a matter of respect

[big teej]

every group is different.

what is an accepted "given" practice (How else would you do it?" in one group is taboo (you did what!?!) in another.

both in character and out of character.

so I"m curious.

what "code" does your group work with?

what examples of people breaking this code can you give?

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a DM?
what sorts of things just get under your skin as a Player?
a rant may be in the works.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

You find out when going to a new group. You ask, you learn. What you do after that is up to you alone, but you should try to find out.

[Ephiel]

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a DM?
what sorts of things just get under your skin as a Player?

As a DM, it bothers me when my players refuse to do the appropriate amount of bookwork. This seems like it's pretty common among the people I've played with. On the flipside though, the person who does too much bookwork is just as bad.

When I have to spend any more than 10 seconds explaining to a player why he can or can't take a specific course of action/cast a spell/make a move/do something absurd, it's taken far too long.



As a Player, it bugs me when DM's are too rigid. D&D is a game, it is not law school. In many cases though, when a player tries to do something fun and the DM says "I dunno... Let me look that up," and the pacing halts violently, it's frustrating. In my mind, a DM should be more focused on maintaining the pace of the game than being a funsponge.

[kardar233]

Know your character. If it takes you a whole minute to figure out their skill modifier, you're doing it wrong.

You say your character does it, and unless you mention immediately after that you were kidding, you did it. If the DM says something like "Are you sure?" and you go through with it, too bad. No take-backs.

No grudges carried between games or characters. I've seen people get into fights over trivial things in one game, and then inexplicably hold a massive grudge in another one.

Play your goddamn character. Too many people play a "tough-guy soldier like the sergeant from Halo" and then expeditiously retreat when more than goblins show up.

Unlike a lot of groups, we don't disallow PvP. If your characters have something that needs hashing out, then go right ahead. Be warned though: authority figures (including, sometimes, other players) can and will step in. If the Druid and the Ranger are having a catfight (figuratively or literally, if they're a wildshape ranger) on my ship, I'm going to get involved, and don't be surprised if you get a flogging too. Just don't hold grudges between characters, as noted above. Don't take years doing it. If you die to another character, don't yell and scream OP. If you have indirect PvP, like some scheming that's going on or something, don't drag the rest of us into it unless it deals with us too.

Give the rules a read through before playing. You don't have to memorize the Attack of Opportunity or Grappling rules, leave that to us. Just learn what a full-round, a standard, a move and a free action mean. Also, it's good to get people to fill out their character sheets themselves, which ties into my next point.

If you have to roll a new PC, don't monopolize the GM's attention while he's dealing with the rest of us. Asking if, say, War Hulk is OK is fine, but don't incessantly ask "How many spells per day do I get as a Cleric5?". You have a damn table right there.

Think that covers most things. Oh, and be very clear as to what is IC and OOC.

[King Atticus]

My biggest thing is a player demanding skill checks on something another player is doing. It completely undermines the authority of the DM and is really annoying. I'm fine with helping the DM with a rule clarification if they ask for it but until that point it's their game and they can run it however they want.

[kardar233]

Oh, and as a DM, I disallow social skill use on other PCs and major NPCs. You're in a roleplaying game, I'd like to see some.

[big teej]

Oh, and as a DM, I disallow social skill use on other PCs and major NPCs. You're in a roleplaying game, I'd like to see some.

oooh. I like this.

I may have to steal it.

[Honest Tiefling]

My standard group contains my sister and her fellow, so rather close knit. I do not think we've ever settled on any formal code persay, but go under the guideline that you do not undermine others nor do PvP without some form of out of character communication. And you give your character a reason to work with the group

I think this has sprang from all three of us playing with others and not really enjoying the PvP aspect, and having different levels of competence with game systems. The game systems also change around, so no one wants to go through character creation multiple times.

Through we often fall into the Contoller Wizard/Tank Fighter/'Guy actually allowed to speak to others' paradigm a lot I've noticed. This helps as the first two knock out two or more roles in different RPGs allowing for a more flexible third.

What bothers me constantly is being told that a mechanic that I have based my character around doesn't work like it should after I make the PC. To use an example from above, if a DM wants me to RP speaking with others and not use my diplomacy skill, this is alright. Just please tell me before I make up my character and invest in these skills. If you want my character to pick up these skills if I will attempt diplomacy and RP the encounters, this is also alright. But tell me beforehand. Or when I make a mage/rogue based around ray spells and get told that sneak attack doesn't get added to the damage.

[big teej]

in lieu of a rant, I've a question.

does anyone have any tips on how to handle a talk with a player about undermining the DMs authority?

[Solaris]

in lieu of a rant, I've a question.

does anyone have any tips on how to handle a talk with a player about undermining the DMs authority?

You sit them down and you move your mouth some. I understand something about vibrating your vocal cords is pretty important, too.

[PollyOliver]

in lieu of a rant, I've a question.

does anyone have any tips on how to handle a talk with a player about undermining the DMs authority?

It probably depends a lot on what they're doing. Intentional or just incidental, for one? Specifics would help.

[big teej]

It probably depends a lot on what they're doing. Intentional or just incidental, for one? Specifics would help.

constantly questioning if "I'm doing things right"
insisting on checking on the rules (after I've made a ruling)*

the player constantly takes issue with our.... 'stylist clash' in DM style.

...I'm not quite sure how to articulate the nature of the problem....

*specifics

Spoiler

Show

a question on 5 foot steps came up. and I couldn't track down the rules for it in 15 seconds, so I made a call and moved on. immidietly a player/DM stood up and went and started leafing through my books.
I told him that I wasn't going to bog the game down looking it up "doesn't mater, I'm checking"

things like this.

[PollyOliver]

Ah, that's a little tricky. On the off chance you're wrong and it affects the player's character adversely, things can get heated.

One thing you can do is just lay the ground rule that when you're DMing and have to make a call on the fly for the sake of keeping a session moving, the call stands until the end of the session and you can talk about it later. The problem again is if you do get it wrong and it results in something like a player death. My old RL DM knew the rules very well, but his normal rule was that if you could prove him wrong before it was your turn again, he'd change his ruling, but after that the ruling stood until the end of the session or the mid-session snack break.

It sounds from your description like this other player is a DM. You could try pointing out that in general you respect this player when they are DMing (assuming you've played with them DMing before) and that they need to do the same. Point out how disruptive it would be if you questioned them repeatedly even after they've made a final ruling on a subject and how damaging to the flow of the session it could be if they had to stop and re-adjudicate every ruling they made repeatedly because one player wouldn't take their answer for an answer. I'd imagine that if they DM, they will understand this argument. But there also needs to be some give and take. If they are in fact right, you need to recognize that (either on the spot if they can show it quickly, or after the session otherwise), otherwise it'll probably build resentment and a "my DM doesn't know the rules" feeling, even if you're correct on 99 rulings out of 100.

[big teej]

Ah, that's a little tricky. On the off chance you're wrong and it affects the player's character adversely, things can get heated..

in my defense, I made the call that benefited them to be on the safe side.
player still got up and started checking

notethe following conversation is not verbatim
I told him "I've made my call"
response: "I'm looking anyways"
me: "I made the call in your favor"
player:" I'm looking anyways":
me: -growing frusterated/indignant- "why are you challenging a call in your favor.
player: "I wanna check it cause it matters"
me: -raising my voice- "why are you challenging a call I made in your favor. I ruled that it DOESN'T PROVOKE. EVER. and that I will look it up later.
player: -closes book- oh. okay then.

One thing you can do is just lay the ground rule that when you're DMing and have to make a call on the fly for the sake of keeping a session moving, the call stands until the end of the session and you can talk about it later. The problem again is if you do get it wrong and it results in something like a player death. My old RL DM knew the rules very well, but his normal rule was that if you could prove him wrong before it was your turn again, he'd change his ruling, but after that the ruling stood until the end of the session or the mid-session snack break.

I think I may do this. the problem is getting the group/player to abide by it.
also: in my defense (ha, ha, ha,)
if I ever made a call and it resulted in a PC death/maiming, and I later discovered I was wrong.
I'd retcon the hell out of it and fix it.

unfortunately I don't think I could implement the "prove me wrong by your next turn" policy. they wouldn't stop, they'd keep looking and say "hold on" when it got around to their turn.

It sounds from your description like this other player is a DM. You could try pointing out that in general you respect this player when they are DMing (assuming you've played with them DMing before) and that they need to do the same. Point out how disruptive it would be if you questioned them repeatedly even after they've made a final ruling on a subject and how damaging to the flow of the session it could be if they had to stop and re-adjudicate every ruling they made repeatedly because one player wouldn't take their answer for an answer. I'd imagine that if they DM, they will understand this argument. But there also needs to be some give and take. If they are in fact right, you need to recognize that (either on the spot if they can show it quickly, or after the session otherwise), otherwise it'll probably build resentment and a "my DM doesn't know the rules" feeling, even if you're correct on 99 rulings out of 100.

he is, he actually put this group together (partly on my behalf, as I'm home for the summer)
he plays with most (maybe all) of these players 2-4 other times a week. and he DMs them for at least half of those (by my understanding)

and I think I'll use this, next time it happens I think I'll point this out.

again: in my defense.

I consider myself a very reasonable man. hard, but fair.

if the player can show me I was wrong, or show me a "better way" to do something, I'm more than likely to go with it.

my issue stems largely from disrespectful objections and undermining my authority.

my understanding is that I have a much.... "harsher" style than this player/DM. but from what I see from behind the screen, he's the only one that takes issue with it.

* for the record, "harsher" isn't a good word for what I'm after, I just don't know what one is.


I imagine I've been ninja'd by now.

[PollyOliver]

I find that as a DM it's helpful to have the mindset that whatever authority you have is ultimately for the purpose of making the game run smoothly and be fun, not for the purpose of being "king of the table". I imagine you're not actually power hungry or anything, but repeatedly mentioning "[your] authority" on the subject kind of gives that impression (again, I realize you probably aren't and it's just a figure of speech, but it's kind of the impression it gives, and the other player might be getting it too). Your job as the DM is to make the game fair and fun and keep it moving. It's fine to use your authority to that purpose, and it's fine to have a "harsher" style than another DM in order to do this, but go too nuts and people will push back--it's human nature.

Not every objection is disrespectful, and not every question about your rulings is intended to undermine you. It might be disrupting--in fact, it probably is--but I wouldn't start from the premise that the player is trying to undermine you or show your disrespect, but rather that they, as someone who also DMs, cares about getting it right, and that they're acting on that without really thinking about how it affects your ability to keep the game running. So by all means, approach them about it, but I'd start by keeping in mind that they probably aren't trying to undermine you. Point out how it would feel if you did the same when they were DMing and how it affects your ability to keep the game moving, and hopefully they will understand.

If they are doing it for that purpose, of course, that's an entirely different story. Harsh away.

[King Atticus]

How does that not bother the other players at the table? That would annoy the hell outta me and I'd call him out on it. In fact I did this (as a player) in the last session I played in. It was actually on the skill usage issue I mentioned earlier. IMO The only thing worse than a DM stopping the game for an hour to look up a rule is a player doing it. I think you're in the right brutha, but unless someone else steps up and says something about it, it'll just turn into

Spoiler

Show

[ExemplarofAvg]

Back Story, Motivation, Character Goals....
Yes I understand you rolled a critical, good for you, but why did you attack that townsperson. You can try to bluff your way out of the fine yes, but listen to the alternative, it's a side-quest... because y'know three seconds in and you guys decided to ignore the giant rock that fell out of the sky. And when the second one fell you were too busy mugging the guards, kind of odd behaviour for a cleric of Bahamut, y'know what your god forsakes you, no more spells for you Glenn CoCo, yes I think that's fair, you went against your deity's wishes, no it was not just this one time, it's multiple times, like when you stabbed the priest, burned down the bar, broke your friend out of jail, and now you're mugging a town guard.... no you cannot have a dragon!, yes? what is it? I understand your injured, if your cleric would heal you it would be faster... yes I know he can't heal you because I took his spells away, but if I give them back he will try to kill you, go find a healer... roll a search, or a gather information, or a spot... y'know what there's a healer right in front of you, roll a spot of 1, that's it..... (rolls) there you go, you found him, are you healed yet no, he requires you pay him, or do some servic...... no, you cannot kill him... go ahead roll, the healer was really a dragon and now it's pissed... no it's not your dragon... ... .... .... y'know what this sucks a third giant rock crushes you all I'm off to go play outside.


Sadly enough this is a recounting from one of my actual campaigns... One is dragon obsessed, but is playing a Lawful Good Cleric of Bahamut, as some murder obsessed clown.. and the other get's on my nerves because he doesn't know basic combat stuff, but still tries to use it relying fully on my knowledge of it sometimes it gets a little much grappling is the worst of it, I've ruled it myself, I've wrote it down for him, I've let him borrow my copy of the PHB to study the rules he hasn't got it yet, I'm not sure he will. And so I crushed them left for an hour or two, came back, moved the boulder off of them and gave them a second shot... It isn't a common occurrence that I target my players, but when I do it's well deserved. and more than a little bit satisfying,

I want a player who knows the basics, who has an idea of who their character is and what they want, I want a player who knows what his spells do and doesn't go searching for them. I want a player who doesn't loudly yell "I Hide" whenever he walks in somewhere, I get that is a class feature but I mean everywhere and loudly. I want a player who will not whine when the campaign does not centre around him. I want a game that when it ends everyone is still on good terms with each other. I want a DM who doesn't railroad and throws more than just combat.

I want a nap.

[NecroRick]

* for the record, "harsher" isn't a good word for what I'm after, I just don't know what one is.

Dictatorial? :D

Occasionally I will find that no one at the table knows how something works, so I'll look it up:

Not with a view to undermine the DM or interrupt or rewind the game to the previous action, or slow down the game, but so that the _next_ time it comes up I'm ready and prepared to explain it in the most clear fashion that I can. Even so, as a player, I treat the DMG as verbotten during the session. So I'll only look stuff up from the PHB or similar.

As a DM I'd just wing it.

I've run into two main archetypes of players lately:
(a) munchkins and happy/proud of it
(b) ex-DMs who use their rules knowledge to throw monkey wrenches into what other players are trying to do, and then when confronted about it they act all innocent and say they were just trying to help

The munchkins are probably the easier of the two groups to handle, you just say "no" to the really outrageous stuff, and you try to put a cool spin on everything else...

... if you can transition them from trying to have the most powerfulezt karakter evar to having the _coolest_ character ever... then you've got something.

The ex-DMs are more difficult, because they never stop sitting there thinking "that's not how _I_ would do it". Also, after years of beating down the rules-lawyers they have _become_ the rules lawyers, especially if they have come to the conclusion that the rules are perfect, and there is only one obvious interpretation, and it is their interpretation.

[McSmack]

I think sometimes it's difficult for someone who's used to DM'ing to step out of that role fully. I find that when I'm playing I reflexively answer player's questions that are directed to the DM. Sometimes it's okay, it means that they GM can continue with his work without much interruption. But at times it can be a bit awkward because the GM calls all the shots.

I had this happen once in a PbP game. Another player (everyone but me was pretty inexperienced) asked what to roll for his healing potion. I responded that the standard healing potion was 1d8+1 (the party was lvl 1 so I was pretty sure he wouldn't have anything better.) The GM responded that it was actually 3d6+4. I have no idea where he got this, but he's the boss.

So I'd go easy on the guy. From your description it seemed like a minor thing. I'd point out that you'd prefer it if he'd not look up rules about your rulings during the session because you'd rather just go with one thing and then look it up later so as to keep the story moving. But you appreciate his help.

Or if you're feeling saucy you can remind him that it's not a democracy, it's a Teej-tatorship, and he'd best remember that.

[thuigsinn]

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a DM?

Players wanting and attempting to play characters with infinite stats, skills, attacks, being an untouchable war blaster, etc. Optimization cheese taken to obsessive levels. Just because you can be some faerun-monster with multiple half-(monster) templates with a caster level in the thousands doesn't mean you should. At all.

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a Player?

DMs not allowing enough flexibility. I love D&D for the ability to do what you want and be creative. There shouldn't be a one-true-way method of getting to the end goal.

You have darkvision? It's too dark for darkvision! You have natural fast healing? your very first opponent (at 8th level) wish'es it off you.

[darksolitaire]

note[/B]the following conversation is not verbatim
I told him "I've made my call"
response: "I'm looking anyways"
me: "I made the call in your favor"
player:" I'm looking anyways":
me: -growing frusterated/indignant- "why are you challenging a call in your favor.
player: "I wanna check it cause it matters"
me: -raising my voice- "why are you challenging a call I made in your favor. I ruled that it DOESN'T PROVOKE. EVER. and that I will look it up later.
player: -closes book- oh. okay then.

This is the part where you're walking on thin ice. Of course, I don't know your group, but in mine raising your voice would be surest way to immediately make you the one who is overreacting.

The matter that I believe that is the most important, is respect. One must understand that there is a reason said person does what he does, and trust that person's judgement to act as he does.*

While I was on military service, we were taught that good leaders do not have poor subordinates. This proverb simply means that people should refrain from judging others. I believe that this manifests in role playing too. If something goes awry, search the reason from yourself first.

My group happens to be in a position where we cannot pick our players, and all of us have known each other for a long time, while being relatively new to D&D. We're all running campaigns as DMs while also being players. One thing I claim to be unquestionably true is that changing the role from DM to player and player to DM is very broadening.

my 2 cents.

*Some players should not be trusted, ever. No, not even then.

[Serpentine]

Oh, and as a DM, I disallow social skill use on other PCs and major NPCs. You're in a roleplaying game, I'd like to see some.

The first bit's actually RAW, I believe - you can't use Bluff, Diplomacy and so on against fellow PCs. I allow it, so long as there's nothing nasty and everyone's fine with it.

My code's pretty simple: Fun is king. No messing with other people's fun. No trying to break my game.
Only had it violated once. He got bored in a city (which I did handle very, very poorly), so he decided to leave the party and go pissing about. It was with a guy I didn't particularly like, and he pretty clearly wasn't fitting in with my gamestyle, so I didn't worry about negotiating about it and just removed him from the group.

[big teej]

Dictatorial? :D

-shifty eyes-
nooooooooooooo.



nah, I wouldn't call it more dictorial.

the only comparison I feel that even approaches what I'm trying to describe is.

the other DMs style seems to boil down to "Okay, I've set you up for your moment of awesome, now have at it."

and my style is more.

"here's the situation. MAKE your moment."

again, not as descriptive as I'd like. but it does seem to be a recurring difference.

Occasionally I will find that no one at the table knows how something works, so I'll look it up:

Not with a view to undermine the DM or interrupt or rewind the game to the previous action, or slow down the game, but so that the _next_ time it comes up I'm ready and prepared to explain it in the most clear fashion that I can. Even so, as a player, I treat the DMG as verbotten during the session. So I'll only look stuff up from the PHB or similar.

this isn't something I have a problem with.
heck, I do the same thing.

The ex-DMs are more difficult, because they never stop sitting there thinking "that's not how _I_ would do it". Also, after years of beating down the rules-lawyers they have _become_ the rules lawyers, especially if they have come to the conclusion that the rules are perfect, and there is only one obvious interpretation, and it is their interpretation.

this seems to be the crux of the issue from where I'm sitting behind the screen. I do things differently, and it seems to drive him up the walls sometimes.

although I like to think of myself as a Lawful Good Rules Lawyer. if a dispute comes up, I'll go with what I think is the most accurate definition of the rules, regardless of how it impacts my character.

but I doubt I'm a "rules lawyer" I haven't had to beat down many of them.

I think sometimes it's difficult for someone who's used to DM'ing to step out of that role fully. I find that when I'm playing I reflexively answer player's questions that are directed to the DM. Sometimes it's okay, it means that they GM can continue with his work without much interruption. But at times it can be a bit awkward because the GM calls all the shots.

yea, I've developed that habit as well in my school group. mostly because I'm the founder and the most familiar with the rules. and the other DM took the job on the premise of "you worry about crafting your story, if you get hung up on the rules I'm here to help you"

but he's learning. he's probably.... 3rd most adept in the rules if you don't count me.
the only people ahead of him are 1) the only other player at the table with existing dnd 3.5 experience. and 2) the guy who just absorbs rules quickly.

that aside, if a question is directed at the DM I tend to not speak up unless my input is asked for.

So I'd go easy on the guy. From your description it seemed like a minor thing. I'd point out that you'd prefer it if he'd not look up rules about your rulings during the session because you'd rather just go with one thing and then look it up later so as to keep the story moving. But you appreciate his help.

this is likely what I'll do.

Or if you're feeling saucy you can remind him that it's not a democracy, it's a Teej-tatorship, and he'd best remember that.

I approve of this statement, it made me laugh.

I might sig this if it's okay with you.

This is the part where you're walking on thin ice. Of course, I don't know your group, but in mine raising your voice would be surest way to immediately make you the one who is overreacting.

allow me to clarify.

I was raising my voice to get his attention. as he was ignoring me. especially the part about "in your favor"

the basis of his continued looking in the book was him mis-hearing something I said and he'd be damned if he didn't look it up to prove me wrong.
because god forbid I make a call that harms the players.

what I had said was "we'll say 5 foot steps NEVER provoke, and I'll double check it later."

what he heard was "we'll say 5 foot steps provoke sometimes."

so when I started trying to inform hiim of this. he kept ignoring me. leading
to my frusteration and putting a louder emphasis on. IN YOUR FAVOR.

it also irked me when he stopped after that. because that said to me it was more about "proving teej wrong" than "lets see what's right"

the latter is always okay. the former is simply disrespectful.

The matter that I believe that is the most important, is respect. One must understand that there is a reason said person does what he does, and trust that person's judgement to act as he does.*

and what does one do when that understanding and respect is lacking? (or apparently so?)

My group happens to be in a position where we cannot pick our players, and all of us have known each other for a long time, while being relatively new to D&D. We're all running campaigns as DMs while also being players. One thing I claim to be unquestionably true is that changing the role from DM to player and player to DM is very broadening.

in and of itself? or it can be a broadening experience?

I've found it greatly illuminating personally. I enjoy watching other people DM (and then pestering them/picking their brains after a session) because it helps me get better.

*Some players should not be trusted, ever. No, not even then.

I've met those players.....


bet I've been ninja'd by now.

EDIT: wasn't ninja'd but I did forget to respond to some people. and I will later.

[darksolitaire]

allow me to clarify.

I was raising my voice to get his attention. as he was ignoring me. especially the part about "in your favor"

the basis of his continued looking in the book was him mis-hearing something I said and he'd be damned if he didn't look it up to prove me wrong.
because god forbid I make a call that harms the players.

what I had said was "we'll say 5 foot steps NEVER provoke, and I'll double check it later."

what he heard was "we'll say 5 foot steps provoke sometimes."

so when I started trying to inform hiim of this. he kept ignoring me. leading
to my frusteration and putting a louder emphasis on. IN YOUR FAVOR.

it also irked me when he stopped after that. because that said to me it was more about "proving teej wrong" than "lets see what's right"

the latter is always okay. the former is simply disrespectful.

My pardon, I didn't grasp this. I might'we appeared more antagonizing with my response then I intended to. Sorry.

I originally recognized my reaction in that player; I simply hate doing something wrong, such as my character surviving something that might have been fatal blow, by not knowing the rules.

and what does one do when that understanding and respect is lacking? (or apparently so?)

That's a good question, really. If you're conversational type, I'd advise you two to sit down and converse about this. Might not work, at all. My second idea would be to have your player try his hand as a DM. Being responsible for providing fun for a group of people might also make him come to his senses. Also, might not work.

Being immeasurably patient...that might work.

For my campaign, I always try to have both pre- and post game talks around each sessions, in which our group discusses the pro's and con's of what's happening. But then, as I said, we all know each other, and can be pretty open.

in and of itself? or it can be a broadening experience?

I've found it greatly illuminating personally. I enjoy watching other people DM (and then pestering them/picking their brains after a session) because it helps me get better.

You've expressed my idea better then I managed. But I have a hard time imagining how it could not be broadening (perhaps if you don't even try?).

My comment about not trusting some players was intended to be humor.

[Ursus the Grim]

what "code" does your group work with?

Generally, I think the group has to consult with everyone before doing anything story or strategy-related. This can bog things down but almost every action is determined.

Movement and initiative out of combat doesn't matter. This only actually comes to mind because one player likes to try to do a thousand things when exploring, but other smarter players think it out first. So it matters if Bob sprung the trap because Jenny had just found the bypass.

what examples of people breaking this code can you give?

A threw a bored sphinx who was looking for news of the outside world at them. They assumed it to be riddles, but, as a player quickly noted, it was more "how much have we payed attention to the plot?". While they managed to answer the first two questions well enough (he knew the answer), they failed a bluff check on the third one.

Afterwards, they yelled at me because the one player blurted it out in character out of frustration and I hadn't asked "is that your final answer?" and made sure the group was okay with it. But in character, she hadn't consulted, she just blurted it out. For the record, neither they nor their characters could recall the answer, and the sphinx could tell they didn't.

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a DM?

Players not knowing their character. This has been posted before, but I have a few players with terrible characters because they can't remember exactly what goes into what, and instead of keeping the total written down, they have to go through every time to figure out their modifiers. On the flip side, there is one player who we specifically helped create a character for, with total modifiers and everything, who confuses, say, base attack and total attack bonus. So she adds her Strength twice, for instance, for a standard melee attack roll.

I also prefer that players not use character generators for a few reasons. It often doesn't account for WBL. It is often in a confusing, unclear format. It doesn't account for homebrewing and house rules. It prevents players from learning how to do it. Finally, it takes the visceral feel of rolling die out of it.

The same goes for automatic die rollers.

OH, and players who forget their dice but won't use any others. I had a player drive back home (about 40 minute round trip) because she forgot her dice and wouldn't touch someone else's, delaying the session even more.

Player unpreparation in general. Its one thing if you're good at character creation and its a first level one shot. But when I've been telling you for weeks about the next campaign, posting docs to a facebook page walking you through character creation at that level and informing you of the campaign setting, I don't want to spend an hour and a half the next session holding your hand when we should be playing. This is especially problematic because, for a while, we got a new player every week.

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a Player?

DMs not knowing the rules. If the situation is likely to come up in the adventure especially. If I'm DMing and I have a constrictor snake in the dungeon, I'd be an idiot not to refresh my memory of grappling. If you're throwing an evil wizard at us, please know ahead of time what spells you plan on casting and what they do.

"I'm the DM and I said so. My world, my rules," ie, the 'Rule Zero:STFU Players'. Rage. Sooooo much rage.

[Kenneth]

what sorts of things just get under your skin as a DM?
what sorts of things just get under your skin as a Player?
a rant may be in the works.

What gets under my skin as a DM is when my players do not use the knowledge their characters have when asking questions to npcs. Example they started the Fright at Tristor adventure and had ruled our pretty early that a demon was behind the mutilations and murders. but what do they keep on asking every fregging NPC? ' what can you tell us about any demons?" Oh and the whole using OOC knowledge in game.
there are actally a lot of things that players do that irritate me, like playing a rouge then causing a huge fuss over no tbeing able to sneak attack the skeleton, etc. motsly idiotic things

what enrages me about a DM is when he/she tries to bring in real world physics in D&D, or tries to put an definite behind the abstract terms Hit Points, AC etc.

[big teej]

I forgot to reply to some people. and there is new stuff....

sooo

I find that as a DM it's helpful to have the mindset that whatever authority you have is ultimately for the purpose of making the game run smoothly and be fun, not for the purpose of being "king of the table". I imagine you're not actually power hungry or anything, but repeatedly mentioning "[your] authority" on the subject kind of gives that impression (again, I realize you probably aren't and it's just a figure of speech, but it's kind of the impression it gives, and the other player might be getting it too). Your job as the DM is to make the game fair and fun and keep it moving. It's fine to use your authority to that purpose, and it's fine to have a "harsher" style than another DM in order to do this, but go too nuts and people will push back--it's human nature.

I suppose it does come off that way doesn't it? heh.

well, I'll put it down to a failure of vocabulary. the core premises of my DM style are essentially as follows.

I'm the Dungeon Master, what I say, goes.
I reserve the right to smite and refuse anything I wish.
My job is to make sure each and every one of my players has a great time.
items 1 and 2 are used in persuit of item 3

hm...
I can't remember how I phrased that to my school group. but that was basically it.

Not every objection is disrespectful, and not every question about your rulings is intended to undermine you. It might be disrupting--in fact, it probably is--but I wouldn't start from the premise that the player is trying to undermine you or show your disrespect, but rather that they, as someone who also DMs, cares about getting it right, and that they're acting on that without really thinking about how it affects your ability to keep the game running. So by all means, approach them about it, but I'd start by keeping in mind that they probably aren't trying to undermine you. Point out how it would feel if you did the same when they were DMing and how it affects your ability to keep the game moving, and hopefully they will understand.

agreed, totally. and I am (I like to think) very open to people double checking me.

however. Tone and fashion matters.

for example
there is a vast difference between "hey, are you sure this is right?"
and
"dude, that's wrong/not how it works/no way man"

how's that old quote go? 10 percent what you say and 90 percent how you say it?

the reason I'm opperating under the (perhaps slightly mistaken) premise of he's trying to undermine me is his tone and body language.
both scream things like "you're an idiot" "I'm way better at this than you"

these are the things I'm taking issue with.
and given the player's intelligence. I can't help but feel he knows the difference.

If they are doing it for that purpose, of course, that's an entirely different story. Harsh away.

quite so. thankfully I've never had a situation devolve so drastically.

How does that not bother the other players at the table? That would annoy the hell outta me and I'd call him out on it. In fact I did this (as a player) in the last session I played in. It was actually on the skill usage issue I mentioned earlier. IMO The only thing worse than a DM stopping the game for an hour to look up a rule is a player doing it. I think you're in the right brutha, but unless someone else steps up and says something about it, it'll just turn into

Spoiler

Show

I approve of this image.

-ahem-

I would imagine because they're used to being in charge.

I'm the Outsider at the table. the player in question is my only connection to the rest of the players.

every other player at the table is somewhere between completely new and "very" new. so that combined with the fact he's usually they're DM probably contributes to their silence.

...did I spell silence correctly? it looks wierd...

My pardon, I didn't grasp this. I might'we appeared more antagonizing with my response then I intended to. Sorry.

I originally recognized my reaction in that player; I simply hate doing something wrong, such as my character surviving something that might have been fatal blow, by not knowing the rules.

not at all, your statement pointed out that my point needed clarification. I didn't read it as antagonistic.

also, I echo that sentiment. I'm ... mostly okay with a DM flubbing things. but I DO NOT want to know about it.

That's a good question, really. If you're conversational type, I'd advise you two to sit down and converse about this. Might not work, at all. My second idea would be to have your player try his hand as a DM. Being responsible for providing fun for a group of people might also make him come to his senses. Also, might not work.

Being immeasurably patient...that might work.

For my campaign, I always try to have both pre- and post game talks around each sessions, in which our group discusses the pro's and con's of what's happening. But then, as I said, we all know each other, and can be pretty open.

next time it comes up, I likely will. I've mentioned it a few times in passing, but people were present, so we didn't really go into it.

He DMs plenty, however I suspect (pure conjecture) that he has gotten so used to having newbies who don't/can't question him that the idea of someone calling him on something is alient o him now.

which likely frusterates him to no end since I know the 3.x rules better.

I'm fine with things being run "different" but it's not exactly my fault when I'm not told in advance.

now I can't help but wonder if I come off as disrespectful... I feel that I don't. since it's usually more of a "are you sure how it works" thing.

as for being immeasurably patient... I've been told wildly different things about how patient I am. haha.

as for post-game talks, we usually stick around for 2-3 hours after the session and chew the fat.


I imagine I've been heavily ninja'd by now.

[Angry Bob]

As a player?

DMs trying to relive AD&D in 3.5. I'm sure everything was awesome back in the day, but if you want to play AD&D, play AD&D.

Instantly fatal traps with no conceivable way to find them or reason to be there. Yes, I know you build a dungeon without regard to what they players have built, but a random enervation trap on a flight of stairs when we've literally not encountered any other traps in the entire four levels of the campaign might be okay to rule zero out of the module.

Rolling terribly. This isn't anyone's fault, but failing a save to sleep(With Moment of Perfect Mind and everything) and then to charm person in the middle of combat will make you say things you'll regret later. At least Dominate lets you attack your allies.

As a DM?

Players that are convinced I'm railroading them. Guys, we all know that I work better with some preparation and can't improvise, especially complex combat encounters, as well as I'd like. I've tried to ask you where you want to go/what you want to do next at the end of each session and so far, no one's really answered me. So I draw up some stuff with only the smallest idea of what you have planned, and direct you at it in the interest of not having a poor session.

Players that go out of their way to use stuff from sources I don't have and then forget to bring it to the game, even when one of my rules is "pretty much everything is fair game provided you show me your source."

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Oh, and as a DM, I disallow social skill use on other PCs and major NPCs. You're in a roleplaying game, I'd like to see some.

The same house rule is used by my DM, and I 100% agree with it.

One issue I have, and always will, is meta-gaming. It drives me insane.
If you're fighting a monster and automatically know its weakness, I hope you made a knowledge check. Don't tell me your character just got lucky when the MM is right infront of you.

As a Player:

I understand that DM's often have a story in mind, so I don't mind a little railroading (I'm guilty of it too when I DM) but don't go overboard. Don't ever, EVER put us up against something we have no hope in hell of beating, just to show the word out there is big and scary. If you place level 4 characters face-to-face with a level 20 BEG it's just mean. You may have characters who will feel the unfightable need to strike a blow against evil.

As a DM:

I like backstories in writing. My memory sucks and having it in writing means I can refer back to it again and make sure the story I building suits your characters and their past. I still rarely if ever get them.
Also, know that I'm willing to bend the rules for my players. If a players tries to do something cool and the rules are gray, or even completely disallow it, so long as it does not impede other characters or cause them harm, then go for it. Please don't rule lawyer me for trying to keep the pace and fun.

Thankfully, the latter DM irritation rarely arises with my IRL group.

[NoobForHire]

I have a little sign on my wall that says "The DM reserves the right to cheat at any given time."

It solves a lot of problems. If they constantly ask why something's happening, or try to undermine my authority, I just point to the sign.