D&D General worst (real) advice for DMs

[Scott Christian]

Is it not implicit advice to run a game a certain way for people at a Con or game shop/cafe?

Rather than a verbal/written "this is how you do it", it's an actual demonstration of "this is how you do it".

No, it isn't. That is not advice.

Am I advising people to play a game centered around a war between a lizard kingdom and turtle kingdom by running a campaign about a war between these two kingdoms? Am I advising people to play an underwater campaign with water breathing mind flayers by running an underwater campaign?

The answer is no.

 

[Faolyn]

I have never heard this advice - ever. In thirty years never ever heard a DM utter to another DM this as advice.

Never heard it as advice, but I have seen people use it as an excuse, and sometimes seen people claim that not having racism/sexism/homophobia in a game is making the world too unrealistic. Dragons and wizards are fine; not having endemic bigotry is just a step too far.

Somehow, these "realistic" worlds of theirs seem to lack tons of horrible diseases, rampant illiteracy, realistic economics, a constant religious presence, and other such real things.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Somehow, these "realistic" worlds of theirs seem to lack tons of horrible diseases, rampant illiteracy, realistic economics, a constant religious presence, and other such real things.

To be fair, some of the same people very much do have a lot of those too. Its not like "crapsack fantasy world" isn't viewed as a virtue by a lot of people.

(The exception is the economics, which so few people understand well enough that they could even try to do it if they wanted to. )

 

[Bedrockgames]

To be fair, some of the same people very much do have a lot of those too. Its not like "crapsack fantasy world" isn't viewed as a virtue by a lot of people.

I certainly don't mind a world with some grittiness to it. I included some mechanics for sepsis in one of my fantasy settings, and I included rules for developing fistulas from sword wounds in another (which is how I rationalized the whole "it's the old wound my king" from Excalibur). But it isn't for every setting or every group. When I was running a standard high fantasy setting I would layer in the anachronisms and gloss over the miseries of daily life because it wasn't meant to be anything like the real middle ages or ancient world.

(The exception is the economics, which so few people understand well enough that they could even try to do it if they wanted to. )

That is just hard. I have tried to understand the economics. I've read lots of book on the subject, but modern economics is so ingrained in me, it is really hard, I find, to think naturally outside that even if you understand concepts intellectually. At this point, I just use modern dollar amounts for everything, not matter how realistic or fantastical the setting is supposed to be. It is simply easier

 

[Thunderfoot]

I have been to enough GenCons, Gamexes, OrcCons, GaryCons, SoCal Smackdowns, StrategiCons, etc. to have heard things that make me ill. Again, my point, I have never heard it as advice. I have never heard another DM tell another DM they should run their game this way.

I will point out something to you and take it for what you will: Maybe it's not all the surreptitiousness and slyness that you think you see. Maybe it is you distilling someone's argument down to a sensational headline, rather than the complete depth of their claims. Just a thought.

Example 1: I have heard some people on here insist that goliaths should be stronger than halflings because of the size and weight differential. I have never seen them tell another DM they should do the same. But in the very next breath, I have heard the opponent of said DM say they obviously have a type of bigotry in their game towards smaller people. Sensational headline formed.

Example 2: I have seen many debates on here about ASIs. One DM wants to keep them. Wants to keep their smart elves and gnomes. They clearly stated others could do what they want. In the same argument, the opponent of said DM hinted at how racist it was for them to keep that rule. Sensational headline #2 formed.

Example 3: I have seen many debates about inherent evil for some races. One DM wants to keep their drow or orcs evil. They never insisted or advised others to do so. In fact, just the opposite. In the same argument, the opponent of said DM didn't hint, just stated they were racists. Sensational headline #3 formed.

These sensational headlines remove the part where the DM wasn't giving advice, but declaring how they run their table. Because that is what this whole thread is about - giving advice. And again, you can tell me all the times you have heard a racist, bigoted, misogynistic blowhard that has their head up you know what saying something while you were eavesdropping, but that doesn't make it advice. Never mind the rarity of it - which I am also willing to argue about. Because it is not nearly as prevalent as what some make it out to be.

Actually, I think we are in agreement, you just took my passing comment and parsed it.
My point was that it's not advice, it's comments heard that then translate to someone 'thinking' they heard it as advice. But either way, we both agree. it's not good.

 

[Lanefan]

Somehow, these "realistic" worlds of theirs seem to lack tons of horrible diseases, rampant illiteracy, realistic economics, a constant religious presence, and other such real things.

Can't speak for others but in my game, in sequence:

With Cure Disease being a relatively common spell, and curative herbs also existing, it's much less likely - but not inconceivable - that major illnesses or plagues will be as frequent and-or widespread as in our world; but disease is still a thing, yes.

Literacy, even among adventurers and nobility, is not guaranteed*; and among commoners it's quite unusual.

Realistic economics: guilty as charged, both due to the system's in-built monetary imbalances and due to my own dislike of the field.

Constant religious presence is a thing, only with so many competing religions much of it tends to become background noise; an analogy might be how the relentless barrage of advertising in the modern world just becomes background noise most of the time.

* - other than for arcane casters, who have to be literate: it's hard to read a spellbook if you can't read at all.

 

[Scott Christian]

Never heard it as advice, but I have seen people use it as an excuse, and sometimes seen people claim that not having racism/sexism/homophobia in a game is making the world too unrealistic. Dragons and wizards are fine; not having endemic bigotry is just a step too far.

Somehow, these "realistic" worlds of theirs seem to lack tons of horrible diseases, rampant illiteracy, realistic economics, a constant religious presence, and other such real things.

I've seen that too, although I don't assume they are racists, sexists, or misogynists. I mean, I know a DM that has devoted their entire life to helping those less fortunate, yet in their campaign there is slavery and an entire continent that is racist (except for the rebels in the continent). I know them. They are not racist.
But it's all anecdotal I guess. You see your world through your half-empty glass, I will continue to see it as almost full.

 

[Scott Christian]

Actually, I think we are in agreement, you just took my passing comment and parsed it.
My point was that it's not advice, it's comments heard that then translate to someone 'thinking' they heard it as advice. But either way, we both agree. it's not good.

Oh, sorry. My bad. I see it now. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Thunderfoot]

Can't speak for others but in my game, in sequence:

With Cure Disease being a relatively common spell, and curative herbs also existing, it's much less likely - but not inconceivable - that major illnesses or plagues will be as frequent and-or widespread as in our world; but disease is still a thing, yes.

Literacy, even among adventurers and nobility, is not guaranteed*; and among commoners it's quite unusual.

Realistic economics: guilty as charged, both due to the system's in-built monetary imbalances and due to my own dislike of the field.

Constant religious presence is a thing, only with so many competing religions much of it tends to become background noise; an analogy might be how the relentless barrage of advertising in the modern world just becomes background noise most of the time.

* - other than for arcane casters, who have to be literate: it's hard to read a spellbook if you can't read at all.

Yep, and also most game worlds are written from the perspective of novels, not history books. So things like economics are (as stated) background noise. The other issue is when those issues do come to the fore it ends up being Star Wars, Episode 1, Embargo Wars... and I can't think of anything less heroic than that.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yep, and also most game worlds are written from the perspective of novels, not history books. So things like economics are (as stated) background noise. The other issue is when those issues do come to the fore it ends up being Star Wars, Episode 1, Embargo Wars... and I can't think of anything less heroic than that.

I call this knowing what franchise you are in. Is the setting meant to be something more like the movie I, Claudius or Agora (where I might expect a lot more realism) or is it meant to be like an action packed sword and sandals movie.