D&D 5E Was I in the wrong?

[AaronOfBarbaria]

...you (as the blacksmith) did clarify if the full thing was for sale which should have perhaps been a reminder to the player that there was a ring stuck on the gauntlet...

That doesn't track.

The player says, in character "Hey blacksmith, I'm selling this suit of armor."
The blacksmith looks over it and asks "The whole thing?"
The player answers "Yes (the whole suit of armor)."

There is no inherent guarantee that the player pick up on that the blacksmith is meaning "the whole thing" any other way than "all of this suit of armor, which doesn't actually include those gauntlets that almost match, nor that ring", and thus the question is not an actual hint - it just sounds like a clarifying question that the character doesn't want to keep the breastplate, or helmet, or other pieces the player considers to be part of the suit of armor they are selling.

Had the blacksmith said something like "...gauntlets too?" that would actually be a hint that maybe there is some reason why the player might say something other than "Yes (the whole suit of armor)."

 

[Lejaun]

They didn't even held an interest in getting a second look or trying to items out on their way to the city.

But they did have an interest in the item, which is clear by their frustration of trying to have it identified and you telling them that it was sold. If they didn't intend to identify the items, they wouldn't have been upset. They would have sold the armor and gone on to new adventures without ever knowing they got screwed over by the blacksmith on the ring and gauntlets.

 

[Shasarak]

Metagaming is when you take the optimal path to being the most powerful. Players should not be forced to have one specific spell or miss out on magic items. Players should not be forced to ask multiple NPC's to determine if an item is magic. 5e made a concentrated effort to help players have more variety to them, to include giving players the ability to discover magic items without making players have the exact same spell lineup.

The DM strayed from the path that and the players couldn't even ID the gear if they had the spells to do so anyways.

Were you one of these Players? If so, then just try to up your game a bit more. Take it as a character lesson to check your loot a little closer and try to be a little less naive. It is a DnD world, bad guys are out there and they want your stuff.

 

[Lejaun]

No, I wasn't one of those players. If I was and had a DM that was deliberately hiding information from me or misinterpreting what the group thought it was doing, I probably would't be playing with that DM.

A good DM does something like this:

Ranger: "I take the armor to the blacksmith to sell. How much does he offer?"

DM: "Roll me a couple d20s". (The DM intends for the first to be an insight check and the second to be a perception check. Insight to read the blacksmith's reaction, perception to just notice the ring and gauntlets).

Ranger: "Why?"

DM: "Ability checks."

Ranger: "Which abilities?"

DM: "If I wanted you to know that, I'd have told you." (Sticks out tongue).

Ranger: "17 and 4 on the die. I don't know what to add to them."

DM: "I do." (DM rolls a deception check for the blacksmith and gets an 8 - much lower than the PC's 17+1 Insight) "You step into the blacksmith's shop and are surprised by how clean it is. Instead of soot and grime, it is spotless and smells of lemon. You notice a cloth casually floating along a windowsill dusting by itself - a sign that this blacksmith can afford a magical servant. He is a middle aged human with a well-muscled frame and a grim demeanor ... at least at first. As soon as you drop the armor on the table and offer to sell it, his eyes nearly fly out of his head. He is clearly very interested. He immediately offers you [the fair price for the armor]."

Ranger: "Is that a good price for the armor?"

DM: "Roll an intelligence check."

Ranger: "18."

DM: "You've heard tales of a similar suit being sold for slightly less than that, but that was some time ago and far away. You might find someone willing to offer a bit more somewhere else, but it seems in the right tourney field."

Ranger: "OK."

DM: "He is practically salivating as he asks if you have a deal."

Ranger: "Yeah, I guess."

DM: "The blacksmith is trying to contain his excitement, but you can tell he is extremely happy. He runs to the back of the shop and returns a few moments later with the funds in platinum. He places the coins on the counter for you and then grabs the armor. As you turn to leave, you see him start to inspect each part of the armor in detail, mumbling under his breath as he does so."

Ranger: "Good for him. I grab the coins and go."

DM: "Roll me a d20."

Player: "Why?"

DM: "If I wanted you to know...."

Ranger: "Ugh ... 13."

DM: "You heard him mumble that THIS is going to make it so much easier for him to work faster."

Ranger: "Huh? Why is armor going to.... Never mind. More power to him. Weirdo."

DM: (Rolls a die for no reason): "He doesn't even seem to notice you leave, much less note your disdain."

A good DM does NOT do something like this:

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

If the player was paying attention then perhaps they'd have remembered that the ring and gauntlets were in there.

I doesn't seem to me like a case of the player not remembering actually being the thing that resulted in the problem.

The DM knew the player had 3 items in a bundle.
The Player knew they were selling a suit of armor, and said as much.
The DM then thought that it seemed like the player had forgotten about the ring and gauntlets, and instead of giving the player the benefit of the doubt and having the character present only the armor to the blacksmith chose the "you didn't say you weren't also doing these other things, so you did them" route and even stuck to it once the players made it clear that they had considered the armor completely separate from the gauntlets and ring by way of their not stepping in while the other player sold them, and by assuming they still had them to be identified like they said was their next goal.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

*shrug*

I think the DM is in the right. Gauntlets (metal) are part of a 'suit of armor'. So, saying "I sell the armor" would naturally include the gauntlets...as it would a helmet. Seeing as the ring was specifically mentioned as being part of the gauntlets, and not easily removable, the PC would have understood that selling them would mean the ring goes with it. Adding all that together gives "I sell the armor" equivalence to "I sell the armor (including the helm, gauntlets, ring, greeves, and everything else that is a part of this suit of armor".

As a DM if I feel the players are glossing over something that should probably at least make their characters pause...I will 'mention' it in passing. If they still keep with what they stated, so be it. My hands are clean.

In the OP's situation, I would have likely said something like:

"The blacksmith is eager to buy. He spaces out the stuff on the table, placing the helm to the left, then the core armor, then the miss-matched gauntlets. He looks at you and asks, 'Do we have a deal then?'".

So, I would specifically mention the helm (not even mentioned in the original description of the armor), the core armor, the gauntlets. If the player agrees to the deal...so be it. He had his chance. His character was looking right there at everything separately. His character obviously didn't feel the gauntlets and ring were important enough to be separate. Player mistake...not the DM. But that's how I've learned to DM over the decades. Live and learn I guess.

Now, for the OP's problem... he should use this as an opportunity to lay down a house rule or "ground work" for future situations. He should go back and say "OK, the gauntlets with the embedded ring wasn't part of the deal. I can see your point. However, from now on, if you guys don't specifically say something about something unusual, I will assume you are treating that 'unusual thing' as inconsequential. So if you find a 'long sword that has a scabbard that is made from solid brass and red-leather', and you decide to sell that sword...the scabbard is going with it unless you make mention of it". This way, future "player distractions at the table" are on them.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Noctem]

I doesn't seem to me like a case of the player not remembering actually being the thing that resulted in the problem.

The DM knew the player had 3 items in a bundle.
The Player knew they were selling a suit of armor, and said as much.
The DM then thought that it seemed like the player had forgotten about the ring and gauntlets, and instead of giving the player the benefit of the doubt and having the character present only the armor to the blacksmith chose the "you didn't say you weren't also doing these other things, so you did them" route and even stuck to it once the players made it clear that they had considered the armor completely separate from the gauntlets and ring by way of their not stepping in while the other player sold them, and by assuming they still had them to be identified like they said was their next goal.

Yup. Imo this is a clear example of malicious DM'ing. The DM was frustrated about an out of character problem, the player being on his cellphone, so he decided to enact punishment. How? By purposefully and maliciously causing not just the player he has a problem with, BUT THE ENTIRE GROUP, frustration. He's there to play a game. Another fun thing about all this, he starts his post by saying that he's playing with his best friends. His best friends. And he does this to them? In a game.. meant to have fun together.. So not only is he not willing to actually address the problem he's having with the specific player (apparently one his best friends), but he's going to resort to passive aggressive attacks against the entire group to vent? How do you have friends? This guy should be removed from the DM'ing role for a bit so he can cool off and realize that he's not there to punish people or be the parent. He's there to play a group game. If the guy being on his cellphone really bothers him, he should talk about it openly with the group next session (if there is one).. I would walk away from a table where the DM acted like this, friend or not. Wheaton's Law applies to everyone at the table, DM included.

 

[Lejaun]

In the OP's situation, I would have likely said something like:

"The blacksmith is eager to buy. He spaces out the stuff on the table, placing the helm to the left, then the core armor, then the miss-matched gauntlets. He looks at you and asks, 'Do we have a deal then?'".

So, I would specifically mention the helm (not even mentioned in the original description of the armor), the core armor, the gauntlets. If the player agrees to the deal...so be it. He had his chance. His character was looking right there at everything separately. His character obviously didn't feel the gauntlets and ring were important enough to be separate. Player mistake...not the DM.

I agree on this part. If the DM had done something like this and the player still sold it, then bad on the player. Big oops. He had his chance. The players frustration at finding out the items being sold seems to show that they did not intend for it to happen that way. Too late now, but hopefully that group doesn't have to experience that again and aren't scarred by the experience (IE being overzealous in making sure, positively, without any doubt, 110%, double and triple checked that they aren't selling something magical).

 

[Saeviomagy]

In general if you are mentally presenting a scene to an NPC, and it contains details that he will act on:
"The customer gets out a suit of adamantine plate armor. It has mismatched gauntlets with a ring welded to one of them. They will significantly increase the value of the armor, and the ring might be more cash still."

Then it behooves you to accurately present the same scene to the PC.
"You get out the adamantine plate armor, with it's mismatched gauntlets with a ring welded to one of them"

Exceptions can be made if the two differ in their knowledge or ability to perceive the scene (ie - you don't need to tell the PC that the NPC has detect magic continuously running, and spotted the magic items).

As to the mobile phone use... that's just the player being rude. Tell him to knock it off. Don't get all passive aggressive about it like you have here.

 

[Aura]

I'm pretty firmly placed in the 'player should have gotten opportunity for a reminder when his character saw the items in question again' camp. I feel this omission was a DM error.

However, the reason for my comment is the discussion of the 'the whole thing' comment by the blacksmith. IMO, this does not suggest anything more than the adamantine armor was being discussed, *if* we are making the assumption it was said in the first person roleplaying style (it's a bit unclear on this issue.) In that case, it is actually appropriate someone viewing a suit of armor to treat it as a set of discrete items, because in the game world, that is exactly what it is. Thus, said viewer could very well ask the same question, even with nothing more than the armor set in consideration.