Conflicting Advice for Dungeon Masters

[@Marcus-ki1en]

As a 40+ year DM/GM I would pass on the following wisdom: 1) Opinions are like A**holes, every one has one and most stink (yes, including mine); 2) Rule of Cool is fine, in moderation, but only by the DM, never by the players. They can ask, but consistency in critical and "no" is always an acceptable answer on your part; 3) Death should always be a possibility, otherwise there can be no tension, which is a critical element/concept. Should a character die mid session, I have the player help roll for the monsters so they stay engaged. They may be brought back when the party returns to civilization, or they can roll up a new character then, but keep everyone engaged during the present; 4) Remember the ultimate goal is to have fun, as a group. Be willing to improve as you go. Its just that simple.

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Thanks for taking the time to share this!

[@Gokais]

I've had an interesting experience with session prep as a pretty new DM (10ish sessions, half one-shots). At first, I found myself pouring over the pages of whatever I was about to run for hours, writing detailed notes and ideas... Only to look at those notes maybe twice during the sessions themselves? I have never been good at improv in speech, music, even just social situations, but in DnD, especially with the Curse of Strahd campaign I've been running, I find that I prefer making up fitting personalities on the fly rather than having a rigid character structure for each NPC, rumors that come naturally through what that person would naturally know, etc (with exceptions for major plot hooks like Strahd's personality). I've slowly gotten more and more focused on improv over prep, which has worked surprisingly well and I'm excited to see where it takes us as we enter Vallaki. Thanks for some of the best DM advice I've found on YT, I'll absolutely be recommending this to my fellow DMing friends!

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Thanks so much! I’m glad you found it useful! It sounds like you’re off to a great start as a DM.

[@nerd.empire]

I've noticed that there's so many ways to play that some players like different kinds of games-- a lot of that conflicting advice has to do with different playstyles and I often find myself negotiating those things with players (or trying to make sure i pick the players that will be a good fit with the other players and myself)

[@GeekPhilosophy]

I think you nailed it! People enjoy all kinds of different games and styles, so it all comes down to the group. Thanks for commenting!

[@AnnaMno1]

I'd say there's a mix and balance between Rules as Written and Rule of Cool, and that everyone's balance point between the two isn't going to always line up, it's like it's own spectrum. Which is why people need to find groups that work for them. As a DM if a player wants to do something against established rules in the moment I'm more likely to turn it down, however if they speak to me ahead of time outside of the games I'm more likely to agree, sometimes with adjustments made. I'm not the best with sudden changes and prefer to anaylise things, and even in that if they're speaking to me of an idea I'll often tell them to message it to me so I can read it and look over it better. As a player I tend to be very rules focused (hopefully not to the point of being a rules lawer), but also will aknowledge that the DM has ulitmate say so if the DM says otherwise I'll accept that ruling. If I want to talk about a concept or pathway for my character to go down I often bring it up outside of the game. About planning and improv, I like world building. And not just d&d but also in trying to write stories and stuff. Designing characters and enviroments and towns. It's honestly why I became interested in DMing. Apart of world building places and people is figuring out the flaws and problems in various parts if the world. When I'm trying to write stories I stuggle more with how characters get from one point to another, it's a fun challenge in writing but defently my wrakest point, with dnd this stuff is decided by the players. When trying to write I often know how things start and I have an idea of where I want things to end up but need to just figure out the midfle, in dnd the middle and ending is a result of the players. So to me in D&D the planning is in the start, the world the npc's, the envionment, the problems and the main plot points the improv is in the reactions to how the Players interact with these. That's how I view it at least, I hope it made sense

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Definitely makes sense! So great to hear different points of view. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[@ghoulofmetal]

There is rules as written, rule of cool but you might also meet Rai, rules as intended, which is what the creators have said was the intention even if the rules dont fit that.

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Great point! And I’m glad they put out errata to help clarify or adjust things when needed. Thanks for sharing.

[@bencarter1646]

One factor to consider in your DM prep time is the pace of your party. My group can usually only game for 1.5 - 2 hr in each session, so I usually end up finishing sooner than I imagined. It makes for more relaxed prep, knowing that I've usually got more than I need. I'm cautious of too much RoC, as my players are all still new to D&D. If I go ignoring rules for effect, it can make things more confusing. We're at Lvl 5, and the idea of flanking has only just come up! Not too many Death Saves yet though...

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Great point about the pace of the party! Thanks again!

[@soeffner6833]

I've always considered 'rules as written' to be the foundation of the world and the 'rule of cool' to be the chaos of chance in a magical world. E. G. A bowmans line of sight is imperative. But a deflection shot with a magic arrow or high skill is a possibility. Much is dependent on the intensity of the moment. Shooting a turkey for dinner versus the last BBG fight for all the trimmings. 😉

[@Andre99328]

I am DMing and try to stick to RAW, because that gives everyone the same chance and they can rely on the rules. But in rare occasions, particularly if the rules are unclear or doesn't make sense, I change them slightly. As a player, I really dislike when the DM is changing rules all the time and medelling with my PC, particularly when my actions should work according to RAW but the DM says no, or roll a dice to see if that works. Not a fan of that.

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Thanks for sharing! Totally makes sense and works for you and your group, which is awesome. Great to see how many different ways there are to enjoy the game. Cheers.

[@RIVERSRPGChannel]

I’m in between on the rules, they are guidelines. I plan one session at a time and I have had the party go left when I thought they would go right, improv ahead. I run a high magic campaign with heroes. So that said characters can die but there are avenues to bring them back, but that’s my game.

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Thanks for sharing!

[@emdotambient]

I don't think the Rule of Cool is really about going against Rules as Written. In my mind, Rules as Written is opposed to Rules as Intended. RAW is the rule lawyer's "that is what it literally says" whereas RAI is the "I, as GM, am interpreting the rule differently than the literal text." Rule of Cool, IMHO is when there is no rule for a given action or when someone's stated actions are a strange or creative twist of rules that aren't easily adjudicated by said rules. In those cases, the GM will invoke ROC and say, "Yeah, sure, try it. But you'll need to give me a [insert roll] and make it good, or else something is gonna happen!" In other words, ROC is compatible with RAW and RAI.

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Well said!

[@Drudenfusz]

I don't like RAW nor the RoC, I sure like well designed games, but D&D certainly is not one of those. And even in those games, I often establish clear house rules from the start and line out how I make judgement calls for things that are not covered by the rules. I do NEVER bend the rules because something is cool! Since the rules are basically the laws of nature and the players should be aware how the world works to be capable of making informed decisions, if the rules can simply change then there is no reason to have any rules in the first place. And I say that while designing my own rules lite system, that is so minimalist, that it almost borders on freeform play anyway. I used to vastly over-prep when I started out in the hobby, but with experience I moved over the years completely to the other end o the spectrum and barely prep anything these days. What I never prepped was any kind of plot though, I made relationship maps and such thing instead. These days I usually just think about the core theme I want to convey, and improvise pretty much everything with that theme in mind. Thus providing the player with a consistent experience even though there was no plot. Death is weird. I mean I usually run very lethal games, especially horror, but death rarely happens, since the players learn usually fast to be cautious. But more important I find death boring, there are so much more interesting things that can be at stake than just hit points. But D&D with its combat focus has spoiled so many players that they seem not to be capable to think outside that box anymore. That is the main reason why I avoid D&D and Shadowrun, since those players and I just don't mix well. Your general tips towards at the end are solid. And well, quoting uncle Iroh is definitely worth the like from me!

[@GeekPhilosophy]

Thanks so much for taking the time to share your thoughts and perspective! There are so many games out there (and even more house rules and home-brew) that I think there’s something for everyone. As long as everyone is having a good time and all on the same page, it all works out. Not ever table has to fit every type of player. Thanks again!