PDA

View Full Version : Mastery of Rules/Builds = Needed Virtue for DMs?



Zephyros
2008-10-17, 06:35 PM
Inspired by some topics regarding some DMs' incompetence distance with the rules, I finally realized that I am prejudiced against not very willing to participate in a rules-lite-DM's game.

What are the causes of this you may ask dear playgrounders... And I ll try to explain swiftly before the RolePlay Inquisition exterminates me.

Rules-mastery as well as a good knowledge of what optimisation is and can achieve is a very powerful weapon in the DM's arsenal.
-Knowing the Rules is essentially halving the amount of time needed for battle and other roll-associated matters.
-KtR also empowers your status as a DM and almost eliminates quarrels between rule-lawyers.
-Knowing how to Optimise helps (almost dictates how) to challenge your players. I assume you all agree that role-playing is far more satisfying after a good battle rather than an anticlimactic one round encounter.
-KhtO even helps with building the story and being thematically appropriate. When you know how to build your own baddies:
a. you are not in risk of slaughtering a newb party by using a page from the MM47546
b. you are not in risk of having your uberNPC crashed by one blow, be unassuming, or rather annoying by doing things you make up.

I ve seen too many storytellers watch as their amazing narrative skills go down the drain when they fail at the mechanical part of DMing. It's most disappointing:
a.having your DM asking rule questions every five minutes, or making things up on the fly
b.not being challenged at all by battles. or getting outright killed. or fighting prebuilt monsters all the time.
c.having to explain to the DM what your character just did (i mean dude! u let me use it in your game!)

All of the above have lead me to currently wear the mantle of the co-DM in 2 games. And watch the quality of the game lunge skyward as great stories are supported by sturdy "mechanical bones".

What do you think?

Keld Denar
2008-10-17, 06:42 PM
Yes, a good DM should have an above average grasp on the rules, including MOST of the juicey/dirty tricks out there. Combat is fun, but loses its fun when it gets bogged down because the DM can't remember this rule, or has to look up that rule. Granted, we are all human, and even I make mistakes (*gasp*) but still, if you accept the responsibility of game mastering, you should at least take an effort to...master the game?

So, your point is: Knowledgable DMs are good? That's kind of a gimme if you ask me...

EDIT: Seriously, like most things, you get out of the game what you put into it. Sure, you can go out and play basketball in the park with your friends, and sure, it might seem kind of fun, but if you take a little time to shoot around on your own, get some coordination and skill, you can make the game a little more competative, which in the end is more fun than continuously lobbing the ball in the direction of the hoop, each time praying that Micheal Jordan (the god of air) will bless this shot more than the last 20. I'm not saying you need to go out and hire a pro coach and train 25 hours a day, because that's not very fun for your friends either, but having a little pride in your DMing can bring the game to a higher level (pun intended) for everyone.

Matthew
2008-10-17, 06:44 PM
Inspired by some topics regarding some DMs' incompetence distance with the rules, I finally realized that I am prejudiced against not very willing to participate in a rules-lite-DM's game.

*snip*

What do you think?

I think you may be a bit confused about what "rule lite" means. If you are playing a "rules heavy" game and your game master is not familiar with the rules, you are not consequently playing a rules light game; you are playing a rules heavy game where the game master doesn't know the rules. That is always a problem, perhaps even one of the fundamental problems of a rules heavy game.

Fax Celestis
2008-10-17, 06:55 PM
Rules mastery is also good for a DM as they are therefore better equipped to see a broken build in it's infant stages and nip it in the bud before a player burns through six levels working towards a gamebreaker setup.

Zephyros
2008-10-17, 06:59 PM
@Matthew:

well yes my slang is a bit unclear there, but i think most people get my point.

@lussmanj:

It's not a exactly a point, more of a question I may say. I've played good games with not-so-knowledgable DMs, but I've also experienced the lust for a more "virtuous" DM at that matter. It's most irritating to have a good story "stained" by some of the above reasons.

Matthew
2008-10-17, 07:05 PM
well yes my slang is a bit unclear there, but i think most people get my point.

Just clarifying, this is the internet you know. :smallwink:

AslanCross
2008-10-17, 07:28 PM
Rules mastery is also good for a DM as they are therefore better equipped to see a broken build in it's infant stages and nip it in the bud before a player burns through six levels working towards a gamebreaker setup.

I agree completely.

The DM also has to be able to adjudicate consistently, and rules help a lot in that. Of course I don't mean the DM shouldn't bend rules, but the rules help lay down groundwork for the DM to adjudicate quickly especially when the players are not so familiar with the rules themselves (some of my players are still confused over which dice to roll after a year and a half of playing).

Edited for grammar.

Keld Denar
2008-10-17, 08:46 PM
@lussmanj:

It's not a exactly a point, more of a question I may say. I've played good games with not-so-knowledgable DMs, but I've also experienced the lust for a more "virtuous" DM at that matter. It's most irritating to have a good story "stained" by some of the above reasons.

I see you live in Greece, which sadly makes it hard to participate in RPGA games other than via the internet. Most of the best and knowledgable DMs I've ever played with are with the RPGA. The vast differences of people and opinions you encounter, especially at conventions, keeps various rules stagnations from festering in your mind to the point where you have wrong conceptions of things. Most of my knowledge of rules of the current edition comes from chatting with 100's of people throughout my RPGA career of almost 8 years, along with regular trolling of this and the forums formally known as gleemax. The more people you interact with, the more differing opinions you encounter, the more all-encompassing your own knowledge becomes. Having the experience of all those people together definitely help when trying to figure out some of the more complicated issues, such as how some PrCs interact with each other, or have grappling actually works.

nargbop
2008-10-17, 09:00 PM
Either be an Enabler (player announces something awesome, something that a hero would do ; DM says "yes, and also...") or an Authority (be reliably RIGHT and don't take back any rules, be certain of what you said, either through being certain of the rules or of Rule Zero).

Totally Guy
2008-10-18, 03:47 AM
I have been playing for one year and the whole group, me included, decided that I would run the next campaign.

Overall I struggle with fantasy specific knowledge, amongst you all I am fairly poorly read (How was I to know I'd end up with geeky friends once I got to adulthood). So on those points within my games I have to be the authority, as in: no the elf is not wearing a fake beard he grew it himself.

As a player within D&D (3.5) I find the optimisation / build emphasis the most tedious element and I don't tend to do any optimising myself. Not doing something meaningful within a battle does not equate to not doing something meaningful to the adventure. Certainly there is metagaming within this statement but I see nobody crying foul when a DM asks the boards how to challenge their party which is pretty much the same kind of metagaming.

I think I've gleaned enough from the various DMs I've had to make the session fun for everyone. This utilises the knowledge I have for planning the scenario of which I am better read than fantasy.

4th edition came out the same time as I started planning my campaign so I built around that and said we'd play the new system. It's been a godsend for myself as I'm just too plain dumb to spot the cheese. The players have been really enjoying the campaign as the end of the first arc is within sight I've been asked to for two more arcs. I said no to any more. I'll never be a player again if I agree to more.

And that's how I tricked my somewhat skeptical group into liking 4th edition.

Prometheus
2008-10-18, 10:04 AM
Mastery of Rules, definitely yes for all the reason stated. It can be done otherwise, but it is always better knowing the rules (so long as it is in fact, D&D that is being played).

Mastery of Builds is a little more complicated in my opinion. A DM has to know enough about optimization to know how difficult their party is and what kind of challenges to give them. However, the game should not be DM vs. PC and shouldn't be creating conditions that force power-gaming.

JaxGaret
2008-10-18, 10:46 AM
@Matthew:

well yes my slang is a bit unclear there, but i think most people get my point.

What you're stating in the OP is not slang, it is incorrect terminology. There is a difference.

As Matthew intimated, but was too polite to say directly, your usage of the term rules-lite is simply wrong; you are equating rules-lite to rules-unaware.

I'm not trying to blast you, just reinforcing what Matthew said.

Defiant
2008-10-18, 11:14 AM
Inspired by some topics regarding some DMs' incompetence distance with the rules, I finally realized that I am prejudiced against not very willing to participate in a rules-lite-DM's game.

What are the causes of this you may ask dear playgrounders... And I ll try to explain swiftly before the RolePlay Inquisition exterminates me.

I represent the Roleplay Inquisition. Prepare to be terminated. :smallwink:

First of all, let me start off by saying that each person has their own preferred type of game. Some prefer rules-lite and some prefer rules-heavy (for the sake of interpretation, I'm assuming rules-lite forbids various extra stuff and keeps it to core).

Now let me explain to you why I myself as a DM choose rules-lite.

I aim to create a story that is captivating and exciting to the players. This does not require them to optimize their builds so much. I do not want my players to start obsessing over how to get the best DPS or whatever... I want them to get immersed in the storyline and not care too much about their character's effectiveness, though some optimization is fine. I want the point of playing through my games to be uncovering and enjoying the plot and overall feel of the game, rather than primarily focusing on each of their optimized builds.

When necessary, I will let my players know this. "The main reason I don't want to allow stuff from such-and-such book is because I don't want you to focus too much on making your character perfect to the last detail; you can still enjoy the story and the action with another class." Of course, I only say this if they're especially adamant about something, and what I'll throw in instead usually is "I don't have familiarity with that".

Basically, the point of my game is to enjoy the plot, the roleplaying, and the challenging encounters, and an optimized build is not necessary for that.


Rules-mastery as well as a good knowledge of what optimisation is and can achieve is a very powerful weapon in the DM's arsenal.
-Knowing the Rules is essentially halving the amount of time needed for battle and other roll-associated matters.

Agreed. One summer (well, last summer) I read up on just about all of the rules in preparation of me becoming a DM. I still curse myself whenever I forget some important rule and incur too much time penalties in everyone finding out what the rule exactly does (though many times I am able to impose with certainty the rules as I clearly remember it).


-KtR also empowers your status as a DM and almost eliminates quarrels between rule-lawyers.

The people I play with generally aren't ever rule-lawyers. When they adamantly decree a rule that is remembered wrong, they genuinely believe it and I'll usually let them take some time (probably while the others are doing their initiatives) to check it out. For example, I had my previous DM (who had never been a player) adamantly state that Mage Armor is a deflection bonus that can be added on top of regular armor.


-Knowing how to Optimise helps (almost dictates how) to challenge your players. I assume you all agree that role-playing is far more satisfying after a good battle rather than an anticlimactic one round encounter.
-KhtO even helps with building the story and being thematically appropriate. When you know how to build your own baddies:
a. you are not in risk of slaughtering a newb party by using a page from the MM47546
b. you are not in risk of having your uberNPC crashed by one blow, be unassuming, or rather annoying by doing things you make up.

Well, I have to directly disagree with this part. Your first job as an active DM is to gauge the party. You can figure out their combat abilities by throwing various things at them. Once you have the basic idea, then you don't even need to optimize (though I do anyways).

In fact, one of the things my DM told me when I was going to take part-time control of the party in a werewolf-like scenario was "throw a wererat at them and see how they manage".


I ve seen too many storytellers watch as their amazing narrative skills go down the drain when they fail at the mechanical part of DMing. It's most disappointing:
a.having your DM asking rule questions every five minutes, or making things up on the fly

That can be quite detrimental. The only things I have to make up on the fly are various storytelling situations that have just been blown out of the water by my pesky players! :smallredface:


b.not being challenged at all by battles. or getting outright killed. or fighting prebuilt monsters all the time.

Again, this is a combat balance issue that is best evaluated and gauged. Sometimes the players are meant to be challenged, and sometimes killed. Not to mention that some encounters might easily feature a regular plain wolf or bear.


c.having to explain to the DM what your character just did (i mean dude! u let me use it in your game!)

You have to be a bit lenient about this part. If they've authorized your custom rule or class/whatever, then it doesn't mean they've necessarily had the time (or will have the time) to go over your thing and other people's things in detail.


All of the above have lead me to currently wear the mantle of the co-DM in 2 games. And watch the quality of the game lunge skyward as great stories are supported by sturdy "mechanical bones".

What do you think?

Well, that's great, and if the DM is fine with it, super! Maybe this DM is just new at it and doesn't fully comprehend all the basic rules. Or maybe the DM is playing with players who really want rules-heavy games, so he/she allowed that option to pander to their desires, but resulting in him being bogged down with unknown rules a bit more than he/she expected.

Hal
2008-10-18, 12:01 PM
While mastery isn't necessary, a DM should have enough rule familiarity to make gameplay smooth and spend as little time as possible searching for things. This sort of thing is inevitable, but a good DM will do what he can to minimize this.

As for builds, well, this is going to be true again. I think humanoids make the most interesting opponents, rather than fighting random monsters all the time. Having at least some knowledge of how to put them together can make for better encounters. Additionally, there's a lot of material in the various books out there that a PC might never take that could be great for NPCs, friendly or not. It could certainly spice up the game to encounter someone who has a strange power that you don't know how to counter. (On the other hand, throwing an uber-charger at your players is just cruel).

They worked around this in 4th ed to a degree, since there are now rules in the monster manuals for making humanoid opponents and leveling them up. Still, for 3.5, you don't want to just throw out warriors with toughness and improved toughness for all their feats.

Of course, this still falls secondary to a DM being a flexible storyteller and a willing participant in your own story as well. Nothing is worse than a DM who has a mastery of rules, thorough knowledge of how to make a great build, and an adversarial attitude.

Keld Denar
2008-10-18, 12:33 PM
To each, their own, and as much as I enjoy an immersive story/setting, it is the thrill of combat that draws me to D&D. I've been playing Living Greyhawk for almost 8 years now (RIP) and have been involved in literally hundreds of games. Some of the stories were great, and some of them were ok. Some were just plain bad. But the things I remember most vividly to this day were the most epic of combats. My highest level character, my fighter mutt, was involved in an adventure where his party took on a Fiendish Shadowed Beholder Hive Mother of Legend. It was an epic fight, took something like 2 hours where everyone was standing up out of their chairs cheering and awwwing together at all the dice rolls. And when we finally triumphed (without any permanent deaths, I might add!) the feeling was incredible. We took on an incredibly powerful regional NPC that had been central to the plot and story and killed it in what felt like one of the most epic battles ever. It was an optimized challenge that most other parties that I heard of weren't able to complete, many loosing items, levels, and characters permanently. It made me proud that I had built a smart character, played with others who built smart characters, and that we all understood smart tactics. The DM/author of the mod was a good friend of mine, and he prided himself on how hard he worked on this encounter, and was genuinely happy that it was challenging, but not quite impossible. It was and probably will remain one of my most fond memories of D&D, simply because of how big of an achievement it was, the culmination of many years of playing in the LG campain. The story grows fuzzy, but the intensity of that combat is forever burned into my brain.