Quote from: TristramEvans;651262Its funny how these online debates make it all seem so complicated, but when I sit down to play, I've never had any problems that didnt amount to "Jerk GM, move on to a new game" or "jerk player, ditch him and continue"

A couple observations about the 'jerk DM' meme:

1) You have to remember that a lot of people active on RPG design forums don't actually play anymore. They're largely just indulging in theorywank, so it's the theoretical issue of a jerk DM that they feel a need to solve.

2) I'm always amazed that the most obvious question never comes up among these complaints. If you don't like how your DM runs the game, then why don't you run your own game? That's how gamers I know have resolved the issue, on the rare occasions where it did come up. Think Mike's game is too deadly, or he's too stingy with treasure? OK. You DM the next session or campaign. And if the group enjoys it more than Mike's game, then hey, you've been vindicated. The reason I think this isn't pointed out more often is there's a cohort of entitled powergamers out there who would get no satisfaction out of facilitating other people's fun - they just want to create their uber character for entirely selfish reasons of inflating their fragile self-esteem. The real laugher is that these same folks are the first to complain about the megalomania of DMs, and the need for airtight RAW to ensure a fair game. When really, the last thing they want is a fair game; they want a game where nobody can interfere with their desire to powergame by exploiting rules mastery.

Quote from: Benoist;651401Yes. I think there's always that excluded middle thing cropping up in discussions about DMs: one side assumes they all suck and make the most terrible choices, don't know how to talk to people, are assholes etc, and the other talks about "well that wouldn't happen with a good DM".

The thing is, I really think it's not that hard to DM decently. And yes, that means you're going to make mistakes and fumble and be too intransigent and/or too lenient at some point or other and and and ... yeah. People make mistakes! News flash! But at the same time, you can't improve and become that "good DM" people like to talk about if you're never making these mistakes in the first place.

Playing with a decent DM, not a good one, a decent one, a normal not especially experienced one, can be great! Just relax, play the game, and forgive the DM if there are inconsistencies or mistakes cropping up here and there from time to time. Maybe you'll be able to talk about them after the game is over, so that these mistakes become experience which in turn will allow the DM to grow and become better over the course of the campaign? But that really shouldn't ruin anyone's day. If you're taking a bad call that seriously that you're going to fly into an extended argument with the DM and storm out of the room if you don't get your way, then maybe it's time to put down the dice and join the real world, where real people have to get along every day, and where being a dick just is the less productive option.

In my experience the best GMs are the ones who don't think they are great. They understand they make mistakes like anyone else and isten to player concerns openly when they arise. I agree people often talk as if the GM is either wonderful and brilliant or a complete jerk.

Completely agree with the last paragraph here.

Quote from: Haffrung;651402The reason I think this isn't pointed out more often is there's a cohort of entitled powergamers out there who would get no satisfaction out of facilitating other people's fun - they just want to create their uber character for entirely selfish reasons of inflating their fragile self-esteem. The real laugher is that these same folks are the first to complain about the megalomania of DMs, and the need for airtight RAW to ensure a fair game. When really, the last thing they want is a fair game; they want a game where nobody can interfere with their desire to powergame by exploiting rules mastery.

A classic case of pot and kettle.

At times I wonder whether some rpg designers are attempting to create rulesets which are DM-proof, such that anybody can be DM without botching up a game through idiocy and/or powertrip hungriness.

Quote from: ggroy;651417At times I wonder whether some rpg designers are attempting to create rulesets which are DM-proof, such that anybody can be DM without botching up a game through idiocy and/or powertrip hungriness.

Impossible task.

Even a GM running tic tac toe can be an asshat.

Quote from: ggroy;651417At times I wonder whether some rpg designers are attempting to create rulesets which are DM-proof, such that anybody can be DM without botching up a game through idiocy and/or powertrip hungriness.

There is no such (tabletop) game. For judgement free systems fire up the computer and revel in the untempered RAW.

You cannot take the DM out of the equation without seriously limiting the scope of the game.

Quote from: ggroy;651417At times I wonder whether some rpg designers are attempting to create rulesets which are DM-proof, such that anybody can be DM without botching up a game through idiocy and/or powertrip hungriness.

4vengers will say that 4e does that.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;6514274vengers will say that 4e does that.

A GM using 4E can have a level 30 pet npc hang out with a level 1 PC party.

A GM using 4E can choose to never allow the characters to rest.

Probly plenty of ways for a GM to be Captain Asshat even if they do 4E RAW.

Quote from: ggroy;651417At times I wonder whether some rpg designers are attempting to create rulesets which are DM-proof, such that anybody can be DM without botching up a game through idiocy and/or powertrip hungriness.

that intention has been voiced on rpgnet (and enforced as the official position of the mods).

GMs don't kill people, Systems kill people.

I will say that, once, to my shame, I derailed an entire session when I had a two hour argument with the GM over how binary stars worked.

What can I say. I was younger and stupider, and maybe I was having a bad day?

(I was also right.)

I think Ben makes some excellent points here.

I also like a lot that different GMs will give you different games using even the same setting and system. That's a feature and not a bug for me, something that makes RPGs stand out in front of boardgames or videogames.

I also think that playing with a decent GM is good enough, and the obsession with all the gaming sessions being on fire is idiotic.

So, good points all around, not only Ben's, but I felt specially close to them.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;651584I will say that, once, to my shame, I derailed an entire session when I had a two hour argument with the GM over how binary stars worked.

What can I say. I was younger and stupider, and maybe I was having a bad day?

(I was also right.)

What! the GM did not know stellar physics!

A GM must know everything in the universe!


But in all seriousness, I am sure most of us have at least one moment of cluelessness.

I was once branded a rules lawyer and cast out of a gaming group.

I joined them and played 1E dnd for three sessions and it was all good.

Then the dm wanted to sneak in a session of magic the gathering, and I argued like an insane pit bull about some technicality in the rules of Mtg.

They sent me a letter telling me they don't like rules lawyers.

So I ruined an otherwise good chance to play dnd by being an asshat in a game of magic.

Then again, if you can't handle rules technicalities that make the decks in Magic, you can't handle the heat.

Quote from: Rincewind1;651647Then again, if you can't handle rules technicalities that make the decks in Magic, you can't handle the heat.

I stopped playing magic before they cleaned up the rules, as far as I know.

Once I sensed Magic The Addiction was claiming a piece of my soul, I gave my cards to a friend and went cold turkey.

Well, cold turkey for buying cards, I don't have a problem with playing if someone provides the cards.