Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hossrex" data-source="post: 4143412" data-attributes="member: 60784">Congratulations on dismissing my post without actually bothering to dispute any of my statements.&nbsp; Tis' what one expects out of an internet discussion.I stand by what I said.&nbsp; If you're a DM, and you think its a better idea for the DM to allow the party to accidentally stumble upon the end of campaign baddie ten levels prior to when it was supposed to happen, then to fudge things to keep the campaign alive, and fun...&nbsp; you're a bad Dungeon Master.Weird things happen in a pen and paper RPG.&nbsp; A DM can *NOT* predict everything the players will do, and these situations will arise.&nbsp; Its a noble thing to say &quot;let the dice fall where they may&quot;, but in practice this can ruin a campaign and upset everyone.So...&nbsp; I'll bow to your point.If you're gaming group is composed of players who don't mind if they're campaign isn't any good, then &quot;rule zero&quot; (a phrase I'd never heard before today) isn't necessary.No one is saying a DM need to this every encounter, every adventure, or even every campaign.&nbsp; A good DM may never do this.&nbsp; A good DM may know his players well enough to predict any possibility.But a good DM knows when he's backed into a corner, and he has the option between &quot;ruining a campaign&quot; or &quot;saving a campaign&quot;.A good DM doesn't allow a campaign to fall apart.&nbsp; A good DM doesn't even let his players know there has been a hand wave.&nbsp; A good DM lets his players think everything is going as planned.I'm not saying &quot;every DM does this&quot; or &quot;no DM does that&quot;...&nbsp; but I am saying &quot;a person is a bad DM if they willingly let a campaign fall apart, when he could have fudged/changed/handwaved away something without the players knowledge&quot;.Nerfing sucks.&nbsp; Pulling back an enemy and not using his abilities to their fullest extent sucks.&nbsp; The players know when this happens.&nbsp; &quot;Why didn't the dragon breathe after the first time?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Why didn't the giant throw any rocks?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;How come the lich didn't use any high level spells?&quot;This isn't what anyone is talking about.We're not talking about dealing with problems an average DM should have been able to predict (&quot;uh oh...&nbsp; I didn't realize my party of 5th level adventurers would have a problem with the level 12 Evil Cleric.&nbsp; Sorry.&quot;).&nbsp; We're talking about that two times per year where everything goes wrong, no one does what any rational person could have predicted, and things need to be changed for the benefit of everyone.I shouldn't have to spell this out so specifically.&nbsp; It really is common sense.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hossrex, post: 4143412, member: 60784"] Congratulations on dismissing my post without actually bothering to dispute any of my statements. Tis' what one expects out of an internet discussion. I stand by what I said. If you're a DM, and you think its a better idea for the DM to allow the party to accidentally stumble upon the end of campaign baddie ten levels prior to when it was supposed to happen, then to fudge things to keep the campaign alive, and fun... you're a bad Dungeon Master. Weird things happen in a pen and paper RPG. A DM can *NOT* predict everything the players will do, and these situations will arise. Its a noble thing to say "let the dice fall where they may", but in practice this can ruin a campaign and upset everyone. So... I'll bow to your point. If you're gaming group is composed of players who don't mind if they're campaign isn't any good, then "rule zero" (a phrase I'd never heard before today) isn't necessary. No one is saying a DM need to this every encounter, every adventure, or even every campaign. A good DM may never do this. A good DM may know his players well enough to predict any possibility. But a good DM knows when he's backed into a corner, and he has the option between "ruining a campaign" or "saving a campaign". A good DM doesn't allow a campaign to fall apart. A good DM doesn't even let his players know there has been a hand wave. A good DM lets his players think everything is going as planned. I'm not saying "every DM does this" or "no DM does that"... but I am saying "a person is a bad DM if they willingly let a campaign fall apart, when he could have fudged/changed/handwaved away something without the players knowledge". Nerfing sucks. Pulling back an enemy and not using his abilities to their fullest extent sucks. The players know when this happens. "Why didn't the dragon breathe after the first time?" "Why didn't the giant throw any rocks?" "How come the lich didn't use any high level spells?" This isn't what anyone is talking about. We're not talking about dealing with problems an average DM should have been able to predict ("uh oh... I didn't realize my party of 5th level adventurers would have a problem with the level 12 Evil Cleric. Sorry."). We're talking about that two times per year where everything goes wrong, no one does what any rational person could have predicted, and things need to be changed for the benefit of everyone. I shouldn't have to spell this out so specifically. It really is common sense. [/QUOTE]

Verification