How often do you fight (disagree, debate)?

[Jan van Leyden]

It has happened over the years, but rarely. It tends to be the first step of the player to leave the group.

With our asymmetric set up, i.e. with me running th show 99% of the time, I'm not willing to change my game for the sake of one player who seeks a completely different experience. When a disagreement comes up, I'll talk to the affected player after the game and try to reach a compromise. If he isn't happy with the result I make it clear that I'm only will go so far to appease him.

 

[Vascant]

We have a firm understanding of Rule #1, GM is always right.

Now if you have a problem with something that he does, take it up after the game. At our table you only have 30 seconds to state your action, if you want to waste it talking about what happened last round, your choice but once your time is up.. you do nothing and move to the next. Everyone has a part in keeping the game moving.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Rarely. When I was younger this happened, but as I get older, and as everyone's time becomes more precious, the idea of wasting time arguing over a rules call doesn't make much sense.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, come rules questions, two players have not a clue on the rules, and the other DM and I tend to agree on most everything.

He is smart that way

Ther eare occasional disagreements, but never anything close to a fight.

I have had a few on online games though.

 

[Desdichado]

I don't think fight, disagree and debate all mean the same thing. I'd say disagree: frequently, debate, infrequently, but it happens, and fight: never.

And this despite the fact that I'm the most opinionated guy on the internet, I'm politically misaligned with the majority of my group, and I'm insufferably arrogant. We still just don't have ugly showdowns. Mature adults tend to avoid that kind of thing, IME.

 

[howandwhy99]

IME it has really depended upon the group and the game. I think a lot of what makes an RPG good is the players coming together to a more and more coordinated coherence. You know, when players don't even need to tell each other what they plan on doing, they simply know. That level of attunement is difficult and a struggle to reach, but it is very much worth the effort. Sort of like a band finally coming together. It's not that the journey ends, but rather that the sustenance of their growth routinely pays off.

 

[was]

very rarely..the group works well together

 

[JamesonCourage]

There's probably a headed argument about once per session, but it's never personal. Nobody has hard feelings about it. Sometimes I'm involved (as I run the game), sometimes I help settle something. At any rate, it's never so bad that anyone is upset even five minutes after it happens, much less carrying over between sessions. We know it's a game. As always, play what you like

 

[malcolypse]

Pretty much never. The worst it ever gets is an arched eyebrow and a "Really? That's what you're gonna do?"

I save my anger for Black Ops.

 

[IronWolf]

Never. We might disagree and have conversation but never anything close to being a fight or even heated.

This is my group as well. We never fight. No heated drama.