Dealing with characters & parties that have serious defects (can't do anything but fight, can't fight, etc.) that are real or perceived. The problem is, in the wrong hands, the above advice in the spoiler box can be seen as an endorsement for DM vs Players as the correct attitude, and it never has been the correct attitude.ĭifferent ways to do what things? What are the best practices a DMG should include? These aren't rhetorical questions it's hard to conceive of what the DMG is missing with vague statements like that.Advice on: Problematic magic, illusions & mind control have been problems in the player/DM tug-of-war for decades and there are solutions out there. Arneson likewise tended to referee in this fashion (with his little black book of Blackmoor that he was always adjusting and retuning as a result of play). (Yet those who played in his games enjoyed them, so what are they missing?) The purpose behind not having everything known: it can set the conditions for evoking the sense of wonder and the joy of discovery. I have noticed a powerful counter trend to that among WoTC era D&Ders, to the point that the above passage is often viewed as DM is Hostile to Players as EGG's default attitude. Letting facts emerge through play is a part of the exploration pillar. Gygax, and a lot of DMs in that era, liked to try and invoke a sense of wonder that the process of discovery could create.
If they express knowledge which could only be garnered by consulting these pages, a magic item or two can be taken as payment - insufficient, but perhaps it will tend to discourage such actions. If any of your participants do read herein, it is suggested that you assess them a heavy fee for consulting "sages" and other sources of information not normally attainable by the inhabitants of your milieu. It is in your interests, and in theirs, to discourage possession of this book by players. Peeping players there will undoubtedly be, but they are simply lessening their own enjoyment of the game by taking away some of the sense of wonder that otherwise arises from a game which has rules hidden from participants. Meanwhile no edition of D&D I've owned has explained what it wants, and sometime even claims the complete opposite (yeah 5e, claim that things unrelated to combat are important).ĭoes good GMing advice suddenly make a new GM a good one? No, but it helps somebody learn faster.Īs this book is the exclusive precinct of the DM, you must view any non-DM player possessing it as something less than worthy of honorable death. This is because I personally found that games like Unknown Armies and Fate explained how they wanted to be run much better, and it was easy for me to grok (but your mileage will vary heavily on if it was clear to you). I suck at running most of the games I originally ran, and am much better at running others. Got to do other stuff.It's also important to understand that even a great GM can run a game terribly if it isn t what they're used to. People generally don't start as good DMs (I certainly didn't) and take their cues from the books. It's nice that you didn't need a DMG to help you start DMing, but it's not what I've experienced. AD&D recognized those spells as game changers that warranted extra attention for the novice DM. Wish, miracle, sim, plane shift, teleport, summons, all those spells that cause DMs angst at the table. I wasn't talking about general rules for categories of spells (tho D&D seriously needs some for illusions & mind control), but actual advice on specific spells that goes beyond what belongs in the PH.
0 kommentar(er)
