Scott's potential game mastering of his own Ozzy campaign and a few recent grumbles about ours has gotten me thinking about why I plan encounters and limit the world of Fissa as I do?
Why, in a world of 'high' fantasy, do I set conditions on what treasure and equipment you're likely to find?
Why do I religiously insist on keeping track of the twenty odd arrows in your quivers?
I think it comes down to DMs creating the game worlds that they would want to play in.
I loved playing the video arcade game 'Gauntlet' when I was a teenager. I'd probably love it now, but it'd annoy me in a role-playing world that the Barbarian could carry and throw unlimited hand-axes.
Although I really enjoyed our shared (Sorry, not you David) University campaigns, I was often frustrated by the choppy tone that came with multiple DMs and a vague storyline.
The worst session for me though, was Sven's single attempt. I really liked Sven and good for him for having a go, but the fact he set deliberately impossible challenges and unbeatable monsters was beyond annoying.
For me, it's a case of having options. If my character was designed to be able to jump twenty feet across chasms, why, when wanting to jump a river would the DM suddenly contrive a reason for why that was impossible? A giant wave suddenly rises up, there's an invisible barrier, you just can't do it so shut up etc.
David, spoke about plot armour. He's right of course; although I don't really want to kill you all, players should absolutely not have it. The element of risk and ultimately death, is vital to the game. Without a real possibility of failure or consequences of poor decisions, there really is no game.
Don't want to be burned to ash by a gigantic fire breathing dragon?
Then D&D is probably not the game for you.
As a DM though, especially in a sand-boxy game like the one we're currently playing, the NPCs shouldn’t have it either. They can't for the exact same reasons. If you know absolutely that I'm going to keep the villain alive, no matter what you do, how hard you fight or how cleverly you plan, what's the point of even trying?
Obviously, I’ll try to keep the important ones alive. Hell, I’ll even try to keep the trivial ones alive too, but they can't be immortal. They have to exist in the same world that you do and abide by the same rules.
It was super irritating for me when you managed to capture Egrow, as he was quite important to Sir Briefadel's plans but, fair play, you were in the right place at the right time, made a decision to target him and you succeeded.
Estrid's choice to blind and then murder him was, given how I'd conceived her, just the action that she would take. To do anything else would’ve needed charm and persuasion.
In the very first combat encounter of the 'Rat King' session, the bandit leader Spider Murphy managed to escape. Assif assumed it was because he had a future purpose and therefore 'plot armour'. In reality, it was just because he had excellent Climb and Jump skill rolls and wanted to stay alive!
That said, what the players want matters too.
I know Assif wants to hit things and a session without any battles for him is a session wasted. Fair enough; I can't promise a battle, but I can certainly make it much more likely. I'm also very aware that Assif hates book-keeping but I still need him to at least keep track his expendable items like arrows and potions.
Scott seems more invested in character development and a clever application of tactics. I try to plan for every possibility, but Scott surprises me more often than not and I’m glad of it. It’s like a fun little battle of wits.
I think David is the most invested in the story though and staying true to his own/his character’s core beliefs and morals. That's a interesting area for us both to play with.
D&D is a game built on three pillars: Combat, Exploration and Interaction (Role playing) and all three of these pillars are vital to any game. The precise proportions though, can vary by what the players want and the skills of the DM.
I'm no actor and although I'll have a go, I realise that my strengths lie more towards the story telling aspect, making puns and cardboard models.
Finally, the problem with finding magical equipment. I try to limit the amount of magic available as I believe it can easily unbalance a game and the more you give, the more you have to give. It's a destructive boulder on a slope, that once started, can't easily be slowed or stopped.
Give a character a hundred magic items and the player can’t help but forget what they have and utility items, no matter how brilliant, are often ignored. Also, there should be a reasonable explanation of why they’re there. If I just insert exactly what the players demand/want, whenever they want it, the story becomes broken, and our shared group suspension of disbelief is utterly destroyed.
That said, just for LOLs, I've inserted a loot pile containing a specifically targeted item for each of you in the very next (possible) encounter, should you want them.
Ah, zigga, zag, ah!
