I've had the DM think that when someone is grabbed he moves into the grabbing guy's square, and that when someone is grabbed he can't teleport... In general just bad rules calls, I always get annoyed by that, although I don't whine about it. To him.
Another time the party was losing a battle on a ship, so we went into the hold. The enemies didn't follow us. Then we were allowed an extended rest... I was hoping to see what'd happen if we got captured, but the DM didn't want us to lose, apparantly. Next to that, he had created characters for us to pick from, and they didn't follow the WotC powers and stuff. They had their own powers, classes and races, and some of them were poorly balanced (like having a +4 to hit by default at level 3, and having 12 AC at level 3, and no ranged attacks, on the same character). I sent him my feedback before the game, but he didn't change anything.
Get your Microsoft Word Monster Statistics Block Template here! My Campaign
Ouch, those are some very brutal horror stories, Detox!
I guess I've been fortunate that all the DMs I've been a player for since I started DMing have started in D&D as my players, and most have never had a any DM but, so their mistakes have all been either common mistakes for new DMs (such as "you can't do that"), or bad habits they learned from me, so I'm extremely forgiving of anything they do that maybe should annoy me.
As for DM horror stories from before I started DMing that have probably influenced my own approach to DMing:
spotlight-hogging DMPCs - yuck! If I use a DMPC, I make extra effort to subordinate him to the other PCs, often by starting him with a level of the weak NPC classes like Expert or Warrior (3.5 Edition) or giving him weaker ability scores, or by having him ask the PCs for suggestions, instructions, and advice; as a reaction to bad-ass DMPCs who seem to end up the center of the story, my DMPCs tend to be rather dull, unimaginative, and nerdy guys with no exciting features beyond their ability to fill in gaps in incomplete parties
killer DMs - those DMs who seem to think it's their job to see the PCs fail, who will bend or break the rules to make that happen, and genuinely get mad when the PCs find clever ways out no-win situations - their battle-cry is "your PCs will probably die, because I'm really good at winning this game"; because of my experience with one or two of these guys, I have come to see my role as DM as being more of a supporter and cheer-leader to the PCs in their struggle against the difficult situations I put them into, rather than their opponent
Trying to solve out-of-game problems (like cheating, bad attitudes, or poor sportsmanship) with in-game solutions will almost always result in failure, and will probably make matters worse.
Gun Safety Rule #5: Never point the gun at anything you don't intend to destroy. (Never introduce a character, PC, NPC, Villain, or fate of the world into even the possibility of a deadly combat or other dangerous situation, unless you are prepared to destroy it instantly and completely forever.)
Know your group's character sheets, and check them over carefully. You don't want surprises, but, more importantly, they are a gold mine of ideas!
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." It's a problem if the players aren't having fun and it interferes with a DM's ability to run the game effectively; if it's not a problem, 'fixing' at best does little to help, and at worst causes problems that didn't exist before.
"Hulk Smash" characters are a bad match for open-ended exploration in crowds of civilians; get them out of civilization where they can break things and kill monsters in peace.
Success is not necessarily the same thing as killing an opponent. Failure is not necessarily the same thing as dying.
Failure is always an option. And it's a fine option, too, as long as failure is interesting, entertaining, and fun!
"Broken or not, unbalanced or not, if something seems to be preventing the game from being enjoyable, something has to give: either that thing, or other aspects of the game, or your idea of what's enjoyable." - Centauri
spotlight-hogging DMPCs - yuck! If I use a DMPC, I make extra effort to subordinate him to the other PCs, often by starting him with a level of the weak NPC classes like Expert or Warrior (3.5 Edition) or giving him weaker ability scores, or by having him ask the PCs for suggestions, instructions, and advice; as a reaction to bad-ass DMPCs who seem to end up the center of the story, my DMPCs tend to be rather dull, unimaginative, and nerdy guys with no exciting features beyond their ability to fill in gaps in incomplete parties
Those would be "NPCs", not "DMPCs".
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
I have a tendency to backseat DM when I play too. I started playing on the VT specifically so I could pl,ay rather than DM and I am always biting my tongue when somone makes a call differently than what I would have made, especially when I know it to be wrong by RAW. I never am sure whether to say anything or not when that happens, so I err on the side of politness and keep my yap shut, but I always WANT to say something.
So do i. Never Its also fun to hear how other DM do things
As for Knowledge check there may have a difference in difficulty that will reveal how much info is gained. For basic information, i often don't even ask for checks and rather assume a passive History or Nature etc... and just give it away.
I thought the same as well at first glance, but after addressing it with the DM, it wasn't the case. He wanted to share some information. The roll was bad. He shared it anyway. Effectively he wanted to justify us knowing some information by backing it up with a good skill roll, only there was no good skill roll. But since he wanted to or had to impart the information, he had to say the roll was good. He uses the same chart I do for DCs so I know there was something awry and I was right.
All in all, not a huge thing, mind you. But it does have unintended consequences for the game. Not everything needs to be a roll. It increases table transactions and creates uncertainty in cases where it is not required. If the information is not vital to the adventure, have it be a roll you can pass/fail. If it's vital, share the information straight up. Skip the foreplay, dammit!
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
I thought the same as well at first glance, but after addressing it with the DM, it wasn't the case. He wanted to share some information. The roll was bad. He shared it anyway. Effectively he wanted to justify us knowing some information by backing it up with a good skill roll, only there was no good skill roll. But since he wanted to or had to impart the information, he had to say the roll was good.
Yeah. That's pretty much the definition of "why was there a roll, then?"
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
I hate other DMs telling me what my character is doing, or giving me background on my character. That's my job when I'm a player!
I actually don't mind this as long as it makes sense. I tend to only provide an elevator pitch to the DM about my character with the assumption that it gives just enough to build off of and tie into the campaign without hamstringing everyone else's creativity. If the DM throws something in about my background that I hadn't explicitly stated, but makes sense in context, I think it's best to roll with it as is or suggest a slight modification of the same. Even as DM, I don't have or want full control over the story. I'd rather the players tell the story, too. So some give and take on backgrounds or even what I might be doing in a given moment (especially when used in media res to catapult a cool adventure) is just fine provided it makes some sense. It's not a stretch if I take the cutpurse background that the DM references something in my past about a heist that went wrong to make the current adventure more poignant.
I didn't feel this way 10 years ago though. Since playing more narrative, shared storytelling games, however, that style has slipped into our games and made them a lot better in my opinion. That said, I can see it's not for everybody.
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
I have a tendency to backseat DM when I play too. I started playing on the VT specifically so I could pl,ay rather than DM and I am always biting my tongue when somone makes a call differently than what I would have made, especially when I know it to be wrong by RAW. I never am sure whether to say anything or not when that happens, so I err on the side of politness and keep my yap shut, but I always WANT to say something.
Ooh, me too. It's really hard not to make 'helpful' suggestions sometimes. But I just imagine if another DM were playing at my table, would I want them interjecting with sage advice during the game?
Ooh, me too. It's really hard not to make 'helpful' suggestions sometimes. But I just imagine if another DM were playing at my table, would I want them interjecting with sage advice during the game?
NO.
I actually don't mind if someone corrects me if I get a rule wrong. I can't possibly read up on every piece of errata and if it matters, I'd like to know for my own sake. Nobody's ever corrected me on a stylistic point which I guess in a sense I did in my example above. I can sort of see why the DM was asking for unnecessary skill checks, too - I think it harkens back to that whole "DM rolls a die behind the screen and gives some information before it stops spinning" thing. It's just not necessary. Now, the DM did say that when I run a game, I ask for a lot of skill checks. And I do, but that's actually a stylistic choice based around the fact that I have an "investigate" mechanic in the game to simulate the feel of old school exploration, poking and prodding to figure stuff out (since the players wanted to go with an old-school feel updated to 4e). Except in my case, if you don't make the roll, you don't get the info, none of which is absolutely key to moving on with the plot and exploration. I won't be using this mechanic in future games because I'll likely want a different style altogether to mix it up.
Speaking of styles, I can live with a lot of stuff that is under normal circumstances annoying to me if it's made clear at the outset what we're doing and our goal as a game. I remember a game I was playing in about 4 years ago, 3.5e Conan I believe. The DM was and is a great storyteller (we're still friends). I can listen to the guy for hours. Not only is he well-versed in actual history, but he's good at bringing the small details to life in a way that I never could. You see his games in full color. However, don't touch ANYTHING. Certain actions and dice rolls just didn't matter if it conflicted with the story. That got to be a little frustrating because if you're playing D&D, you expect a certain measure of freedom of choice and even some mechanical consistency around which to build your character. But none of that mattered. So why are we playing D&D then? I'm perfectly happy to roll dice on the table, drink my Jack Daniels, and roleplay all night while the DM tells a story. Or we can use another rules set with more narrative emphasis. I just think it's really important at the outset to set expectations of what the game is and isn't so that everyone is on the same page. It solves a lot of problems.
No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues. Reduce DM Prep & Increase Player Engagement:Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Collaborative Roleplay | "Yes, and..." | Prep Tips Games I'm Running on Roll20: Island of the Frog | Vanguard of Dis | Star*Juice | Tesseract | The Crucible | Fimbulvetr | The Delve | Draj, City of the Moon Follow me on Twitter:@is3rith
I have a tendency to backseat DM when I play too. I started playing on the VT specifically so I could pl,ay rather than DM and I am always biting my tongue when somone makes a call differently than what I would have made, especially when I know it to be wrong by RAW. I never am sure whether to say anything or not when that happens, so I err on the side of politness and keep my yap shut, but I always WANT to say something.
Ooh, me too. It's really hard not to make 'helpful' suggestions sometimes. But I just imagine if another DM were playing at my table, would I want them interjecting with sage advice during the game?
NO.
I don't really have a problem with this, My saturday group has a total of 4 DM's playing in it-it could possibly include an additional long time DM very soon bringing our total to 5 DM's and 4 players. I don't know it its because we are all pretty generally laid back or what but when rule or Dm conflicts arise we usually solve them quickly and without getting nasty about it. Maybe we are just lucky, that or it has something to do with us all still playing 3.5e and noone having less than 10 years of experience-we all know the rules very well, even the players.
I think this may actually boil down to maturity, I've met some DM's in the past who DM'd mostly because it gave them a power high. These DM's made terrible players and when they did play, they generally tried brow beating the DM into doing it their way.
I guess I can see this both ways, and honestly, as long as the game is fun I can let go of little quarrels and be a good player.
...and in the ancient voice of a million squirrels the begotten chittered "You have set upon yourselves a great and noble task, dare you step further, what say you! What say you!"
To him.
