Thursday, May 5, 2016

My response to Facebook post "I am a horrid DM"

My response to Facebook post "I am a horrid DM"In Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition group at Facebook Douglass Tanner posted this:
"I am a horrid DM.1.  I use a screen.2.  I fudge dice rolls (both in favor and against the characters, to promote more strategy)3.  I don't give them details they did not look for.4.  I use encounters that are under them, over them and in range of them.5.  I give few magic items out, and when I do its random.6.  I give out lots of $ and allow them to try and find an item or buy one. With % roll that it even exists in the city/town they are in.7.  i do not use modules, I use a home made world every time.I got this from Crypt Of Rabies, you can read his responses here - http://cryptofrabies.blogspot.ca/2016/04/my-response-to-facebook-post-i-am.html

Moi, 
1.  I've always used a screen, I like it.  I used to use a 2e screen, but the darn thing is so high its hard to see the players.   I got the 5e screen and have been using that, I like it because I can see reactions and rolls, etc.  One time I ran a start of an adventure without a screen, and it wasn't that big of a deal, just kind of held the map in my lap.  I wouldn't mind trying it again. 

2.  I used to fudge rolls.  I don't anymore.  Or at least I haven't in awhile.  I've been told by players that they like seeing the rolls.  So I think I will probably stick to that.  It keeps me from handholding.  That being said, as Thaumiel suggest's its sometimes good to keep certain rolls behind the screen.  As well, I like to just randomly roll a dice, look down.  and then keep going. 

3.  This is rather difficult.  I think it depends on the situation.  I know I've railroaded a bit, it depends on the module.  I need to stop that.  I like to give a general description of everything.  What is preferable is if there is something the PC's need to know about a description, I'd like to have 2 options, one real one and one red herring.  When it works. 

4.  Well it depends on the module doesn't it.  The last little while I've ran modules, so everything is mildly pre-planned.  A random encounter though, sure I'll throw some big bad guys at em.  It's their decision as to whether they think they can take em or not.  The world shouldn't "level up" with the PC's.  That's my one issue with certain "challenge rating" games.  We go from kobolds to killing gods.  And in all honesty I prefer low level games (PC level wise), its so much more interesting. 

5.  Yes for the most part.   However there are certain items I'd like to pre plan.  For instance, I've always wanted to use the deck of many things, and probably will at some point.  The 2e deck.  And of course throwing in cursed items is always fun. 

6.  I like keeping them poor as well.  There's no reason to adventure if you've got a nice big paid for castle, a garrison, some income coming in from a few houses of ill repute and the local tavern, is there? 
"you know how much that mortar work set me back! Aye! I had to kill off a whole giant clan for that!"

7.  I love world building, but tend to stick to modules, and place them in certain worlds.  As I've talked about, I'm a big fan of the "known world" currently and Thunderrift.  I'm planning on throwing in some basic fantasy adventures into those worlds, and see how it goes.  So modules & campaigns with some tinkering I suppose.  But yah, meta gaming is bothersome.