Community

Over the years I have learned a lot of things from the different DMs I have gamed with, most importantly what not to do. Here's a quick list.

Play Favorites
Hey, you may be playing with your best friend/favorite cousin/brother/significant other, but that doesn't mean that the other players don't rate. Don't make one player the star and treat the others as also-rans. All too often I've seen the DM's best buddy get breaks they shouldn't. As a DM, I try and give every player the spotlight from time to time. I also treat them as equal under the rules. Never, ever treat one player as more important than another. Gaming is a group activity, and if you are the DM, you have a responsibility to make it fun for the whole group!

Treat the Players as Adversaries
I have played in games where the DM has set up encounters specifically to kill a certain PC. Or, worse yet, encounters that seemed designed to force a TPK. Or set up traps that were completely undetectable and  could not be disarmed that resulted in instant, irrevocable death. I mean, it's okay to throw the PCs in the deep end as long as they have a way out. Running from an encounter that's too tough is a part of the game, and smart players know when to do so. Setting up an encounter like that and not giving the players an "out" is just dickish. As the DM, you can kill the entire PC party at any time. It does not give you the right to do so arbitrarily. You do not win by killing the PCs. If the DM treats PC deaths as "winning" he's playing the wrong game. Everyone wins only if everyone has fun. The DM should create adversaries, not become one. 

Treat the Game as a Contest of "Who is Smarter?"
I remember one session back in high school where the DM had us trapped in a pit. It took about an hour for five players to get out. There was a lot of "Nope, that won't work" from the DM and a lot of angry stares from the players. I think he only relented because he was outnumbered. The look of smug satisfaction on his face as he shot down plan after plan as "not realistic" made me want to chick a d20 at his head. Yes, yes - your pit trap was sooo clever and we are not as clever as you, Mister DM Sir! Never play "DM may I?" with your players! Trying to prove that you are somehow smarter than everyone else at the table when you control what does or does not work (especially when trying to reach a sense of versimilitude that has nothing to do with the rules) is pure dickery. Just. Don't.

Apply the Rules of the Game Inconsistently
One DM (back in the AD&D 1st Edition days) would use the segment rules for spellcasting. Except of course, for his spellcaster NPCs and monsters. They could cast all spells in one segment. With the house rules he used, this meant PC casters could fire off two or three low-level spells a round (Magic Missile, Burning Hands), or one big spell (Fireball, Wall of Ice). NPCs could fire off three big spells (including stuff like Meteor Swarm, Bigby's Crushing Hand, and so on) every damn round. And PCs had absolutely no chance of learning this awesomeness! I have also had DMs use a ton of house rules inconsistently. They would literally change their rulings every other session, which made it impossible for the players to keep things straight. Stay consistent within the rules, as they are the framework by which the game runs. Don't change things without reason, and once they are changed, keep them that way. Don't apply them differently to monstes and PCs either!

Rely on Luck to Win (or Lose) the Day
I have a friend who uses a home-brewed crit system in his 1st Edition AD&D game that can result in one-hit kills. All too often, he has thrown the group up against overwhelming encounters under the assumption that we can win if we crit a couple of the bad guys. Of course, the bad guys have just as much of a chance as getting a one-hit kill against the PCs...gah! Don't make up encounters based on luck! The DM should provide challenges to the players to overcome, but the conditions for victory shouldn't be based on nothing but luck. 

Kill PCs Randomly or Stupidly. And Keep Them Dead Randomly or Stupidly.
Okay, related to the above, I once had a 14th level barbarian in the DM above's game that was killed by a manticore. It was one of his famous one-hit-kill crits. That would be acceptable if it was in battle, even if it was a "random" encounter. But it was from a manticore cub. After the battle was over and we were searching the monsters' nest. And the character was at near full hit points. WTF? Okay, then when the rest of the PCs hauled him back to town to get raised...nothing. A series of random, arbitrary rolls later and "Oh, there are no clerics in the city that can perform Raise Dead. And the time limit for raising him expired while you were looking." Months and months of character development and plotlines ruined by random stupidity. It's okay to kill off PCs. It's not okay to do so from random, stupid stuff. PCs are the main characters in a story. Even George R.R. Martin doesn't kill off characters by having them stub their toe and fall down a flight of stairs (well, I'm pretty sure...) so you can't do that either. 

So in short, being a DM does not give you a license to be a dick. Make the game fun for your players, and I guarantee you will have fun too.

Oct 3, 2012 -- 10:56PM, DontEatRawHagis wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />General
DM's should never use skill checks to determine a player's actions. Rail roading is fine, but saying that a player has to follow an NPC because the NPC rolled well on his Diplomacy check is taking a step too far. Players lose their sense of freedom because of this.

    Good advice in general, but no, the PC is by and large the prisoner of the dice on skill checks just as he is on attack and damage rolls.  When the PC rolls a 1 on insight the DM should tell him he believes the NPC fully, just as a 1 on a perception check means the player is convinced there is no ambush ahead.  [& the DM should be having him make checks when there is no ambush so he can't conclude from the call for a roll that there is an ambush.]  The NPC should also roll box text 20's whenever the plot demands it. [And telling the honest NPC "seems" honest is just another way to prevent the metagame.]
    Now the 4e skill system is not one of the strong points of the game and you don't want to have the party risking big stakes on just one roll anyway.  But even if we don't want the adventure to be decided by a skill check, the PC must suffer for having failed that check, and that means the failed insight roll means the PC believes the lie [or does not believe the truth, or ...]

Oct 8, 2012 -- 6:23AM, Madfox11 wrote:

1 on a skill check is NOT an automatic failure in 4e.

    A skill check where one is not a failure is an unnecessary roll, and one the DM should normally not have demanded.  Granted, we still have skill monkeys who can tap a difficult, but they are the rare case.  In anything close to normal the DM can look at the roll of 1 and routinely say he failed without asking for the total.

Oct 8, 2012 -- 6:23AM, Madfox11 wrote:

As for NPCs using Bluff, Diplomacy or Intimidate against the PCs, I always found that a tough one. On the one hand, you don't want to force your players to RP in a certain way. On the other, why is it fine to use such force when it is magic (e.g. charm person), but not when it is a NPC who is so much better at those skills than the DM? I usually avoid the whole discussion by simply mentioning that the NPC got X on the Diplomacy check, leaving it completely up to the players on how they react. If they ignore it, fine, if they RP based on that result, great (and yes, my players are well aware it is truly optional and especially in cases of Bluffs they have ignored it in the past ).

     Some of our favorite plots involve the patron being the villain, which means the patron always beats the PC's insight roll [unless we want to allow a little hint.  But the player must not be allowed a reason not to fall into the trap.]  The patron very obviously uses bluff, and is going to be fully successful at it.  The PC can roll all sorts of 20s, and will fail.  The example of Charm Person has already been mentioned.  And 4e has lots of dominate effects that force the PC to do what he doesn't like.  So no.  The player who wants to ignore a bad insight roll is cheating just the same as the one who insists he rolled a 20 instead of the one he actually rolled.