But I've never been censored.
Awwww. Let me help you, you miserable piece of XP-Soup. You're nothing but a poor GM plot device that is used by incompetent wannabes that have no idea of the rules, let the players make the game run away from him and desperately tries to reign them in, but of course it never works, because they always know how to beat you. You're the amateur's choice! You belong to the past!
Now you have a go at me. Possible points of attack:
I'm sure that if you follow those easy steps, you can get a post removed, and probably a stern talking to via email. Maybe, if you really put some effort into it, a couple of days ban on the boards to cool down! I believe in you!
Ever read that Asimov story about the three super computers secretly controlling the development of mankind?
The super computers were designed to help mankind and they figured that by directly getting onvolved, pulling strings, fiddling numbers etc was the only way of ensuring the survival of the human race, saving it from it's self.
These super computers could literally do whatever they wanted but made sure to keep up the appearance of being utterly subserviant to their 'mortal masters'.
You see, these super computers *knew* that mankind wasn't about to have his develompent controlled by a damned machine!
So they ensured mankind never realised what was going on, by keeping things within the realm of the plausibile, makinf sure nothing that occured seemed impossible and, above all, keeping a low profile while they worked...
...and guess what? Everybody was happy!
A good DM is like a good Super Computer.
How did you find out about u...h I mean yeah, funny story, that. Totally SciFi as something like that is just not possible, but totally [REFERENCE NOT FOUND]!
What I did? I grabbed the generic Dragon stats out of Arcana Evolved for the age I wanted and customized how it's breath weapon worked. They didn't care how I managed it, they just thought it was awesome. In my opinion, that's the key factor on whether or not it was fair. They had fun with it.To be honest I really don't consider this changing the rules. You are created a custom monster that has abilities that work in a predictable, normal fashion. That is well within the province of the GM and Paizo has in fact created a section in the book (which FWIW is a really great section) for doing exactly that.
+1. It's working within the rules. The RAW does allow for a lot of customisation right out of the box!
The section you mention is one of the best additions to the PF core rulebook, as it provides the inventive GM with a benchmark to see whether he went too far with his invention or whether he can even cocker up the critter a bit.
I am used to more of the old school where the DM has the final say. It's easy to say the DM won't have any players, but in reality, there are plenty of players and DMs and eventually a group will match up.
The DM has the right to say that a certain build, feature, feat, spell... anything doesn't fit in his campaign and the Player has the right to either pick something else or not play. There weren't many reasons I'd say "I'm not playing this" based on rules set by a DM that choice came mostly from not interested in the flavor of the Campaign.
As a player, I never really asked why monsters or NPCs did something that wasn't normal. It didn't really matter to the story. Remember, you’re not supposed to “win” a gaming session.
It is not about winning, it is about fairness and fun. The DM should not have to cheat, and regardless of popular opinion a DM can cheat. DM's still have the final say now, but to do whatever you want with no regard for what the group(who are likely your friends) think is not cool at all, IMHO. Just because things used to be a certain way that does not make it ok, and the only reason DM's got away with a lot of things they did back in the day was because information was not so easy to get access too.
|
What I did? I grabbed the generic Dragon stats out of Arcana Evolved for the age I wanted and customized how it's breath weapon worked. They didn't care how I managed it, they just thought it was awesome. In my opinion, that's the key factor on whether or not it was fair. They had fun with it.To be honest I really don't consider this changing the rules. You are created a custom monster that has abilities that work in a predictable, normal fashion. That is well within the province of the GM and Paizo has in fact created a section in the book (which FWIW is a really great section) for doing exactly that.+1. It's working within the rules. The RAW does allow for a lot of customisation right out of the box!
The section you mention is one of the best additions to the PF core rulebook, as it provides the inventive GM with a benchmark to see whether he went too far with his invention or whether he can even cocker up the critter a bit.
+1 to you both. Totally agree with this, keep those players on their toes!
Only if he has enough system mastery and sense of balance is this true. As a general guideline he just follow the rules.
DM's only need guidelines.
You are quite correct. I guess I've been doing DMing stuff so long and with the same "type" of people (yes I'm stereo-typing my friends) that I forget the dim dark past of "learning to DM". I believe it is a learning event and also a skill. I may get a little defensive when posters/players seem to be bagging DM's. Being a player is a cake-walk compared to running a game. DM's make mistakes and mature players accept that and move on in the name of keeping the game running, fun and respect for the person DMing. D&D had the "red box" and that eased you into learning to be a DM, making those "non-standard calls", and controlling a game in general. I in some ways pity a new DM starting with something like Pathfinder - great game but a little rules heavy to cut your teeth on. I think a "red box" Pathfinder lite would be cool - free download?
An experienced DM can (and will) make the odd bad call, I see it only an issue when its happening lots. Some people will never have the skills to be a DM - that's not an insult it's just a fact like I'll never be an astronaut.
S.
PS: I'm not including DM dick-heads who think the aim of an RPG is to win by killing the PC's as many times as possible...
The reason alot of people react strongly to the 'dm's can do whatever they want' mentality is that there are lots of dms out there that arent as capable as some of the best. I agree that with experience you are far better able to make those on the fly calls, but there are lots that read these forums that dont have that experience. And no one ever prefaces 'the dm can do whatever they want' with, 'if you have the experience and judgement to determine what is fair, and what your players will enjoy'. So those ass-hat dms come here, see that and feel justified.
I dont doubt that those who react strongest have had bad experiences with this, and for that reason among others they dont want to see the unprefaced statement go unchallenged because it means more people will face the same bad experiences.
What I did? I grabbed the generic Dragon stats out of Arcana Evolved for the age I wanted and customized how it's breath weapon worked. They didn't care how I managed it, they just thought it was awesome. In my opinion, that's the key factor on whether or not it was fair. They had fun with it.To be honest I really don't consider this changing the rules. You are created a custom monster that has abilities that work in a predictable, normal fashion. That is well within the province of the GM and Paizo has in fact created a section in the book (which FWIW is a really great section) for doing exactly that.+1. It's working within the rules. The RAW does allow for a lot of customisation right out of the box!
The section you mention is one of the best additions to the PF core rulebook, as it provides the inventive GM with a benchmark to see whether he went too far with his invention or whether he can even cocker up the critter a bit.
Which, in hindsight, is kinda what I was trying to say. Problem is that I have a tendency to get sidetracked that sometimes annoys me. *shrugs*
Honestly, I think that the GM should make changes on occasion. This entire thread reminded me of the encounter, and with the way that dragons work in Pathfinder I'm going to end up creating a new base dragon type for my campaign. I'm glad I saw it.
In my own case, I recently realized that I'd started turning into an inflexible GM. I used to have a blast creating new minor rules, monsters and magic items, all for the sake of making the game better for my groups. (Which is not necessarily making it better for other groups, I will admit.) And then I realized I'd started losing sight of the role-playing portion of the game, which was a rude wake up call. When I realized that I literally could not run the best of the plots that I once had run, because I'd gotten so inflexible...it was an unpleasant revelation. I've been taking steps to fix it, but I think I did accidentally alienate a few players (who didn't say anything, just disappeared). I wish it hadn't happened, but it's part of why I stress to my players that I want feedback. Because if I do get too heavyhanded, I want them to point it out so that I can fix it. After all, I'm only mortal.
First of all there has to be a level of trust, just like players make mistakes, DMs have to go down the same path. Therefore, the compromise is players don't make on the fly changes to their characters, and DMs don't do the same for creatures. At the same time don't scream the first time someone contradicts a rule that you know by heart. Everyone is there to enjoy.
I would be very intimidated as a DM if I had players who were very knowledgable on the rules, or feigned knowing the game very well. Especially if they started to question everything I do. But once that happens everyone should be prepared to discuss. And sometimes it has more to do with personalities, versus the actual game.
The other perspective is when the DM thinks they have the players figured out, or vice versa, and cry foul, argue, or make changes when best laid plans go south. But then I would refer to the above.
Which, in hindsight, is kinda what I was trying to say. Problem is that I have a tendency to get sidetracked that sometimes annoys me. *shrugs*Yeah me too. Sometimes I can be distracted by the strange*OOOOHHH PENCILS!!!!*
Actually a valid comparison. >.> I collect mechanical pencils for some reason...at least it isn't an expensive habit...
|
and is there any GM that truly abides to raw?!
Probably. Not counting the organised play GMs, who are bound by them.
In the 2nd edition rules it even STATED that the rules are meant as a guideline! As a GM I adhered to this one rule and one rule alone. The main thing is consistency, if you are not consistent as a GM then it matters not as the group will call the GM on it as unfair and probably not play with him/her again. I still believe that the rule that all rules are meant as a guideline are what is important for all editions and this includes Pathfinder. David "Zeb" Cook is the one that said this in his forward in the 2nd Ed Players handbook.
There is more to this than "It was done once, so why not do it always?"
Sure, in his own, private game, the GM is theoretically bound by no rule. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't think about what he does before he does it, and neither should he make changes without taking a moment to think about how this will affect...
The game is what matters and how the rules changes are used in it. If it furthers the game then the GM should be allowed to pretty much do what they want. But if it hinders the players and takes the fun away from them during the game... then the GM needs to consider this in all aspects. The GM is God in their game, but like all gods, they aren't nothing without the ones that worship them and in this analogy, play in their games. So ultimately the players have a lot more say in what happens in the game then one might think.
As long as the GM is consistent and the players are happy this is all that matters. House rules and the like should happen and do happen often.Organized players and GM's have to abide by the rules but even they have some lee-way as to the interpretation of how the rules are abided by during the one game. If there is a problem and something that needs to be resolved it can happen after that one session and the GM and maybe the player in question, needs to go to the organized play HQ (or contact them as needed) and have them arbitrate the ruling in question and go from there.