship. We did recently mutually agree that a player was not a good fit, and then I had a conversation with him. He turned out to agree. We’re still close.

One of my (many) problems with alignment is that it encourages tyrannical DMing.

 

[Scribe]

Why is a GM game more collaborative than a GMless? Doesn't a lack of GM means that everyone will have to at least shoulder some responsibility instead of letting the GM control and create everything on its own?

Because collaborating with someone who has final authority teaches a different lesson. A lack of GM likely just results in whoever is the most vocal, imposing, or extroverted, taking control. /shrug

 

[GobHag]

I don't see how a GM prevents that in my experience.

 

[Scribe]

I don't see how a GM prevents that in my experience.

Well you generally have the adult in the room as the DM.

 

[Necropolitan]

Speak for your own D&D social contract. We see it as a cooperative game, not a dictatorship. We did recently mutually agree that a player was not a good fit, and then I had a conversation with him. He turned out to agree. We’re still close.

One of my (many) problems with alignment is that it encourages tyrannical DMing.

It is cooperative. But since the DM is the one providing the campaign they can choose who to share it with.

And Alignment doesn't encourage tyrannical DMing, there's no evidence that that's the case. Any DM who'd abuse the Alignment system would just find another way to be abusive.

I don't see how a GM prevents that in my experience.

The DM is the ones running the campaign. Without them there is no campaign.

 

[kermit4karate]

I don't see how a GM prevents that in my experience.

Out of curiosity, do you also feel that consensus-based leadership models would work in other areas of life that typically have leaders like classrooms, sports teams, fire departments, hospitals, engineering firms, video game developers, animation studios or musical theater groups?

In your estimation, which of those would also benefit from a shared group leadership model?

 

[AlViking]

Speak for your own D&D social contract. We see it as a cooperative game, not a dictatorship. We did recently mutually agree that a player was not a good fit, and then I had a conversation with him. He turned out to agree. We’re still close.

One of my (many) problems with alignment is that it encourages tyrannical DMing.

Why is so binary and extreme? A DM can be the the one making the final decision while still running a cooperative game. No tyranny in sight.

 

[GobHag]

Out of curiosity, do you also feel that consensus-based leadership models would work in other areas of life that typically have leaders like classrooms, sports teams, fire departments, hospitals, engineering firms, video game developers, animation studios or musical theater groups?

In your estimation, which of those would also benefit from a shared group leadership model?

I think music bands and most creative production do have a less strict hierarchy. Like in some of those groups the Leadership is a collective, and we have the word tyrant for a reason.

And there's plenty of shared group leadership in Video Games development. Most importantly they are small groups creating a creative endeavour.

 

[pemerton]

I've co-authored a lot of papers. That doesn't require a "leader".