A DM Dilemma [Archive] - Wizards Community

A DM Dilemma [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
aleph_woodenglenn
04-03-05, 03:17 PM So. my group has a round robin DM thing, and I DMed last, so this time I get to be a PC.
To make a long story short I really peeved off my DM by rules lawyering. The thing is I have already studied the snot out of the rules, and stuff, and see her making BIG errors from time to time. Its just I know how I would rule it, and I think I have trouble relinquishing control. I know there is a learning curve to such things, but:
a) I am not the most delicate when I bring up my problems with her ajudication
and b) she can be quite sensitive about me "telling her how to run her game"

Some of the things are BIG, and they go both ways. Like she added the BAB to the Melee bonus from the stat block, though the melee attk includes the BAB. On the otherhand, I also reminded that drinking a potion would draw an attack of opportunity. I mean trying to be balanced.
Anyway, I got a touch peevish when she said my character was flat footed when a second enmy party entered the fray, and that I could not use my dodge feat against an enemy that was directly behind me. Regardless the combination of these (and her +7 instead of +4 to hit) ended up in a TPK (actually a total party capture because she's being nice) that she insists couldn't be avoided. (We let one of two guardman run away who got 3 more...for a total of a EL 7 for our second level party...granted we should've run away, but we didn't have that much of a chance (see to hit bonus).
I suppose the best solution is for me to keep my trap shut, but if I have to do that, what is the best way to convince your DM to study not only the adventure she is working on, but also the basic rules of combat (by the way she is a long time 1e player, so that is a big part of it I think).
I really want us to "just have fun" but I feel that the DM makes it a bit harder by getting so defensive when I put a rule forward, and I would have a lot more fun personally with a greater level of consistency with the RAW.
aleph_woodenglenn
04-03-05, 03:20 PM I should add, after a rather lengthy yelling match, we decided that we should save almost all lookingup of rules til after the encounter, and that during the encounter I just have to deal with her rulings until we have the chance to slow down and look it up. I hope this will solve some issues, hoping I can just learn to grin and bear it. Any suggestions etc. would be very helpful.
weasel fierce
04-03-05, 04:06 PM Ask a question to yourself.

Does this error or change in the rules make the game less fun and exciting, or doesnt it matter ?

If it impacts the game, and is ruining someones fun, or making things less interesting to play, then talk to her afterwards. If its not, or if its in fact making things more interesting, then she's doing it right ;)

I'd personally not call surprise by more enemies entering a fight, but its more a DM call, than anything thats spelled out, I guess.
Daydreamer
04-04-05, 04:40 AM the thing i find the most annoying is inconsistency. AS long as her rules allow for a resonable balanced game try to get her to be consistent with them so that at least you know what ur dealing with and can accomplish when she dms.
Sir Todd
04-04-05, 09:07 AM This is tricky.

One thing I do when I play under a GM that is inexperienced. Is I offer concise rules up to the GM during any situation where the GM is either doing it wrong or seems lost as to how to handle it. I say it completely including giving the name of the section of rules they can find the rule in. Then I tell them the ball is in the GMs court and shut up for the rest of the encounter. If the GM still does it wrong, then I take that into consideration the next time they want to run something.

Waiting till after the game is never a good idea. But holding up play to 'ARGUE' about rulings is equally bad. It's best to simply get the RIGHT ruling into the GMs hands imediately and then back off and let them decide on their own.

'Why no waiting till after?' Because by then the damage is done. And its rare a GM ever undoes a bad thing. The lives of characters may indeed hang in the balance due to poor rulings. At the very least the enjoyment of the player getting the poor ruling is going to suffer in proportion to the effects of the violation.

'But why back off after simply reading out the rules? If your right you should back that up with relentless arguement right?' WRONG. It may feel right if your the one being shafted by a ruling. After all you aren't having fun anymore so why should it matter to you if the whole game drags to a stop for a heated arguement. Because of a couple big things: First, if your causing someone else to not have any fun by pressing an arguement. Then they are likely to not want to play with you anymore (even if they know the GM is wrong). Its not fun to have to watch people argue all the time. Especially if your not directly involved. And secondly, YOU may be in error on what you think is the right ruling! There are often things behind the scene that the GM may be doing that make it appear they are breaking some rule when in fact they aren't. And who knows, just maybe the GM has read the rules and either has a different view on how they work or actually understands it better than you do. For example drinking a potion while under the effects of displacement (50% concealment) or from behind cover does not provoke an AoO.

Clearly then the only option is to imediately tell the GM what the rule is and then back off. Looking up a rule when its not your turn doesn't slow the game down. And may just allow enough time to prevent horrible things from happening too. But its always the GMs call. Just give them the info they need and stop. Another thing to consider... how often do people give up on their view once an arguement starts. Almost never. After things have cooled down they might admit they were wrong. But I know very few people who would back down even when they know they are wrong if it gets to the point of a full arguement. So your looking at the end of the game session... maybe even the end of the game itself if enough people are upset.

Please show her this post, if you wish to follow my advice.

Just remember to stop after offering the correct rule. If you make it clear your only offering some quick advice and don't want to stall the game then most GMs actually LIKE a rule savy person around. I know I liked it when I was new. Especially when they knew enough to stop.
Nom
04-04-05, 09:25 AM Let's approach this slightly differently:

How important are the tactical combat rules for you? Given a choice, is the "story" or the "game" more important?

What about for her?

If you're trying to play "wargaming with characters" and she's trying to play "story-oriented" then it's not surprising there is a problem. It's entirely possible that she doesn't even care for the details of the rules, and your harping on about them is just "getting in the way of the story". It's also possible that she's aware that she is not comfortable with the 3rd Ed combat rules, and feels embarrassed or uncomfortable when you keep pointing out her failures. In either of these cases, being a rules lawyer will make her less likely to follow your suggestions.

Where to go from here?

First, you need to get on her good side. She is the DM; you are a player. She needs to feel that you trust her to run the game.

Second, you need to figure out what style of game you each want to play, and how these can mesh. Again, she is the one with the harder job, so cut her as much slack as you can manage. You might even like her play style.

Finally, you can consider asking her if she's comfortable with the tactical rules, and - if not - what she'd like to do about it. Perhaps she would like rules assistance, but only if it supports rather than undermines her confidence and authority. Alternative, it may be better to severely cull the tactical rules and go more freeform.

The order is important. Until she feels that you trust and respect her, she's not going to respond well to criticism, even if presented as "advice" or "suggestions".
aleph_woodenglenn
04-04-05, 10:39 AM thank you so much for the advise. Looks like its may be time to eat crow, and let it ride. She is much more a RP savvy DM, and frankly I prefer that side too. I've just had a lot of game/sport experience being very competitive and rules-oriented, and while it is easier to push that aside in RP, it is much more difficult in combat (that feels more like us v. them). I feel like a heel because I think I made the last session nearly unbearable for both DM and the other player. Are there any suggestions on how to:
a) make ammends for the sake of keeping the game together.
b) encourage further learning of the rules while keeping a focus on the largescale storyline that both DM and PCs cherish...(ie still get the DM to read the rules a little closer.)

that is to say, I know that I am right (because we all agree) that we need to learn the rules better, and I also realize that the rules are secondary to game play (or having a game to play at all). However, I prioritize the battles a touch higher than the DM, and thus the rules of combat (and the rules in general).
I have a pretty good head for remembering rules, and love to study DnD books. Where is the line drawn between being as helpful as possible and trying to undermine the DM's game by being a rules lawyer (especially with a very self conscious DM who does very well, but feels like I don't appreciate it).

I suspect the best thing for me is to stick to applying the rules to my characters, making my knowledge apply largely only to them. If the other players and DM want to be more lax about the RAW, then so be it, but I can do my best to remind about the rules when it comes to my characters (ie. Does my fighter get (or draw) an AoO there? or don't forget you gain a +1 bonus (have a -1 penalty) in that attack against me because... or I know I am drawing an AoO by doing this, but... or my sorcerer needs to roll a concentation check, right?...) and just let everything else go as it would. (this should help prevent alot of group metagaming too).

For the next few sessions though I will do my best to be as putty-like as possible in the hands of my very creative and engaged DM, because I honestly love playing with her as DM, And I appreciate the need to let her know I trust her gameplay regardless of how far it strays from RAW.
strcpy
04-04-05, 12:06 PM From my perspective.

I DM a lot, and if my players point out mistakes, or think I am ruling something wrong they speak up. I... wait for it.... encourage them to do so. I have no problem with this. If I am doing something wrong I want my players to tell me what they think I am doing wrong. That way we get to the bottom of the issue, everyone is happy because we resolve the issue from the handbooks. So what if it temporarily stops play once in a while.

And I tell you that when I am playing as a player and DM makes a blatent error I tell them about it. If a DM does not house rule something before play begins, then any deviations from the rules are mistakes.

Anyway, if you have to stop play and lookup a rule. At least everyone at the table has learnt something new and it will never come up again. (hopefully)
pres_man
04-04-05, 01:33 PM First a piece of advice for anyone, NEVER CHALLENGE SOMEONE'S AUTHORITY IN FRONT OF OTHERS! This goes for your boss at work, this goes for your teachers at school, and it most especially goes for your DM. Quite a few people feel the fact that what they are saying is true is enough for the person in "authority" to take it. If we were robots, that would be true, unfortunately (in this case) we are not. People naturally get defensive when challenged.

So how do you deal with someone who is in error then?

I must disagree with Sir Todd about waiting until after the session is over (to start with). I think until you and the person in "charge" can build a system of mutually respect it is best to wait till you are the only two present. Remember that usually most games run more than one session, so giving up one session where it is done wrong, so that you can discuss it afterwards to get the rest of the sessions right is often a good idea.

Next, how should you give advice/corrections? Here Sir Todd was right, you might be wrong about the rule, even if you are absolutely sure you are right. It almost always best to start off any comment on the "correct" way the rules go with, "I think it works this way ..." or "I think I read the rules saying this ..." etc. Always leave open the idea that you have a certain view, but that you don't know if that view is absolutely correct. It shows humility and shows that if the person has a different view, you don't necessarily believe they are dumb for it.

Once you build some trust between you and the person, and can prompt things politely. Then, yes start bring them up in game. "I think you have to make a touch attack first, right?" Also if everybody is doing something wrong, and you look it up, wait till the beginning of next session to say anything. "I think we were doing (blah) wrong last time." This way you don't anger the other players by changing things mid-session.

As for what to do now. Just say, "I was being an arse last time, I'm sorry. In the future, I will try to be more respectful. I hope we can all be open to discussing the rules outside of game time. I'll still ask questions about how things affect my character, but I'll respect the DM's decisions until we get time to discuss it." Show you're the bigger person. And never say, "That's how I am, I can't change."
CzarGarrett
04-04-05, 01:40 PM If you read the rules so much, then why did you forget Rule 0.

Unless the mistake breaks the game, leave it be.
aleph_woodenglenn
04-04-05, 02:10 PM If you read the rules so much, then why did you forget Rule 0.

Unless the mistake breaks the game, leave it be.good point...(though some mistakes do tend to nearly break the game) I am not sure when we'll play next, but I think I'll write a note to self... This is NOT my game, I am but a player. I might have to say a little mantra...mmmm I am but a small part of her world....my character may die at her whim...the rules are at her discretion. mmmmmmm.....

oh, I thought I should add...the DM is my wife...just thought that might shed some light on how it gets to be so sensitive.
Then it lends itself to a very sticky emotional situation (ie her saying "you get like that EVERY time we play a game," and me "well...(passive aggressively) I just want to help us make the most of the gameplay" and then its more of a relationship thing than a DM/PC thing... some @#@#ed up love call-in show:
"When you throw a rule in my face, I feel...."
"When you ignore the rules and kill my player, I feel..."
"I feel that you don't respect my DM style"
"I feel that my ability to have fun in DnD is hindered by your disregard for the rules, and your lack of appreciation for some of the most basic DM concepts like EL, how to read a stat block, etc.")

I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience.

I think one of the problems is that I DM ( in the same group, mind you) more like strcopy. I ajudicate the rules with a lot of player feedback, and don't mind a player looking up a rule and putting it in front of my face. I am not sure if me looking up things I am uncertain about makes it too tedious for the players, but I try to do it while they are planning over the campfire, on the road, in the tavern, or elsewhere on their own when nothing I do really effects the gameplay. I basically ignore their in game talking, (if no NPCs would hear it...though I listen for excessive metagaming) and look up things I missed, or suspect I will need in the future. She keeps it moving a lot faster, less in-game chat, more NPC and game-world interaction. So, there is less time for her to look stuff up. Maybe I'll volunteer to be her ruleboy, and look things up if she has doubts (assuming they won't subvert the ever-important character ignorance).

I spent a lot of time learning to DM in 3.5, and It seems a shame for me to sit on my thumbs when she could learn from my experience.

Of course that is probably just a mask for me trying to control the situation.
see? it is kinda a sticky situation.
pres_man
04-04-05, 03:16 PM I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience.
What I find interesting/humorous, is that it should be the other way around. As an experienced DM you should be more patient with her, as you have walked in those shoes. Too often though it is not, we having been through it, tend for some reason to be less lenient on those that come after us.

Since it is your wife, I would say tell her, "Honey, I love you and don't want to mess up your game. I know the rules better since I've been where you are now. If you have a question, please ask me, I don't mind helping. I'm going to be a little sticky when it comes to my PC though, so please give me the benefit of the doubt when it comes to my PC. If your not sure why my PC is doing something, ask me. It could be that I'm assuming one thing and you're assuming something else."

As an example of missed assumptions, the example of the blurred person drinking a potion.
DM: The guy drinks a potion.
PC: Well then I take my attack of opportunity on him.
DM: Nope, you don't get it.
PC: He's drinking a potion right, then I get it.
DM: No, you don't.
PC: Don't you know the rules, on p. (blah) it says (blah).
DM and PC now at each others throats.

Problem, DM assumed everybody knew the guy was blurred, the PC assumed that he should get an AoO, since he didn't realize the guy was blurred.

Edit: You might also point out (nicely of course) that when switching DMs it is important that the rules stay constant. That way nobody's character concepts are ruined when a new DM steps in.
Nom
04-04-05, 09:52 PM oh, I thought I should add...the DM is my wife...just thought that might shed some light on how it gets to be so sensitive.

I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience.She is your wife, eh? No wonder there is a problem. She expects you to back her up, and instead she perceives (rightly or wrongly) that you're continually making her look bad by correcting her.

Obviously, this applies to anyone, but it goes doubly your wife, and will likely be a lot more sensitive if she feels belittled by her husband than by anyone else (they are just being a jerk; you are betraying her).

"I've made a big mistake, dear. I was trying to help you, but I can see it just made you feel threatened."
Maybe I'll volunteer to be her ruleboy, and look things up if she has doubts (assuming they won't subvert the ever-important character ignorance).That's not a bad idea. The important thing is the perception that you are her assistant, not her supervisor.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
aleph_woodenglenn 04-03-05, 03:17 PM	So. my group has a round robin DM thing, and I DMed last, so this time I get to be a PC. To make a long story short I really peeved off my DM by rules lawyering. The thing is I have already studied the snot out of the rules, and stuff, and see her making BIG errors from time to time. Its just I know how I would rule it, and I think I have trouble relinquishing control. I know there is a learning curve to such things, but: a) I am not the most delicate when I bring up my problems with her ajudication and b) she can be quite sensitive about me "telling her how to run her game" Some of the things are BIG, and they go both ways. Like she added the BAB to the Melee bonus from the stat block, though the melee attk includes the BAB. On the otherhand, I also reminded that drinking a potion would draw an attack of opportunity. I mean trying to be balanced. Anyway, I got a touch peevish when she said my character was flat footed when a second enmy party entered the fray, and that I could not use my dodge feat against an enemy that was directly behind me. Regardless the combination of these (and her +7 instead of +4 to hit) ended up in a TPK (actually a total party capture because she's being nice) that she insists couldn't be avoided. (We let one of two guardman run away who got 3 more...for a total of a EL 7 for our second level party...granted we should've run away, but we didn't have that much of a chance (see to hit bonus). I suppose the best solution is for me to keep my trap shut, but if I have to do that, what is the best way to convince your DM to study not only the adventure she is working on, but also the basic rules of combat (by the way she is a long time 1e player, so that is a big part of it I think). I really want us to "just have fun" but I feel that the DM makes it a bit harder by getting so defensive when I put a rule forward, and I would have a lot more fun personally with a greater level of consistency with the RAW.
aleph_woodenglenn 04-03-05, 03:20 PM	I should add, after a rather lengthy yelling match, we decided that we should save almost all lookingup of rules til after the encounter, and that during the encounter I just have to deal with her rulings until we have the chance to slow down and look it up. I hope this will solve some issues, hoping I can just learn to grin and bear it. Any suggestions etc. would be very helpful.
weasel fierce 04-03-05, 04:06 PM	Ask a question to yourself. Does this error or change in the rules make the game less fun and exciting, or doesnt it matter ? If it impacts the game, and is ruining someones fun, or making things less interesting to play, then talk to her afterwards. If its not, or if its in fact making things more interesting, then she's doing it right ;) I'd personally not call surprise by more enemies entering a fight, but its more a DM call, than anything thats spelled out, I guess.
Daydreamer 04-04-05, 04:40 AM	the thing i find the most annoying is inconsistency. AS long as her rules allow for a resonable balanced game try to get her to be consistent with them so that at least you know what ur dealing with and can accomplish when she dms.
Sir Todd 04-04-05, 09:07 AM	This is tricky. One thing I do when I play under a GM that is inexperienced. Is I offer concise rules up to the GM during any situation where the GM is either doing it wrong or seems lost as to how to handle it. I say it completely including giving the name of the section of rules they can find the rule in. Then I tell them the ball is in the GMs court and shut up for the rest of the encounter. If the GM still does it wrong, then I take that into consideration the next time they want to run something. Waiting till after the game is never a good idea. But holding up play to 'ARGUE' about rulings is equally bad. It's best to simply get the RIGHT ruling into the GMs hands imediately and then back off and let them decide on their own. 'Why no waiting till after?' Because by then the damage is done. And its rare a GM ever undoes a bad thing. The lives of characters may indeed hang in the balance due to poor rulings. At the very least the enjoyment of the player getting the poor ruling is going to suffer in proportion to the effects of the violation. 'But why back off after simply reading out the rules? If your right you should back that up with relentless arguement right?' WRONG. It may feel right if your the one being shafted by a ruling. After all you aren't having fun anymore so why should it matter to you if the whole game drags to a stop for a heated arguement. Because of a couple big things: First, if your causing someone else to not have any fun by pressing an arguement. Then they are likely to not want to play with you anymore (even if they know the GM is wrong). Its not fun to have to watch people argue all the time. Especially if your not directly involved. And secondly, YOU may be in error on what you think is the right ruling! There are often things behind the scene that the GM may be doing that make it appear they are breaking some rule when in fact they aren't. And who knows, just maybe the GM has read the rules and either has a different view on how they work or actually understands it better than you do. For example drinking a potion while under the effects of displacement (50% concealment) or from behind cover does not provoke an AoO. Clearly then the only option is to imediately tell the GM what the rule is and then back off. Looking up a rule when its not your turn doesn't slow the game down. And may just allow enough time to prevent horrible things from happening too. But its always the GMs call. Just give them the info they need and stop. Another thing to consider... how often do people give up on their view once an arguement starts. Almost never. After things have cooled down they might admit they were wrong. But I know very few people who would back down even when they know they are wrong if it gets to the point of a full arguement. So your looking at the end of the game session... maybe even the end of the game itself if enough people are upset. Please show her this post, if you wish to follow my advice. Just remember to stop after offering the correct rule. If you make it clear your only offering some quick advice and don't want to stall the game then most GMs actually LIKE a rule savy person around. I know I liked it when I was new. Especially when they knew enough to stop.
Nom 04-04-05, 09:25 AM	Let's approach this slightly differently: How important are the tactical combat rules for you? Given a choice, is the "story" or the "game" more important? What about for her? If you're trying to play "wargaming with characters" and she's trying to play "story-oriented" then it's not surprising there is a problem. It's entirely possible that she doesn't even care for the details of the rules, and your harping on about them is just "getting in the way of the story". It's also possible that she's aware that she is not comfortable with the 3rd Ed combat rules, and feels embarrassed or uncomfortable when you keep pointing out her failures. In either of these cases, being a rules lawyer will make her less likely to follow your suggestions. Where to go from here? First, you need to get on her good side. She is the DM; you are a player. She needs to feel that you trust her to run the game. Second, you need to figure out what style of game you each want to play, and how these can mesh. Again, she is the one with the harder job, so cut her as much slack as you can manage. You might even like her play style. Finally, you can consider asking her if she's comfortable with the tactical rules, and - if not - what she'd like to do about it. Perhaps she would like rules assistance, but only if it supports rather than undermines her confidence and authority. Alternative, it may be better to severely cull the tactical rules and go more freeform. The order is important. Until she feels that you trust and respect her, she's not going to respond well to criticism, even if presented as "advice" or "suggestions".
aleph_woodenglenn 04-04-05, 10:39 AM	thank you so much for the advise. Looks like its may be time to eat crow, and let it ride. She is much more a RP savvy DM, and frankly I prefer that side too. I've just had a lot of game/sport experience being very competitive and rules-oriented, and while it is easier to push that aside in RP, it is much more difficult in combat (that feels more like us v. them). I feel like a heel because I think I made the last session nearly unbearable for both DM and the other player. Are there any suggestions on how to: a) make ammends for the sake of keeping the game together. b) encourage further learning of the rules while keeping a focus on the largescale storyline that both DM and PCs cherish...(ie still get the DM to read the rules a little closer.) that is to say, I know that I am right (because we all agree) that we need to learn the rules better, and I also realize that the rules are secondary to game play (or having a game to play at all). However, I prioritize the battles a touch higher than the DM, and thus the rules of combat (and the rules in general). I have a pretty good head for remembering rules, and love to study DnD books. Where is the line drawn between being as helpful as possible and trying to undermine the DM's game by being a rules lawyer (especially with a very self conscious DM who does very well, but feels like I don't appreciate it). I suspect the best thing for me is to stick to applying the rules to my characters, making my knowledge apply largely only to them. If the other players and DM want to be more lax about the RAW, then so be it, but I can do my best to remind about the rules when it comes to my characters (ie. Does my fighter get (or draw) an AoO there? or don't forget you gain a +1 bonus (have a -1 penalty) in that attack against me because... or I know I am drawing an AoO by doing this, but... or my sorcerer needs to roll a concentation check, right?...) and just let everything else go as it would. (this should help prevent alot of group metagaming too). For the next few sessions though I will do my best to be as putty-like as possible in the hands of my very creative and engaged DM, because I honestly love playing with her as DM, And I appreciate the need to let her know I trust her gameplay regardless of how far it strays from RAW.
strcpy 04-04-05, 12:06 PM	From my perspective. I DM a lot, and if my players point out mistakes, or think I am ruling something wrong they speak up. I... wait for it.... encourage them to do so. I have no problem with this. If I am doing something wrong I want my players to tell me what they think I am doing wrong. That way we get to the bottom of the issue, everyone is happy because we resolve the issue from the handbooks. So what if it temporarily stops play once in a while. And I tell you that when I am playing as a player and DM makes a blatent error I tell them about it. If a DM does not house rule something before play begins, then any deviations from the rules are mistakes. Anyway, if you have to stop play and lookup a rule. At least everyone at the table has learnt something new and it will never come up again. (hopefully)
pres_man 04-04-05, 01:33 PM	First a piece of advice for anyone, NEVER CHALLENGE SOMEONE'S AUTHORITY IN FRONT OF OTHERS! This goes for your boss at work, this goes for your teachers at school, and it most especially goes for your DM. Quite a few people feel the fact that what they are saying is true is enough for the person in "authority" to take it. If we were robots, that would be true, unfortunately (in this case) we are not. People naturally get defensive when challenged. So how do you deal with someone who is in error then? I must disagree with Sir Todd about waiting until after the session is over (to start with). I think until you and the person in "charge" can build a system of mutually respect it is best to wait till you are the only two present. Remember that usually most games run more than one session, so giving up one session where it is done wrong, so that you can discuss it afterwards to get the rest of the sessions right is often a good idea. Next, how should you give advice/corrections? Here Sir Todd was right, you might be wrong about the rule, even if you are absolutely sure you are right. It almost always best to start off any comment on the "correct" way the rules go with, "I think it works this way ..." or "I think I read the rules saying this ..." etc. Always leave open the idea that you have a certain view, but that you don't know if that view is absolutely correct. It shows humility and shows that if the person has a different view, you don't necessarily believe they are dumb for it. Once you build some trust between you and the person, and can prompt things politely. Then, yes start bring them up in game. "I think you have to make a touch attack first, right?" Also if everybody is doing something wrong, and you look it up, wait till the beginning of next session to say anything. "I think we were doing (blah) wrong last time." This way you don't anger the other players by changing things mid-session. As for what to do now. Just say, "I was being an arse last time, I'm sorry. In the future, I will try to be more respectful. I hope we can all be open to discussing the rules outside of game time. I'll still ask questions about how things affect my character, but I'll respect the DM's decisions until we get time to discuss it." Show you're the bigger person. And never say, "That's how I am, I can't change."
CzarGarrett 04-04-05, 01:40 PM	If you read the rules so much, then why did you forget Rule 0. Unless the mistake breaks the game, leave it be.
aleph_woodenglenn 04-04-05, 02:10 PM	If you read the rules so much, then why did you forget Rule 0. Unless the mistake breaks the game, leave it be.good point...(though some mistakes do tend to nearly break the game) I am not sure when we'll play next, but I think I'll write a note to self... This is NOT my game, I am but a player. I might have to say a little mantra...mmmm I am but a small part of her world....my character may die at her whim...the rules are at her discretion. mmmmmmm..... oh, I thought I should add...the DM is my wife...just thought that might shed some light on how it gets to be so sensitive. Then it lends itself to a very sticky emotional situation (ie her saying "you get like that EVERY time we play a game," and me "well...(passive aggressively) I just want to help us make the most of the gameplay" and then its more of a relationship thing than a DM/PC thing... some @#@#ed up love call-in show: "When you throw a rule in my face, I feel...." "When you ignore the rules and kill my player, I feel..." "I feel that you don't respect my DM style" "I feel that my ability to have fun in DnD is hindered by your disregard for the rules, and your lack of appreciation for some of the most basic DM concepts like EL, how to read a stat block, etc.") I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience. I think one of the problems is that I DM ( in the same group, mind you) more like strcopy. I ajudicate the rules with a lot of player feedback, and don't mind a player looking up a rule and putting it in front of my face. I am not sure if me looking up things I am uncertain about makes it too tedious for the players, but I try to do it while they are planning over the campfire, on the road, in the tavern, or elsewhere on their own when nothing I do really effects the gameplay. I basically ignore their in game talking, (if no NPCs would hear it...though I listen for excessive metagaming) and look up things I missed, or suspect I will need in the future. She keeps it moving a lot faster, less in-game chat, more NPC and game-world interaction. So, there is less time for her to look stuff up. Maybe I'll volunteer to be her ruleboy, and look things up if she has doubts (assuming they won't subvert the ever-important character ignorance). I spent a lot of time learning to DM in 3.5, and It seems a shame for me to sit on my thumbs when she could learn from my experience. Of course that is probably just a mask for me trying to control the situation. see? it is kinda a sticky situation.
pres_man 04-04-05, 03:16 PM	I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience. What I find interesting/humorous, is that it should be the other way around. As an experienced DM you should be more patient with her, as you have walked in those shoes. Too often though it is not, we having been through it, tend for some reason to be less lenient on those that come after us. Since it is your wife, I would say tell her, "Honey, I love you and don't want to mess up your game. I know the rules better since I've been where you are now. If you have a question, please ask me, I don't mind helping. I'm going to be a little sticky when it comes to my PC though, so please give me the benefit of the doubt when it comes to my PC. If your not sure why my PC is doing something, ask me. It could be that I'm assuming one thing and you're assuming something else." As an example of missed assumptions, the example of the blurred person drinking a potion. DM: The guy drinks a potion. PC: Well then I take my attack of opportunity on him. DM: Nope, you don't get it. PC: He's drinking a potion right, then I get it. DM: No, you don't. PC: Don't you know the rules, on p. (blah) it says (blah). DM and PC now at each others throats. Problem, DM assumed everybody knew the guy was blurred, the PC assumed that he should get an AoO, since he didn't realize the guy was blurred. Edit: You might also point out (nicely of course) that when switching DMs it is important that the rules stay constant. That way nobody's character concepts are ruined when a new DM steps in.
Nom 04-04-05, 09:52 PM	oh, I thought I should add...the DM is my wife...just thought that might shed some light on how it gets to be so sensitive. I can't blame her for getting defensive, but I think she should have patience with my impetuousness considering her inexperience.She is your wife, eh? No wonder there is a problem. She expects you to back her up, and instead she perceives (rightly or wrongly) that you're continually making her look bad by correcting her. Obviously, this applies to anyone, but it goes doubly your wife, and will likely be a lot more sensitive if she feels belittled by her husband than by anyone else (they are just being a jerk; you are betraying her). "I've made a big mistake, dear. I was trying to help you, but I can see it just made you feel threatened." Maybe I'll volunteer to be her ruleboy, and look things up if she has doubts (assuming they won't subvert the ever-important character ignorance).That's not a bad idea. The important thing is the perception that you are her assistant, not her supervisor.