DMs get a bad rap on TGD--or, I should say, there's a tendency to talk about the crappy ones more than the good ones, probably because venting is cathartic. (Crissa, in particular, seems to have terrible luck with DMs.)
So what makes a good DM? Obviously, a good DM runs an entertaining game, whatever your definition of entertaining is, but there's more to it than that. Everyone can probably list a few habits or traits of terrible DMs. What're some traits of good ones?
I figured this was okay to post in IMHO as opposed to The Trenches because it's a general question about RPGs, but I suspect that it might be necessary to tell stories to answer it. Forum staff, if this thread is deemed to be out of place, please feel free to move it.
What makes a good DM?
Moderator: Moderators
What makes a good DM?
P.C. Hodgell wrote:That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
shadzar wrote:i think the apostrophe is an outdated idea such as is hyphenation.
-
Lago PARANOIA
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
I think the biggest thing that will make or break any DM is the ability to make sure everyone is contributing to the story and having fun doing it.
This entails a lot of things, but the three most important things is establishing a clear authority (either through rules or player trust or both) to dispel arguments, taking steps to make more enthusiastic players not steal others' screentime while encouraging the less engaged ones to contribute, and making the story meaningful enough for the players to care.
If I was going to distill all that into one phrase, I'd say credibility as a story guide.
This entails a lot of things, but the three most important things is establishing a clear authority (either through rules or player trust or both) to dispel arguments, taking steps to make more enthusiastic players not steal others' screentime while encouraging the less engaged ones to contribute, and making the story meaningful enough for the players to care.
If I was going to distill all that into one phrase, I'd say credibility as a story guide.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
A good DM can roll with it when the players do something crazy.
A good DM encourages creativity and awesomeness, if it makes the game more fun.
A good DM encourages creativity and awesomeness, if it makes the game more fun.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Is this like making a list kind of thing or just some things to look for when you look at a DM as a perspective for your group.
In no particular order.
A good DM....
...knows when to make the rules make sense.
...knows when to tell the players no.
...knows how to express things with words that will let you see the world as though you were there in the place of your character so that you may better interact with it.
...is prepared ahead of time when given time to do so.
...can work on the fly when his/her plans go awry.
...pays attention to the group to make sure every player is having fun.
...isn't afraid to forsake the players needs for his own enjoyment at times during the game. (An upset DM is one that will make mistakes.)
...doesn't hold grudges against the players for anything that happens in the game.
...doesn't let personal grudges come into the game during play.
...listens to his/her players.
...stands by his rulings.
...doesn't allow rules discussion to halt the game, but uses one rule until the end of the day/night and discusses it after with the group for any possible changes.
...doesn't let the books get in the way of the level verisimilitude the group is looking for.
...lets the players play the game instead of playing it for them.
...lets the players try what they want to do with their characters even if it means certain death of them or the entire campaign, within reason.
...isn't afraid to throw dice at munchkins, rules lawyers, Monty Pythons, etc; to bring them back into focus.
In no particular order.
A good DM....
...knows when to make the rules make sense.
...knows when to tell the players no.
...knows how to express things with words that will let you see the world as though you were there in the place of your character so that you may better interact with it.
...is prepared ahead of time when given time to do so.
...can work on the fly when his/her plans go awry.
...pays attention to the group to make sure every player is having fun.
...isn't afraid to forsake the players needs for his own enjoyment at times during the game. (An upset DM is one that will make mistakes.)
...doesn't hold grudges against the players for anything that happens in the game.
...doesn't let personal grudges come into the game during play.
...listens to his/her players.
...stands by his rulings.
...doesn't allow rules discussion to halt the game, but uses one rule until the end of the day/night and discusses it after with the group for any possible changes.
...doesn't let the books get in the way of the level verisimilitude the group is looking for.
...lets the players play the game instead of playing it for them.
...lets the players try what they want to do with their characters even if it means certain death of them or the entire campaign, within reason.
...isn't afraid to throw dice at munchkins, rules lawyers, Monty Pythons, etc; to bring them back into focus.
Last edited by shadzar on Tue Jan 12, 2010 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Play the game, not the rules.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
Well, you figure out what makes a good DM by having bad ones, sooo.......
1. Realize that player choices are a response to DM choices, and not punish players for that. So, I once had a DM that wanted to run Red Hand of Doom, but with the change that there were no clerics and healing and Raising came only from items. He was then surprised when we made everyone in the party get stealth skills (even the dwarf Fighter) and we planned every attack like a shadowrun.
We also had to talk him into letting use not divide treasure evenly and just pile crap onto the warriors so they could do their job at all.
2. Be consistent, and take a position on the rules. In 3e DnD, I won't even use charm or illusion spells unless I sit you down and have a 30 min discussion about how you rule on them.
3. Realize when going off script or off rule is the only choice. The RHoD DM ran the encounter with ghost lions, and tried to follow the script where they can attack you from inside the floor and you can't attack back. Since that is insta-gib TPK, we had to sit him down and tell him that we didn't care what the the book said and if he ruled that way the game was over.
Did an RPGA event where no one realized that gith get telekinesis and could fling all the PCs off the cliffs they were on in one round and insta-TPK.
4. Roll with the punches. The RHoD DM went the right direction when he figured out that we were not going to tramp around the land like a bunch of peasants and let this timed adventure run out of time, and instead bought a scroll of animate dead to ride a zombie chimera to the next plot point (I'd buried a manticore earlier, but the encounter after our town visit had a chimera so I just rolled with it).
He then put the "reward encounter" of running into friendly elves(shifters) on giant owls since we would have never seen them from zombie-back.
He also seemed to be amused when we decided to not destroy the lich's phylactery, and instead got a artificer to decraft it and pay us for the 10,000 XP he got.
He was also surprised when we kept the potions of sneak and hide we got from a unit combat and didn't sell them. Tiny amounts of swag just don't beat having those potions for the whole campaign.
5. Don't confuse player with character: Once did a RPGA event where you were supposed to tell the DM how you made a poison antidote from the ingredients they gave you. No skill checks or anything. It almost made a big guy cry from frustration.
6. Keep things on track. I understand that I'm a super-focused player, but making sure that the other players aren't smoking pot or playing Smash Bros. is good.
1. Realize that player choices are a response to DM choices, and not punish players for that. So, I once had a DM that wanted to run Red Hand of Doom, but with the change that there were no clerics and healing and Raising came only from items. He was then surprised when we made everyone in the party get stealth skills (even the dwarf Fighter) and we planned every attack like a shadowrun.
We also had to talk him into letting use not divide treasure evenly and just pile crap onto the warriors so they could do their job at all.
2. Be consistent, and take a position on the rules. In 3e DnD, I won't even use charm or illusion spells unless I sit you down and have a 30 min discussion about how you rule on them.
3. Realize when going off script or off rule is the only choice. The RHoD DM ran the encounter with ghost lions, and tried to follow the script where they can attack you from inside the floor and you can't attack back. Since that is insta-gib TPK, we had to sit him down and tell him that we didn't care what the the book said and if he ruled that way the game was over.
Did an RPGA event where no one realized that gith get telekinesis and could fling all the PCs off the cliffs they were on in one round and insta-TPK.
4. Roll with the punches. The RHoD DM went the right direction when he figured out that we were not going to tramp around the land like a bunch of peasants and let this timed adventure run out of time, and instead bought a scroll of animate dead to ride a zombie chimera to the next plot point (I'd buried a manticore earlier, but the encounter after our town visit had a chimera so I just rolled with it).
He then put the "reward encounter" of running into friendly elves(shifters) on giant owls since we would have never seen them from zombie-back.
He also seemed to be amused when we decided to not destroy the lich's phylactery, and instead got a artificer to decraft it and pay us for the 10,000 XP he got.
He was also surprised when we kept the potions of sneak and hide we got from a unit combat and didn't sell them. Tiny amounts of swag just don't beat having those potions for the whole campaign.
5. Don't confuse player with character: Once did a RPGA event where you were supposed to tell the DM how you made a poison antidote from the ingredients they gave you. No skill checks or anything. It almost made a big guy cry from frustration.
6. Keep things on track. I understand that I'm a super-focused player, but making sure that the other players aren't smoking pot or playing Smash Bros. is good.
Last edited by K on Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is an assumption here in the question “what makes a good DM” and that assumption is “in the eyes of the players.” We can go over the details (and how to achieve that which makes a DM a good DM are details) but I think, in the end, the fundamental key was first mentioned by Lago, “the ability to make sure everyone is contributing to the story and having fun doing it.”
I would change it slightly, “the ability to make sure that everyone is involved and having fun in that involvement.”
Everything (and I mean everything) in a role playing game must be designed around the above principle. The rules of the game, the way the game needs to flow, even the necessity of the DM to say “no” on occasions (because of considerations of future involvement and future fun) basically flow from the above.
Back when I played the original AD&D edition in college, in the Gygaxian days where characters died, there were good DMS who made us all involved and having fun and it was a good game (back then). When I played 2E with a DM who lead us from zero to epic hero in about a year of real time it was a good game!
The same arguments go for other games, from Traveller to Vampire. All the good GMS/STS/ETC got the people involved and in doing so got them to have fun.
I would change it slightly, “the ability to make sure that everyone is involved and having fun in that involvement.”
Everything (and I mean everything) in a role playing game must be designed around the above principle. The rules of the game, the way the game needs to flow, even the necessity of the DM to say “no” on occasions (because of considerations of future involvement and future fun) basically flow from the above.
Back when I played the original AD&D edition in college, in the Gygaxian days where characters died, there were good DMS who made us all involved and having fun and it was a good game (back then). When I played 2E with a DM who lead us from zero to epic hero in about a year of real time it was a good game!
The same arguments go for other games, from Traveller to Vampire. All the good GMS/STS/ETC got the people involved and in doing so got them to have fun.
-
Red Archon
- Journeyman
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:36 am
Diplomacy and problem solving skills. Knowing what a dispute is about and the sorting it out efficiently. The DM has to enjoy the game and make the players feel the same. And it's of course important to be able to choose the players, since a random bunch of chumps has a bad tendency of not working together well at all.
I once used pot as Awesome Fuel for my best campaigns.
Now I just plan better.
I hate coming late to these threads. I don't know what else to contribute other than peanut gallery banter... so here's just some blithering in the hopes that it contains something useful:
I like to think I'm a pretty good GM, so here's what I do when I run. Maybe this is only relevant to my particular group, but I doubt it:
1. Plan long-term. I generally use mind maps for these, connecting major plot elements and forcing myself to think about nuance and how an arc I plan to run at 10th or 15th level impacts and manifests in the arcs I'm running at 3rd and 7th. Getting just a few fiddly, interesting details shoehorned into the beginning of the campaign is a big AH-HA payoff for players when they come up later. Also, my mind maps are loose, connecting ideas and player desires and generalized arc outlines - they avoid specifics.
It forces and more-easily allows me to include elements and desires specific to my players and their characters, morphing what I want to do with the game into something that WE want to do with the game.
2. Plan short-term. When I'm running an arc I know what I want to accomplish story-wise from the long-term planning I did for #1. Incorporating that into an actual session takes the mind-map and blows up a certain aspect of it. I generally come up with a series of cool and memorable encounters (combat, social, setting, whatever I feel like the game needs for variety's sake or consistency or awesomeness) and let them stand on their own as "things this session should include". However, I'm very flexible in having those events come to pass: a combat at the harbor becomes an ambush on the beach, the noble that was to be in the know becomes the merchant the players have convinced themselves has all the details, etc. Making this work requires #3.
3. Be flexible and make shit up. Being meticulous with planning pays dividends, but being meticulous with event progression and manifestation is a waste of time. If you're experienced as a GM you know how to pace a scene and read your players, so why bother boxing yourself in with some bullshit do-this-and-then-that method of storytelling when you can just weave it together with whatever avenue the players are taking? Obviously mysteries and stuff like that need some denial thrown in - you can't just give it away - but if it doesn't matter, then it doesn't matter.
Now I just plan better.
I hate coming late to these threads. I don't know what else to contribute other than peanut gallery banter... so here's just some blithering in the hopes that it contains something useful:
I like to think I'm a pretty good GM, so here's what I do when I run. Maybe this is only relevant to my particular group, but I doubt it:
1. Plan long-term. I generally use mind maps for these, connecting major plot elements and forcing myself to think about nuance and how an arc I plan to run at 10th or 15th level impacts and manifests in the arcs I'm running at 3rd and 7th. Getting just a few fiddly, interesting details shoehorned into the beginning of the campaign is a big AH-HA payoff for players when they come up later. Also, my mind maps are loose, connecting ideas and player desires and generalized arc outlines - they avoid specifics.
It forces and more-easily allows me to include elements and desires specific to my players and their characters, morphing what I want to do with the game into something that WE want to do with the game.
2. Plan short-term. When I'm running an arc I know what I want to accomplish story-wise from the long-term planning I did for #1. Incorporating that into an actual session takes the mind-map and blows up a certain aspect of it. I generally come up with a series of cool and memorable encounters (combat, social, setting, whatever I feel like the game needs for variety's sake or consistency or awesomeness) and let them stand on their own as "things this session should include". However, I'm very flexible in having those events come to pass: a combat at the harbor becomes an ambush on the beach, the noble that was to be in the know becomes the merchant the players have convinced themselves has all the details, etc. Making this work requires #3.
3. Be flexible and make shit up. Being meticulous with planning pays dividends, but being meticulous with event progression and manifestation is a waste of time. If you're experienced as a GM you know how to pace a scene and read your players, so why bother boxing yourself in with some bullshit do-this-and-then-that method of storytelling when you can just weave it together with whatever avenue the players are taking? Obviously mysteries and stuff like that need some denial thrown in - you can't just give it away - but if it doesn't matter, then it doesn't matter.
-
RandomCasualty2
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
I was there. Very poorly.RandomCasualty2 wrote:How'd that work exactly?K wrote: Once did a RPGA event where you were supposed to tell the DM how you made a poison antidote from the ingredients they gave you. No skill checks or anything.
The adventure had like some random sea crap and the druid was supposed to make an antidote for the poison that a bunch of Sahuagin gave him. But of course, no player has any actual knowledge of what the fuck Forgotten Realms sea creatures have medicinal properties, so it was basically just a random fuck you.
But it didn't matter because it was all a Sahuagin test or some shit and everyone ended up getting rescued by an avatar of an actual god.
Worst. Adventure. Ever.
-Username17
Most of my advice/techniques have been already been tagged by others. I started out as a pretty bad DM when I was 12 years old, and I think only recently started getting good at things about 15 years later, mostly thanks to reading these boards confirming that the crappy habits I had were in fact crappy, and threads like this.
Somewhere in the things to keep in mind is:
If you find yourself attached to a NPC too much, or he is overshadowing the PCs ever, kill him. It's easier that way. NPCs are there to make your characters more awesome, not to feel short in the pants.
Listen to the players. They usually will let you know when things are sour or when they want something. More often than not, you can let them have their desire as a reward in the near future.
Somewhere in the things to keep in mind is:
If you find yourself attached to a NPC too much, or he is overshadowing the PCs ever, kill him. It's easier that way. NPCs are there to make your characters more awesome, not to feel short in the pants.
Listen to the players. They usually will let you know when things are sour or when they want something. More often than not, you can let them have their desire as a reward in the near future.
-
Judging__Eagle
- Prince
- Posts: 4671
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada
erik's mention on NPCs is pretty easy for me, I find. I try to just make the character able to cast some type of spells (either UMD, and cast 'whatever' feels appropriate); and have him cast buffs, heals, etc. on the party. They're usually built with a bunch of decent defenses, so I don't have to worry about attacking them or not; I'm not a real fan of 'plot' armour, even on an npc (I want my npcs to survive b/c they seriously ran the fuck away. Not b/c "the PCs failed to really kill them."
Also, I find that a good DM will find the power level of a group, and then increase the challenges that the PCs face, until they face challenges that they can deal with 'most' (50%) of the time.
Also, I find that a good DM will find the power level of a group, and then increase the challenges that the PCs face, until they face challenges that they can deal with 'most' (50%) of the time.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Well duh, what good would the opinion of a DM be as to whether they themselves are good or not? Someone can be the worst DM and think themselves to be the best. Players are the only metric to measure the ability of the DM. So the discussion has to come form the eyes of the players right?tzor wrote:There is an assumption here in the question “what makes a good DM” and that assumption is “in the eyes of the players.” We can go over the details (and how to achieve that which makes a DM a good DM are details) but I think, in the end, the fundamental key was first mentioned by Lago, “the ability to make sure everyone is contributing to the story and having fun doing it.”
Play the game, not the rules.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
Heh. I feel bad for doing this (well, the Smash Bros part), like, all the time.K wrote:6. Keep things on track. I understand that I'm a super-focused player, but making sure that the other players aren't smoking pot or playing Smash Bros. is good.
Or maybe it was only when trying out 4e. That was a big Smash Bros fest.
Last edited by Surgo on Wed Jan 13, 2010 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
A good DM can keep his ego in check. He can also acknowledge that not players are created equal and give or take accordingly. He will also acknowledge rule dumb-fuckery and adapt on the fly if it's really ridiculous.
Besides all that nit-picky stuff, what separates the good from the great is the ability to tell a story. If you can tell his NPCs apart by their mannerisms and lingo that goes a long way to transporting you into the narrative.
Besides all that nit-picky stuff, what separates the good from the great is the ability to tell a story. If you can tell his NPCs apart by their mannerisms and lingo that goes a long way to transporting you into the narrative.
-
Lago PARANOIA
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
Hey, Frank, how did the players, the DM, and the coordinators react to the adventure?
Did any faces get punched? Did any full soda cups get thrown at the back of peoples' heads?
Did any faces get punched? Did any full soda cups get thrown at the back of peoples' heads?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
A good DM talks with the players, guides a concensus about how the game should be played, then has the facilitation skills and intelligence to deliver on the desired objectives.
A bad GM fails at one or the other.
A bad GM fails at one or the other.
Last edited by cthulhu on Wed Jan 13, 2010 4:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
A Man In Black
- Duke
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:33 am
I'd be sorely tempted to break a chair over that guy.ggroy wrote: I remember in one 3.5E Forgotten Realms game I played in, the DM would punish players for vocally taking issue with canon or rules. Basically the DM would force the player to roll a d20, and that number would be subtracted off the player's primary stat. If the player refused to do the roll, the DM would do the d20 roll for them and force the player to subtract double that number from a primary stat. Not surprisingly, the game ended up in fist fights towards the end of the session.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
I concur. Going to remember that trick next time I'm play 3.5Koumei wrote:That is AWESOME.K wrote: He also seemed to be amused when we decided to not destroy the lich's phylactery, and instead got a artificer to decraft it and pay us for the 10,000 XP he got.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
I know what I would do. I'd hijack the game and DM it myself, completely ignoring the douche. Even - especially - if it was his home turf. Like that:ggroy wrote:Not surprisingly, the game ended up in fist fights towards the end of the session.
"Bob, you step on a loose flagstone, and a swinging blade (roll) neatly slices off your head."
"No, fuck you. Hey, party, that's what actually happens: Bob steps on a loose flagstone, and the northern wall suddenly disappears, revealing a stairway descending into the darkness. The rush of wind brings the smell of sulfur. You see a faint greenish glow in the distance. What do you do?"
Another one...
A good DM knows how to handle the silver baton in the cresset in the Moathouse.
A good DM knows how to handle the silver baton in the cresset in the Moathouse.
Play the game, not the rules.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.