Search results

1. My group doesn't usually do player v player social rolls. If a player wants to convince another player then they can try. Although, probably an opposed skill roll would be good. Bluff v Insight or Streetwise. 2. I play very player forward so I don't usually do this either. I give away false...

Yeah, okay.

In that case, you have a very strange idea of rules as written.

Ah huh. You also assumed that there were no house-rules, DM fiat or anything else that deviates from the RAW. Well, we'll depart here.

Just because you know "more" doesn't mean you know what a player will and will not enjoy and so you can't make a decision in their best interest because you are not them. Players are not children. I've already expressed how I would deal with that situation where the player's decision for their...

Okay, you haven't made any assumptions... How did you know the game was RAW again? You must have missed the part where he basically said that their wishes would turn the game into a non-rpg? Because, that's a pretty jerky thing to say. Like I said before, being rude to a jerk might not be...

Heartily disagree all you want. I don't agree with the DM knows best argument either. As for your hypothetical, I change my plots to suit my players on a game by game basis. So I would let the player turn into a dragon or whatever and come up with another explanation as to why the dragons...

Fine, we can play that game, if you wish. Since you have assumed that compromises existed, you have reached an unsupported conclusion. You have no idea of knowing how the conversation started and ended and you have no idea how much middle ground they may have found. This whole conversation is...

Yeah, it is. For "no" to not be either it needs to proceed something that qualifies the possibility of compromise. Merely saying "No" is a refusal or denial and is usually used in a final context. Like I said to bedrock, why is it so hard to say "This is going to be hard because (enter reason...

Okay, and I think those reasons are just as easily compromised than rejected. So we'll leave it at that?

It doesn't matter how many times he was being dismissive and uncompromising, it matters that he was being dismissive and uncompromising.

No, I'm not. You are assuming that's what I'm saying but if I've been unclear, I'll try to be as clear as possible now. My position is that you should never say "no" outright because you think your preferences as a DM hold more clout over the preferences of your players. You should always be...

I disagree. Neither preferences out-rule each other. If you and your players are bent on getting your way then that's not a group or people I'd be involved with. I also think you should always strive for the middle ground. I don't always get what I want and neither do my players but we're all...

I never offered that opinion. I'm attributing that disposition because I don't agree that a DM who is dismissive of his players requests cares about their enjoyment. Once again, I never offered that the GM says yes to everything. I offered that the GM should always cooperate and compromise...

Ah huh, so if you're not trying to qualify yourself as an authority then why suggest that "you should know"? It doesn't matter how many times he said "yes" or "no", the fact that he was uncompromising and dismissive does. I'm not conflating anything, I'm asking you to think about why the...

How do you get "saying yes all the time" out of "saying yes or cooperating and compromising with players"? So, as a player, you believe that your suggestions should be ignored and that a DM who is in favour of discussion and compromise, no matter what the subject because you find important, is...

I don't respect appeals to authority, so I could care less what you say you are. You are also missing the point. Improv is an art that lives and dies by cooperation, its golden rule is to say "yes" not "no" or "say yes sometimes but no other times". Doesn't that tell you something about the...

I've already explained how a certain position, held in this thread, to me is jerky. I agree, he shouldn't run it but the player shouldn't be targeted for the game turning south. The blame is shared, the DM decided to reject a request that the players felt strongly about and the players decided...

You have a strange idea of cooperation. Saying "yes" is a golden rule of improvisation, just reflect on that. Saying "no" is uncompromising and thus authoritarian because you expect the players to comply. Being rude to a jerk might not be mature but neither party can claim maturity.

If you, as a DM, consider your preferences to out-rule the preferences of your players then I would consider that wrong. That's what I mean by above. I agree, there is no obligation but if things turn sour you don't start sniping at the players because you believe your position is more...