DM second guessing? [Archive] - Wizards Community

DM second guessing? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
mikeymichaelmike
07-13-07, 11:51 PM How do you all feel about second guessing a DM. What i mean by that is let's say that a less then favorable outcome has befallen your party. The session has ended and you feel that the situation needs looking into, so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome.

You see I DM and I run a character in a second game. I refuse to do this to my Dm out of respect, however I have had this very same issue over my years of play. I never want to cheat my players out of anything, and I always want them to be sucsessful in my campaigns, but sometimes I need to make judgment calls to keep the game fluid. Of course there will be screws up , I'm not perfect, but it just burns me up when my players call me on the situation days after.

I never do this to my players as I don't have time to go back and see if every spell they casted was accurate or if every feat they enacted was correct.

Now this doesn't happen but maybe once in a blue moon, but when it does...look out because Kracatoa is about to erupt.

Mikey
mikeymichaelmike
07-13-07, 11:54 PM side note I am talking about jugdment calls, not actual hard copy rules. I have no problem reversing an infraction I either overlooked or comitted. i am talking about those nasty little grey areas.:D

Mikey
Professorpain
07-14-07, 12:04 AM It depends if you are talking about a total party kill that was unwarranted, then sure do something about it. But don't slow the game down for a minor to moderate gray area.
shadzar
07-14-07, 12:04 AM i never have found the DM to be wrong in his ruling. it is the DMs world after all. if i just don't agree with the DM i no longer play in his games due to differences of opinion and style.

but if spells are changed and such the DM may have a reason.

well i like to think that all DMs have well thought out reason to change things, but this rarely is true. but i try to still give them the benefit of the doubt. until it just gets out of hand or silly, or they refuse to explain what reasoning their may be for a change tot he printed rules that would otherwise work just find.

(i am by no means, nor condone rules-lawyering.)
Zephania
07-14-07, 12:04 AM I'm my group, we as a whole decide on what seems fairest or most logical, pending on the situation. DM gets final say, but we all talk it over to be fair, and try to cover all angles
Jenrock
07-14-07, 12:17 AM Sometimes I give my DM a hard time about certain rulings of his, but (usually) only in jest. It normally ends with him saying "If you want something heavy and rock-shaped to fall on your character, keep talking." I do this because he and I are the only ones in our group with the books and more-than-basic knowledge of the rules. If I had and actual problem with one of his rulings, I would wait until after the game and talk to him about it until the two of us reached a solution that worked out well for everyone.
Seeker95
07-14-07, 08:13 AM so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome.To reverse the outcome? I do not advocate such an objective. Such a change request will be denied.

However, doing so with an objective of altering the adjudication of future encounters is perfectly reasonable and welcomed. As a DM, I am perfectly willing to learn as I play. But I will not rewrite the past based on what I have learned. I will apply it to the future.
Board_Rider
07-14-07, 08:34 AM I'm my group, we as a whole decide on what seems fairest or most logical, pending on the situation. DM gets final say, but we all talk it over to be fair, and try to cover all angles

Typically this is what my old group did.
mikeymichaelmike
07-14-07, 08:48 AM It depends if you are talking about a total party kill that was unwarranted, then sure do something about it. But don't slow the game down for a minor to moderate gray area.

no no I would never do this on purpose, but if it did happen I would pay close attention to the dynamics to make sure the party was entitled to everything it had.

I was reffering to , let's say a creatures reaction to a situation, or a morality call, or the course of action based on desire versus common sense. You know stuff you can't find in a book.

DM "Golom bites off Frotos finger with the ring on it, and knowingly falls to his death at the same time"

2 days later

Player "Hey I went online and read in the Dm's guide where it said Blah blah blah, and no way would he have jumped yada yada yada"

Get the idea? That is what drives me nuts

Mikey
pres_man
07-14-07, 09:12 AM Frankly, I don't really get what you are saying. Are you saying that some players would complain that the character was not played according to what the character would do based on the character's personality? If it is an NPC the DM decides what the personality is, so I fail to see how a player could argue such a thing without sounding like a complete idiot (then again I would suggest the same for a DM who tried to tell a player that their character was not being played correctly).

Though the only thing remotely similiar to this that I have ever been tempted to make a big deal is when a spellcaster has all of the "correct" spells prepared for that day, despite not knowing that this particular group was going to confront him that day. Now maybe it makes sense for that particular character, but when it starts happening more than once, I start to get worried that the DM may be doing (bad) metagaming.

Though I would feel that brings things up outside of normal game time is actually more appropriate then making a big deal in game and slowing down play. I don't see anything wrong with a player coming back a few days later wanting to discuss an issue. And though you don't second guess your players, if something seems strange to me, I do. And if they read something wrong and were using a feat/spell incorrectly I will inform them before the next session.
mikeymichaelmike
07-16-07, 10:35 AM I made my point as clear as mud! My bad let me try to clear things up. (By the way thanks for all replys it seems we are all on the same page)

A player has a familiar and uses it quite effectively! For several adventures the character and his pet have been able to get the upper hand quite easily. Kuddos to him, however I see some over confidence start building, so I build in a stop gap measure in my next adventure, which is I pit him against himself. (I build and play an NPC based on his character's stats and personality)

Deep into the adventure the player comes across my NPC battle ensues and my player's familiar gets dispatched. (Now this was not my intention, plenty of opportunities were offered to pull the pet out, and even his campanions urged him to pull the pet out.) Well, he wins the day but at a cost.

Riches and many exp's fall upon his character, however he is not happy about the loss. He jumps on the boards (here) and does the rules lawyers thing through our extensive book collection, and builds a case (in his favor) on how the battle should not have evolved in the manner that it did, and that the pet should have never been targeted.

I never question my players as they dismantle my baddies and adventures, but the second the coin changes hand here comes the who, what, where, why.

By the way, I fealt horrible about the death cause I really like the way he played the familiar!

Mikey:confused:
Uglysad
07-16-07, 11:30 AM To reverse the outcome? I do not advocate such an objective. Such a change request will be denied.

However, doing so with an objective of altering the adjudication of future encounters is perfectly reasonable and welcomed. As a DM, I am perfectly willing to learn as I play. But I will not rewrite the past based on what I have learned. I will apply it to the future.

This, I believe, is the proper response of how it should be handled.
Kouk
07-16-07, 11:59 AM How do you all feel about second guessing a DM. What i mean by that is let's say that a less then favorable outcome has befallen your party. The session has ended and you feel that the situation needs looking into, so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome.

Uhh, I'm not sure. I have not had that sort of thing happen. Often players questions strange things I do, and that is fine but they usually accept anything I state is the way something will be.
suppio
07-16-07, 12:06 PM On the subject of being called out after the fact i tend to take in stride. No DM is perfect (and a doubt any really try. However, you do need to stick to your guns when you feel it's appropriate.
Should you use a rule a certain way and then find out it shouldn't be, then it should be considered for revising. However, sometimes you like the way you ruled, despite how the book version looks. Thats when you explain why your using it that way and hope the players understand. I personally only explain myself once. Not to rude or powertrip, but because any more then that and the slope quickly slides into subjects far removed from the question at hand.

As for that particluar situation, i think you need to just sit the player down and go over both their reasoning for the reversal, and for you to explain why you do or do not agree with him. However, i would not reverse the outcome. Death, any kind, should not be reversed (in my humble opinion). However, you could perhaps grant the option for a ressurection (i know it usually doesn't apply to familiars,) however, you could explain he can ressurect the familiar (for normal cost) as well as taking the XP penalty for the loss, however he'd at least get to keep his beloved familiar.
I've actually had a wizard do this before. Just a thought...
key
07-16-07, 12:16 PM if i just don't agree with the DM i no longer play in his games due to differences of opinion and style.
I had to do this once. It was over something non-trivial and we couldn't work things out.
LadyAlaria
07-16-07, 12:56 PM My advice:

1. Admit he has a point. You admit you were out to humble him. There is a trace of pettiness in that. You engineered an encounter specifically for that purpose, rather than from the natural progression of the campaign. The encounter cost him a favorite pet. He has a right to nurse some greivance.

2. Admit he has a second point. You made a judgment call, and those should always be open to discussion after the fact. He's not wrong for wanting to revisit the decision. That doesn't mean your call was wrong or that you will "go back in time" and reverse the decision - it only means that you shouldn't get mad at him for "second-guessing" you, any more than he should get made for you "second-guessing" him by starting this thread.

3. Move on. Don't beat yourself up, don't beat him up. Just get back to the game and start having fun again.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
mikeymichaelmike 07-13-07, 11:51 PM	How do you all feel about second guessing a DM. What i mean by that is let's say that a less then favorable outcome has befallen your party. The session has ended and you feel that the situation needs looking into, so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome. You see I DM and I run a character in a second game. I refuse to do this to my Dm out of respect, however I have had this very same issue over my years of play. I never want to cheat my players out of anything, and I always want them to be sucsessful in my campaigns, but sometimes I need to make judgment calls to keep the game fluid. Of course there will be screws up , I'm not perfect, but it just burns me up when my players call me on the situation days after. I never do this to my players as I don't have time to go back and see if every spell they casted was accurate or if every feat they enacted was correct. Now this doesn't happen but maybe once in a blue moon, but when it does...look out because Kracatoa is about to erupt. Mikey
mikeymichaelmike 07-13-07, 11:54 PM	side note I am talking about jugdment calls, not actual hard copy rules. I have no problem reversing an infraction I either overlooked or comitted. i am talking about those nasty little grey areas.:D Mikey
Professorpain 07-14-07, 12:04 AM	It depends if you are talking about a total party kill that was unwarranted, then sure do something about it. But don't slow the game down for a minor to moderate gray area.
shadzar 07-14-07, 12:04 AM	i never have found the DM to be wrong in his ruling. it is the DMs world after all. if i just don't agree with the DM i no longer play in his games due to differences of opinion and style. but if spells are changed and such the DM may have a reason. well i like to think that all DMs have well thought out reason to change things, but this rarely is true. but i try to still give them the benefit of the doubt. until it just gets out of hand or silly, or they refuse to explain what reasoning their may be for a change tot he printed rules that would otherwise work just find. (i am by no means, nor condone rules-lawyering.)
Zephania 07-14-07, 12:04 AM	I'm my group, we as a whole decide on what seems fairest or most logical, pending on the situation. DM gets final say, but we all talk it over to be fair, and try to cover all angles
Jenrock 07-14-07, 12:17 AM	Sometimes I give my DM a hard time about certain rulings of his, but (usually) only in jest. It normally ends with him saying "If you want something heavy and rock-shaped to fall on your character, keep talking." I do this because he and I are the only ones in our group with the books and more-than-basic knowledge of the rules. If I had and actual problem with one of his rulings, I would wait until after the game and talk to him about it until the two of us reached a solution that worked out well for everyone.
Seeker95 07-14-07, 08:13 AM	so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome.To reverse the outcome? I do not advocate such an objective. Such a change request will be denied. However, doing so with an objective of altering the adjudication of future encounters is perfectly reasonable and welcomed. As a DM, I am perfectly willing to learn as I play. But I will not rewrite the past based on what I have learned. I will apply it to the future.
Board_Rider 07-14-07, 08:34 AM	I'm my group, we as a whole decide on what seems fairest or most logical, pending on the situation. DM gets final say, but we all talk it over to be fair, and try to cover all angles Typically this is what my old group did.
mikeymichaelmike 07-14-07, 08:48 AM	It depends if you are talking about a total party kill that was unwarranted, then sure do something about it. But don't slow the game down for a minor to moderate gray area. no no I would never do this on purpose, but if it did happen I would pay close attention to the dynamics to make sure the party was entitled to everything it had. I was reffering to , let's say a creatures reaction to a situation, or a morality call, or the course of action based on desire versus common sense. You know stuff you can't find in a book. DM "Golom bites off Frotos finger with the ring on it, and knowingly falls to his death at the same time" 2 days later Player "Hey I went online and read in the Dm's guide where it said Blah blah blah, and no way would he have jumped yada yada yada" Get the idea? That is what drives me nuts Mikey
pres_man 07-14-07, 09:12 AM	Frankly, I don't really get what you are saying. Are you saying that some players would complain that the character was not played according to what the character would do based on the character's personality? If it is an NPC the DM decides what the personality is, so I fail to see how a player could argue such a thing without sounding like a complete idiot (then again I would suggest the same for a DM who tried to tell a player that their character was not being played correctly). Though the only thing remotely similiar to this that I have ever been tempted to make a big deal is when a spellcaster has all of the "correct" spells prepared for that day, despite not knowing that this particular group was going to confront him that day. Now maybe it makes sense for that particular character, but when it starts happening more than once, I start to get worried that the DM may be doing (bad) metagaming. Though I would feel that brings things up outside of normal game time is actually more appropriate then making a big deal in game and slowing down play. I don't see anything wrong with a player coming back a few days later wanting to discuss an issue. And though you don't second guess your players, if something seems strange to me, I do. And if they read something wrong and were using a feat/spell incorrectly I will inform them before the next session.
mikeymichaelmike 07-16-07, 10:35 AM	I made my point as clear as mud! My bad let me try to clear things up. (By the way thanks for all replys it seems we are all on the same page) A player has a familiar and uses it quite effectively! For several adventures the character and his pet have been able to get the upper hand quite easily. Kuddos to him, however I see some over confidence start building, so I build in a stop gap measure in my next adventure, which is I pit him against himself. (I build and play an NPC based on his character's stats and personality) Deep into the adventure the player comes across my NPC battle ensues and my player's familiar gets dispatched. (Now this was not my intention, plenty of opportunities were offered to pull the pet out, and even his campanions urged him to pull the pet out.) Well, he wins the day but at a cost. Riches and many exp's fall upon his character, however he is not happy about the loss. He jumps on the boards (here) and does the rules lawyers thing through our extensive book collection, and builds a case (in his favor) on how the battle should not have evolved in the manner that it did, and that the pet should have never been targeted. I never question my players as they dismantle my baddies and adventures, but the second the coin changes hand here comes the who, what, where, why. By the way, I fealt horrible about the death cause I really like the way he played the familiar! Mikey:confused:
Uglysad 07-16-07, 11:30 AM	To reverse the outcome? I do not advocate such an objective. Such a change request will be denied. However, doing so with an objective of altering the adjudication of future encounters is perfectly reasonable and welcomed. As a DM, I am perfectly willing to learn as I play. But I will not rewrite the past based on what I have learned. I will apply it to the future. This, I believe, is the proper response of how it should be handled.
Kouk 07-16-07, 11:59 AM	How do you all feel about second guessing a DM. What i mean by that is let's say that a less then favorable outcome has befallen your party. The session has ended and you feel that the situation needs looking into, so you hit the books in the hopes to be able reverse the undesirable outcome. Uhh, I'm not sure. I have not had that sort of thing happen. Often players questions strange things I do, and that is fine but they usually accept anything I state is the way something will be.
suppio 07-16-07, 12:06 PM	On the subject of being called out after the fact i tend to take in stride. No DM is perfect (and a doubt any really try. However, you do need to stick to your guns when you feel it's appropriate. Should you use a rule a certain way and then find out it shouldn't be, then it should be considered for revising. However, sometimes you like the way you ruled, despite how the book version looks. Thats when you explain why your using it that way and hope the players understand. I personally only explain myself once. Not to rude or powertrip, but because any more then that and the slope quickly slides into subjects far removed from the question at hand. As for that particluar situation, i think you need to just sit the player down and go over both their reasoning for the reversal, and for you to explain why you do or do not agree with him. However, i would not reverse the outcome. Death, any kind, should not be reversed (in my humble opinion). However, you could perhaps grant the option for a ressurection (i know it usually doesn't apply to familiars,) however, you could explain he can ressurect the familiar (for normal cost) as well as taking the XP penalty for the loss, however he'd at least get to keep his beloved familiar. I've actually had a wizard do this before. Just a thought...
key 07-16-07, 12:16 PM	if i just don't agree with the DM i no longer play in his games due to differences of opinion and style. I had to do this once. It was over something non-trivial and we couldn't work things out.
LadyAlaria 07-16-07, 12:56 PM	My advice: 1. Admit he has a point. You admit you were out to humble him. There is a trace of pettiness in that. You engineered an encounter specifically for that purpose, rather than from the natural progression of the campaign. The encounter cost him a favorite pet. He has a right to nurse some greivance. 2. Admit he has a second point. You made a judgment call, and those should always be open to discussion after the fact. He's not wrong for wanting to revisit the decision. That doesn't mean your call was wrong or that you will "go back in time" and reverse the decision - it only means that you shouldn't get mad at him for "second-guessing" you, any more than he should get made for you "second-guessing" him by starting this thread. 3. Move on. Don't beat yourself up, don't beat him up. Just get back to the game and start having fun again.