alt.universes

Dungeons and Dragons has survived for as long as it has because of one simple rule: DM’s prerogative. What this means is no matter what action a player decides he or she would like to take, the DM has the final say on all rules. The DM can make judgments on what is and is not allowed, but, most importantly, translates the nigh-unlimited number of options a player can take into the game mechanic. Having a human in charge of the rules at any given moment, along with the rules stating that the human is in charge and can override any rule, makes the game infinitely and immediately adaptable to practically any and every situation.

The open-endedness of it can be quite daunting. While it is possible to relate most actions under the human domain to one of the six core D&D attributes, it is not always as simple as a skill check. The very nature of the game allows for the players to roleplay as they see fit. But nothing irks beginning DMs more than a story not going according to plan.

And for good reason. Campaigns require planning. Dungeons are created, story plots are threaded together, and clues and puzzles are set for the players to solve and find. A finely tuned campaign where the players find a loophole the DM did not think of can fall apart fast. In the end, if the DM cannot think on his feet, the event will railroad into something not very fun for everyone involved.

More advanced Dungeon Masters learn to approach it in a different light: it is NOT their story. It is the players’ story to craft as they see fit. The DM, while the alpha and omega of rules and mechanics, only has that role to facilitate the imagination of the players. It is keeping this in mind that will keep a dungeon fun for everyone involved.

One of the initial problems faced by new campaigns is the quest proposition. While some players can get behind the whole “Bad things are happening; we must fix them!” methodology of joining an epic quest, more like the opportunity to roleplay their way through it. One player wants to make sure there is a monetary reward, while another has a mystic past that compels them to join the party for some unknown reason. It is important that the DM, when possible, speak with the players out-of-character, bluntly asking “How do YOU want to play?” Creating a compelling reason that the player can get into their quest from the beginning will give them a backdrop to roleplay from, and make it that much less likely that they will get bored later. It will also prevent that inevitable rogue who points out that he was only here for the treasure to begin with, and he’s leaving if there is none to claim. The DM, having known from the start the motives of the characters, will be able to adjust the story to keep their main thirst quenched.

Another issue DMs contend with is the simple fact that they cannot possibly account for everything. The players will, time and time again, come up with a solution or method for handling an encounter such as a puzzle or skill challenge that the DM did not expect. Rules do need to be consistent, and conveniently coming up with sudden restrictions that prevent a player from using certain skills, abilities, or items at the last moment feels forced and flimsy for the entire party.

Instead, the important rule of DMhood should be remembered: translate the actions of the players, whatever they may be, into the game mechanics. A puzzle is simply a means to a goal. If they accomplish the goal in another method, then go with it. Award the same awards and spoils as would have been received if they had done it your way. (An especially crafty DM will declare that it was the only way the puzzle really could have been solved anyways, and that the “real” solution was simply a guise to throw them off.) This will usually mean making changes on the fly.

Example: Party enters a dungeon, where your intention is an epic boss fight against an old Red Dragon, after which the spoils are the dragon’s treasure horde and bountiful XP. However, they hatch an ingenious plan to sneak in using certain spells and potions and steal the treasure right out from under the sleeping dragon’s nose. As this takes place, the DM has to come up with several options. A DM could force the battle by ensuring the dragon wins one of the checks to wake up. The downside is that once enough of the party’s “ingenious” plans do not work, the party tends to realize that some of the rolls are stacked against them. Instead, the DM could choose to allow the action to take place, remembering the end goal is the treasure, not the destruction of the dragon. And, not waking up the dragon could very well be one method of achieving said goal.

This brings me to the next rule of DMing: there is always something else bad around the corner. The party, for nearly the entire game, play in a constant state of “What’s next?” There is never a way to tell if the next encounter was truly planned, or a fight thrown in at the last second because they managed to tiptoe successfully past your well-planned boss fight. (In the example above, the party successfully escaped the dungeon with their loads of treasure. They were quite proud of themselves. Until, that is, they made it outside again, where the dragon’s mate was just returning home. Not just a coincidence? You can’t prove that.)

The bottom line there is to let the party do as they please. Remember what the goals of the dungeon truly are, and if the party performs a feat as impressive as the preplanned activity, reward them as if that were the plan all along. If they still need another encounter, well, that just happened to be coming next anyways, right?

These rules also can apply to another common problem: irreversible plot damage. Or, more simply put, when the party completely screws up the story so badly, there is no easy way to tweak it back. I learned this the hard way when a small accident concerning a Rogue, a Paladin’s goldpurse, and Alchemist’s Fire caused the death of an NPC that not only was important to the story I had worked hard to plan, but was involved in it for some time to come, and was such a loved and influential character that nearly every player at the table uttered obscenities at the offending parties when I read off the damage numbers.

It was a case I was not prepared for, and the level at which the story was thrown off was in the area of “rewriting brand new campaigns.” The rule to remember here is that it was not my story. It was theirs. So, I stopped the game temporarily, and explained to the players the extent of damage that had just occurred. In situations such as this where a major story change has occurred, and the DM has not enough time to plan during that session what the consequences of the action, the choice should go to the players. They can continue from this point, understanding that the game dynamic will be vastly different, or, they can choose to back up several moments of gametime and replay the scene, this time choosing a different course of action.

I can hear hardcore DMs growling at me for my previous statement, but no matter what, it is the DMs job to keep the game entertaining for the players. Those of you on the hardcore roleplay side of things will probably have players of the same caliber, and therefore replaying a scene is simply not an option. Other players will appreciate the opportunity to not let one silly mistake derail them halfway through the story they were enjoying.

Of course, that’s one extreme. A game as open-ended as this has many different ways events can play out, but as long as everyone enjoys the game, is that not the point?

But, regardless, player frustrations can still flare, especially when you have a group who regularly outthink the DM. Either the DM cannot keep up, and runs out of ways to adjust the story so the same goals are met, or ends up having to limit the actions of the party to stick to the story.

Limit is a very bad word. While the DM is the final say on the rules, any rule that is implemented because either “I said so,” or “because I want them to do this instead” will not only be frowned upon, but frustrate players who will feel as if their actions are being decided for them.

In these cases, I rely on an old sales tactic: Either/Or. Take the case of a man entering a car dealership to buy a new vehicle. After deciding on basic features, the salesman has three ways to respond. The first (and worst way to sell a car) method involves asking the customer outright “So, do you want to buy a car?” Here, the customer will think about the circumstances surrounding the purchase, and will respond with either a “yes” or “no” accordingly. Let’s say, on average, that results in a 50/50 chance of yes’s to no’s. That’s a high ratio of no sale, and that is before you count the fact that once a customer overcomes the natural fear of confrontation to say “No,” there is very little to save the sale at that point. This is the equivalent of forcing a player down a single path, leaving them no choice. They either need to take your choice, or trainwreck the entire game if they decide they do not want to cooperate.

The second option for our salesman is to go through the parking lot and, instead of asking yes or no, point out the 30 or so vehicles that match the customer’s request, and ask them to make a choice. The choice will be so overwhelming for the customer, that the odds of making a choice you can positively control will be small. They might choose a car that the salesman will make little profit (and therefore little commission) on, or they may decide they need time to think through all the options, and decide not to commit to a purchase at a time. This is similar to separating the party from safety by a huge river of molten lava, and without any guidance whatsoever saying “now, go!” Even if the players come together enough to come up with a plan of their own, the odds of it fitting whatever you were hoping they would do is slim to none at best.

Let’s take option C, Either/Or. Using this method, our salesman continues gathering details until he is able to narrow the selection down for the customer. In the end, our salesman finds that by weeding out every car that has even one unwanted feature, we end up with two cars left. The salesman says, “Which one do you want more, this one, or that one.” Proven in psychology, the effect will be that the customer will spend more time deciding which one he wants more, easily weighing the options of A vs B, even if he did not intend to purchase in the first place. This will make him a more likely purchaser, deciding between the two items than to choose not to purchase at all. This works because whereas “no” is difficult enough to say to a stranger, choosing “no” when there is no “no” to choose is even more difficult.

This method works wonders in controlling party actions, guiding them along the path of the story without ever seeming to limit them in anyway. In our river of lava example, who knows what actions a party could take that a DM would have to plan for, but, using seemingly indifferent requests for spot and perception checks, the DM points out that the Rogue notices several chains laced throughout the ceilings that would be easily used as a swing if knocked free with a well-placed crossbow bolt. Then, following the Arcana check asked of the casters, the DM points out that the Wizard notices that a blast placed just so would partially cave in the ceiling, creating a path for the party to walk on.

I guarantee you the party will argue back and forth the merit of both plans, which will unconsciously obligate them to pick one or the other. The odds that the party will do something in line with your plans as the DM suddenly raised a large percentage.

An expert DM handles his party without them even knowing, giving them options to choose from that keep the feeling of that freedom to choose. By considering the goals and missions of each length of the party’s journey, side trips and unintended consequences can easily be substituted for the main encounters. Additional exercise can be added if necessary to force a story plot point. But no matter what, the game where the party feels that they are truly in control of their fate from the beginning and at all points throughout, and risks taken are often rewarded, will be more likely to follow along the planned story as more time is invested into it.

After all, it’s their story. They’re in it.