Five Rules for Being a Good Dungeon Master

[gunny1993]

I'm totally against fudging dice rolls, if you're going to decide when people should or should not die why even pretend that the dice play a part. Sometimes you get total part wipes, that's a shame but no one can blame you for it and everyone will remember the time the group ran into a dungeon and proceeded to slip up on random rocks, falling into a group of goblins who had just come back from their "Lets fuck up these adventures" lesson.

But I will add that I dislike combat in general, if it goes on for longer than say 30 mins i'm probably already checking out (I just try to make those first 20 mins as brutish and violent as possible)

I'd also point out I primarily use Dungeon World, where my the DM doesn't actually roll so much due to the way the rule-set works (Combat is almost hit for hit reciprocal and players roll to avoid damage rather than DM rolling to deal it)

 

[Fasckira]

I love the screen but not to hide dice rolls, they happen out in the open. No, the screen is invaluable for hiding your notes from player's sitting near you.

 

[Gilbert Estrada]

I have to somewhat disagree with the negative connotations about rules lawyers. In most games I *am* the rules lawyer, mostly because of my better than average memory for trivial details, but also because I have no problem arguing either side regardless of my own character's stakes in the outcome.

Most people who get labeled 'rules lawyers' aren't worthy of the title and are really min-maxers, metagamers, or outright jerks whose only loyalty is to their own entertainment, no matter who else is inconvenienced.

The one rule I always try to follow when debating a point of detail is "will this make things more fun for everyone?" heavily modified by "Is this fair to everyone?", and if both answers aren't 'Yes' then I'll punt it back to the GM with minimal commentary.

One of my GMs asks for rules info all the time. The response goes one of two ways:

Option 1- What page is that on?
GM: Hey, what's the usual rule for (not quite defined situation)?
Me: Generally you would (mostly appropriate rule) but you could also (less appropriate but still applicable option) instead.

Option 2(far too often)- Oh man, my wife is gonna kill me if her elf dies..
GM: Hey, my lack of planning has put me in a position where I have to make a potentially unpopular decision, what should I do?
Me: Well, you could do (options 1-4), none of which look promising.
GM: So which should I do?
Me: It's your game, amigo. I'm just here to sign the death certificates.

 

[Mikeybb]

Good article.

...because I'm a g.m. at heart, I'm going to add my sixth rule to this list.

6. Stay flexible.
Your players can be mercurial creatures in both mood and goals. Be ready to follow where they lead. We all know some of the best adventures can be found when you wander off the path.

 

[RJ 17]

Pffft, you forgot the most important rule:

Go straight for the jugular!

Spoiler: Personally, I apply to the Tycho school of game-running...

Crush the players! See them driven before you! Hear the lamentations of their women!!!!

Seriously, my friends only want let me DM when they're in the mood for a challenge. :3

To-date, they've never completed one of my campaigns. Much like Dark Souls, however, there's fun to be had in overcoming an astoundingly brutal challenge, so they do enjoy it none-the-less.

 

[Rack]

I have to agree with the article when it comes to never cheating the dice or fudging the rolls. In the moment it's obviously tempting, one character dying, or even a full wipe from an unlucky roll can severely derail a session. But the flipside is you've completely defanged your game, the players realise they are never in any danger and thus nothing you do can ever generate tension. You might as well remove every combat and trap from your gameworld after this point.

Your players only know that if you tell them you change results. So it's the GM's fault if that happens and his/her players take advantage of that.

I think you might be underestimating players there. First up if you're rolling behind a screen players are naturally going to expect shenanigans, you have to convince them you aren't fixing dice rolls rather than expose that you are. Secondly it's pretty easy to spot surges of luck while you're in a desperate situation. Lastly it's really hard to cover up that you're fudging dice. There will normally be a beat as you decide what the outcome of that bad roll will be, whether you need to fudge it, if it's worth fudging it, how much you need to fudge it by and how much to actually fudge it. Even if it only takes you a tenth of a second a player reduced to low hit points by a big attack is going to spot that a mile off.

I've never had a situation where I've had to convince my players of that, I've had PC's die and had no complaints about rolls etc. I've only ever fudged three rolls as far as I can recall, each were to do with the fact that I screwed up the balance of the encounter. Plus die rolls are random, there are runs of good luck and runs of bad, how is it any less believable when it happens to a GM, that just seems a bit silly.

If players are always going to be suspicious of the GM running their game, maybe they should find another game. There should be a mutual respect between GM and players, and I feel I have that with my group.

I can already tell we're probably going to have to agree to disagree, but every role playing group is different, so that's no surprise

Maybe, if you've only fudged dice three times then I'd guess we have pretty similar views on this one. if you fudge rolls that infrequently it's going to be very hard to spot, and even if it is spotted it's not going to ruin trust at the table. It's more frequent interferring with the results that I think causes problems.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Snip.

Looks like we agree then Fudging die is a tool the GM has, but it needs to be used wisely if at all. If you do it all the time, why bother with dice.

 

[Halbert]

I find rule 4 (Know what your players want) to be critically important, and probably the reason why there are so many arguments about gaming. If your players want a brutal, merciless game, then GMing that way is fine. If your players just want to feel like bad-asses while crushing the opposition handily, then the former way of GMing is going to be zero fun for them. Do your players want a story driven game, or do they just want a dungeon crawl with zero narrative?

The best way to ensure everyone has fun is to know the answer to such questions when you sit down, because nothing will ruin the fun at the table like a mismatch of expectations.

 

[Crimson Cade]

Would add a rule 6: The best laid plans often goes right out the window, with cake.

Nothing is going to go exactly as planned, and no matter how well you prepare, you will find that players have a knack to come up with things that not even Nostradamus could see coming. That's how the strange, but memorable sessions are made. Like, they snuck into a ball in disguise to spy on the villain, and wouldn't attack someone unarmed, right? How would I prepare for the fighter using the huge birthday cake at the evil countess' party as a shield and bullrush it into her face and run her off the balcony, resolving the conflict waaaay prematurely? Had to rewrite a lot of prepwork to make it fit with this new direction. But it was well worth it.

I will forever remember his grin when he rolled that critical natural 20 and went "Happy Birthday!"