Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Aerion Faelorn 04-15-05, 01:28 PM	I can't place my finger on it. I think my DM misunderstands the setting of Eberron. Not once have we been backstabbed, not once have we felt that sense of paranoia, and it's been at least 10 sessions since we've had any swashbuckling at all. Eberron, for me, is turning into a hack and slash. Something I had hoped to be away from. I'd like to confront him, but I'm a player in his campaign, and he plays 'rule 0' incredibly hard. So what do you define as good DMing? Or bad DMing if you feel like it.
DarkWarriorKarg 04-15-05, 01:43 PM	I can't place my finger on it. I think my DM misunderstands the setting of Eberron. Not once have we been backstabbed, not once have we felt that sense of paranoia, and it's been at least 10 sessions since we've had any swashbuckling at all. Eberron, for me, is turning into a hack and slash. Something I had hoped to be away from. I'd like to confront him, but I'm a player in his campaign, and he plays 'rule 0' incredibly hard. So what do you define as good DMing? Or bad DMing if you feel like it. I've highlighted the part in your statement that usually indicates bad DMing. Once had a fool who tried that with me. He lost his entire gaming group with his one proclamation that began with "I'm the Gamemaster, so...[insert dictatorial proclamation here]". Now that that's out of my system, you need to talk to him. He can't know there's a problem if no one brings it up. If he ain't getting the message or doesn't want to hear it, walk away from the game. Expecially if he starts getting angry and/or abusive. Had a friend who went on a power trip in his game. Wouldn't listen to anyone. I tried reasoning with him. When it got to the point that he was changing the rules in mid game, I walked away. And I stopped talking to him for a while. So did a bunch of others. He finally calmed down and I'm back in his game. The point I'm making is that RESPECT must exist between players & DM. Both must listen to each other. Rule 0 is cute, but abuse it, and you'll only have yourself to play with.
KP91 04-15-05, 04:33 PM	Like Karg said. You need to talk to him. If you don't like it, blckmail is a nice option. Have him post the game on the boards and have many people from Eberron insult him. :evillaugh ....I mean..... :angelhide . You should talk to him. Eberron isn't a fight based world (besides the thousands of wars...), and should include lots of exploration. Xen'drik, Argonnesan, and Khyber.
Lord Tyranus 04-15-05, 08:30 PM	I think that the key of being a good GM (or DM...I think there's a subtle difference in what each term implies) is to keep a very careful balance between giving your players freedom and keeping the story moving along. In a sense, a good GM gives the players the illusion of total freedom by introducing situations where the free will of the PC's will have an impact on the story - and where that impact on the story will turn around and have an impact on the PC's lives. The GM is still in control of the overall plot, but the PC's have the ability to change the circumstances, the outcome, and even the points of the plot through their decisions. It's just that the GM has thought ahead and determined what happens for most likely choices that the PC' make. For instance, let's say the PC's are on the Sharn docks, when a shifty-looking captain comes up and offers to pay them a nice, fat chunk of money if they receive a cargo for him and deliver it to a certain address. Here, the PC's have several choices they can make: 1) Sign for the cargo, deliver it to the address, and make a load of money. In this case, the DM has determined that the captain is trying to swindle the real owner of the cargo; the address and cargo are fakes, and the captain absconds with the real item(s) and sells them to another person. This does not make the owner happy. He notices the PC's names on the manifests and tracks them down... 2) Sign for the cargo, keep it for themselves, and and make a load of money in the bargain. The captain still pulls off the switch. The owner notices their names on the manifests and tracks them down...Or the cargo is real, the captain didn't pull off the switch, and the owner just tracks them down to get the real cargo back. 3) Refuse the captain's offer. In this case, the captain makes a big show of asking for them to help, then curses them loudly when they still refuse. Later, off-screen, he finds another group of patsies, and pulls off the switch. Then he has to deal with the PC's, since they know too much. His clumsy attempts draw the attention of the real owner, who puts two and two together and tracks them down... In each instance, roughly the same story is told, regardless of the PC's actions. But the PC's change the circumstances of the story in each case, and the players feel like they're the stars of the show - which they are...they just don't RUN it. ;) Now, the "bad" GM will run the situation like this: 1) The PC's are on the docks. 2) The captain shows up and makes the offer. 3) The GM either makes it abundantly clear that the PC's should sign for the item, or does a poor job of manipulating circumstances (e.g., the PC's don't sign, so the captain forges their names on the manifest - effectively undoing the PC's decision by GM fiat) to get his way. Of course, there's more to being a good GM, like telling entertaining stories (and Hack 'n Slashes are not that entertaining, IMHO), evoking convincing characters and settings, and helping the PC's flesh out their characters with subtle storytelling prodding...but the real key is that illusion of freedom. It gives the GM a measure of control while giving the players a measure of say in how his control plays out. Just watch the Dexter's Lab episode, "D & DD" for prime examples. Dexter the GM runs his PC's through a set maze, runs his set traps, and fudges his rolls so that the story ends up how he wants it to end. Dee-Dee the GM makes things more fluid; the story is less about fighting monsters and more how the PC's fight monsters...and even more about the consequences of their actions. It's silly, but those two, to my mind, are the quintessential "bad" and "good" DM's. Gosh, that was long. Hope it helped!
Dansan 04-16-05, 03:51 AM	Agreeing with what was already said, and having had a GM who was changing rules whenever the need suited him, I have the following to add. A GM is not just the guy who runs the story, make judgment calls and hand out treasure and XP. He (or rarely she) should also ask for feedback from the players on what can be improved in how they play (houserules etc) and what they play (style of adventure). I usually ask my players after an adventure what they want to do next, just to get a feel for where they want to go, so I can plan accordingly. It's difficult at first to give your PCs that much leeway, but ultimately, it feels more free for the PCs. I also ask what they thought of what they just did, to see if they would like more or less of it. And I ask for things they'd like to see in the campaign, though of course not all will appear as its still my own setting.
Greyson 04-17-05, 02:13 PM	...he plays 'rule 0' incredibly hard. Hey, all. What is Rule 0, and does 'playing it hard' mean? I don't mean to high jack the thread, just wondering about this Rule 0 term.
stone_dog 04-17-05, 02:19 PM	Rule 0 is basically "It is your game, alter the rules to suit you and your group." Playing it hard in this case sounds like "It is MY game and if you don't like they way I am playing it, the door is over there."
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple 04-17-05, 03:41 PM	It's simple: good DMing in any campaign setting involves making stories and plot hooks in the setting that aren't possible in other settings. If you're playing Eberron, there's nothing wrong with the classic scenario of rescuing the damsel in distress. That's a universal. But in what other setting can you thwart a psychotic (but good) necromancer from using the damsel in his studies to create an arcane Create Deathless spell, while elves are trying to stop you because they think you'll just get in the way? Now suppose that the necromancer is a dragonmarked member of House Jorasco. Now you have intrigue with Elves, at least one Dragonmarked House, very likely the Gatekeepers, the Daughters of Sora Kell, the Esoteric Order of Aureon and the Guild of Starlight and Shadows...
Von Ether 04-17-05, 03:42 PM	Sounds like you GM may be the "bait and switch" here type. The sort of fellow who plays the same style of game, no matter what world it's set in. He's thinking the marketing hype and any special rules of the setting will carry the weight, while in essence he doesn't do anything different. He can spout all the blurbs off the book, but his efforts don't do anything to support it. To be frank, any rpg can be reduced to a dungeon crawl with little to no effort and it seems your GM isn't in the mood to change anytime soon. If hack n slash aggravates you, move on.
Targos 04-17-05, 04:42 PM	It's important for the DM to understand its the players game too. Our group always comes to a concensus on what we enjoy and want to play. A DM is free to houserule things, but it should be made clear in the beginning. Rule 0 is usually used when a rule is changed on the spot or worse yet when the outcome is decided no matter what the dice roll or the PC does. (e.g. Missing when a PC rolls a 20.) We only use Rule 0 to eliminate a debate for the time and we resolve it between games when we have time to research the rule or discuss the matter via email. Ultimately the DM shouldn't be expected to run a game he doesn't enjoy and the players shouldn't be expected to play one they don't like. If they can't agree perhaps somebody else should DM. My games become H&S when I lose my creativity. Lately I spent more time brainstorming and debating plot twists and impact of the PCs, which change several times before I make a final decision, than worrying about who/what the monsters/NPCs are.