So I have a couple of DMs I play with that like to argue against any player action that isn't outlined in black and white in the rulebook.
The problem with this is that it severely limits open-ended powers like illusion, or clever use of skills with classes like the Rogue or Bard.
The conventional method of dealing with this is of course to not play anything that would normally require the DM to reward creativity.
But I figured a lot of you might have similar experience with this sort of thing so I thought it'd be fun to start a discussion about it.
I know the canned answer about "How do I deal with person X" is to pull them aside and talk to them, but let's talk about other more subtle methods. In my own case, one of the DMs I deal with gets offended pretty easily and more stubborn as a result. Add in the fact that he's a relative and we're playing just to spend time together and you'll see why I put up with him rather than just walking out. Right now I'm just playing a fighter - which I enjoy - but again, I thought a discussion about this subject would be fun.
The game is all about imagination.
If the DM can't handle that... They suck as a DM.
It hard to offer advice without a specific example. Have you thought about being a GM and then you can show them how to do it better?
I was just about to suggest the same thing. Run a campaign yourself, and show them how its done. More often than not, inexperienced DM's will be afraid to allow creative actions on behalf of the players, because they are unsure how to rule such actions (since they aren't mentioned in the DMG). As a DM you should allow creativity, within reason. And thats the tricky part. Sometimes you do need to disallow something, to keep the game fair. But new DM's can often restrict themselves a bit too much to what the DMG dictates. So show them how its done.
I firmly believe one of the best things any D&D player or Dungeon Master can do is watch the Acquisitions Inc games. They show how creative and stellar a DM can be, in all ends of the spectrum. Then again, I'm also a complete Chris Perkins fanboy.
Archon007 wrote:
As a relative, I would pull him aside and explain to him that being a control freak DM and shutting down the imagination and creativity of the people he plays with is not a good way to play this game. Ask him to calm down and allow players to use their abilities for creativity. It's more rewarding for everyone involved. You've mentioned this person is stubborn and becomes easily offended. Subtlety won't work if he's stubborn. The best way to resolve this issue is to deal with it head on. Help him understand. It's very possible that he won't be able to, if that's the case, you're going to have to make a choice. Either continue dealing with this person or not. Considering you're at the point of asking for help to resolve this issue, maybe you should take the hint and find other ways to spend time with this relative, or better yet, put some distance between the two of you so he can understand that his behavior isn't favorable to spending time together. You haven't given clear examples, but try to gauge my response by what it's actually like for you. Can you continue to put up with it? If yes, for how long? How do the other players react/feel about this? If you can't then you have choices to make. As a group, if you all feel the same way and want him to relax and stop being such a control freak, you have the right to tell him to step down from DM for a while to cool down from his power tripping. Maybe he can be a DM again at another time.
Improvised actions that are not covered by the rules are - - covered by the rules. 
Sidebar, top of p.193 of the PHB. or bottom of p.72 of the Basic Players PDF.
So if the DM says "No, swinging from the chandelier is not in the rules, you can't do it." then he's not playing by the rules. That's not fun. If he says "Okay, make a Dexterity check" and decides that it's DC15, then that's fine. He's playing the game by the rules and that's fun. You might or might not succeed with your dice roll, but that's not the point. The point is that you are allowed to try.
The advice of talking to your DM may be "canned," but that's only because it's the most direct way of resolving the problem and, in my experience, the most sure way (however it may turn out).
In addition to that, is it common at your table for someone to say "I use my Deception skill to bluff my way past the guard..." or "I tumble past the guy with my Acrobatics?" Or to otherwise try to "use" or "activate" a skill or class feature or justify an action with a rule?
If so, stop doing that. Instead, make clear your (reasonable) goal and approach, then wait for adjudication. For example, "I lie to the guard in an effort to get past him, telling that I was invited by the Queen herself..." or "I try to somersault past this guy, trying to avoid his attacks as I go for my sword." Now wait. Those are both reasonable things a fictional person could do. It's on the DM to decide if the results of those actions are uncertain and, if so, to call for an ability check. He might otherwise say it's successful or fails. See what happens. The same thing goes for illusions. "I cast a minor illusion of a rabbit to try and trick the wolf into walking into the snare." Then wait for adjudication. If your table is used to doing things the way I described above, changing over to this approach instead might have the desired effect.
Still, talk to the guy.
I am with Iserith. This problem requires politely pulling him aside and talking to him. If he gets upset, the only way to resolve the problem is to tell him politely that you are sorry you made him upset, and you think it would be best if you guys spent time doing something else--maybe playing a nice dungeon crawling boardgame like Castle Ravenloft, or the upcoming Elemental Evil game, or Descent. Those game's don't require creativity. Hopefully, if you couple this process with being polite, he will get the point and change his ways. Possibly, you will end up playing a boardgame in order to spend time with your family instead of D&D.
It has been my experience that gaming with family makes it easier to talk through any problems that arise at the table... but perhaps that is a trait that results from my family's attitude (we value people being up front and honest about things so that they can be fixed if a fix is possible, rather than letting resentments stew) and is not inherent to all families.
I know that when I have a non-family member creating issues at the table I try to handle the situation as politely and delicately as possible. When it is a family member creating an issue, my response is much more immediate and blunt, such as saying "Tim, quit being a [colorful term for male genitalia] before you spoil the game for everybody else."
jaappleton wrote:
I always look at the game from this perspective as a DM: if the player wants to do an epic, flying, hurled-over-the-castle-walls-by-catapult, charging attack and use his acrobatic to absorb some of the impact I will always allow it. The worst that can happen is that the piece of paper that comprises the numbers of the BBEG is done being used and the players all have a wickedly cool story to tell. Did I set the numbers too low? Too high? Who cares? I can make the next one tougher or easier depending on the situation and knowledge I gained DMing the first thing. Just make sure not to make an action need a bunch of rolls to accomplish. Telling a player "Yes you can try it" and then asking for an engineering check to use the catapult, an acrobatics check to be able to attack while hurtling through the air, an attack roll to hit, then a perception check to see if you can grab/swing/kick off of something to break your fall, then another acrobatics roll to tuck and reduce damage and you may as well just tell the player NO. An attack roll to hit and an acrobatics roll to lessen damage to the character is sufficient to set the mood.
Had our DM tell a player he could do something last week and then just kept asking for rolls(3or 4 I think) until he failed....it sucked and it instantly told the entire table that creativity will not be tolerated. I know that with that DM I am limited to what is in the book for actions and that's it. I am currently forming a game that I will be running and half the players will be joining me (we have 10 people in our group).
Even if you are a DM who says yes, make sure that yes is a real and honest yes and not a yes wrapped up in a bunch of no's.
I suggest DMing yourself and showing him how to do what you want him to do. Sounds like talking is not going to work.
5e is actually very easy to improvise with. Most actions already have something similar you can borrow from - disarming is there, climbing, jumping, tumbling etc (inc DMG options). You can usually improvise something based off what's there, adv/disad and flat +1 to +3 modifiers.
Vahnyu wrote:
KaptainKrunch wrote:
The flip side is the player who has decided they are creative, so they get to win now.
It depends on whether as a player you are willing to compromise on the result you wanted.
If you don't want to compromise and feel your creative effort should get every effect you imagine it aught to, then you're being as stubborn as your GM is. Given you're related, that's probably why.
Give a specific example of what you wanted to do and I could give a compromise example to go with it.
The first step is you being able to compromise - the next is him being able to.