I know we have "Rules Lawyers", but what

[Sound of Azure]

I give all new players a hard copy of the house rules before they roll up their character. I also let my players know that my house rules aren't set in stone and that if they have an issue with any of them or would like to change something I am open to discussion.

Olaf the Stout

That's really good to know Olaf!

 

[Olaf the Stout]

It was about SR and a web spell. He rolled saves, 4 of them. Then said two of the 4 were completely uneffected. I said even when saved they still are impeded etc...

Plus I am supposed to get to roll to overcome their SR. That is when he called me a rules lawyer and told me how it was "his house rule" for SR. A house rule none of us players were aware of. Then I said "I'm here to play by the rules", and we went on. So we didn't "argue" about it at that time. In fact we haven't had our argument yet. I've been waiting until I'm confident it will be difficult for me to lose my temper.

We didn't even talk about how Web doesn't allow for an SR roll. Not that he actually rolled anything other than a save.

I would sit down with him and ask him exactly what rules he has changed from the core rules. Get him to write them down for you. At least that way you know where you stand so that you can make informed decisions.

Is he open to discussion on the "house rule"? If not, and if the rules are changed enough that you're not happy with the game then just let him know that you won't be playing anymore.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Olaf the Stout]

That's really good to know Olaf!

I only have 1 page of house rules anyway so there is not a huge amount of difference between my rules and the core rules. I also think that there is no point in having rules that the players hate just so the DM can feel important. The players should have a say in things too.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Treebore]

Olaf,

I do house rules the same way you do. Exactly.

As for the game, my goal is to not quit, so I'm hoping we have a good and positive discussion.

I'm thinking that he lays out the game session like a movie/play. So I think he was "stuck" on something he wanted to happen, and made it play out the way he wanted it to play out. So changed things as needed to make the "movie" go the way it was supposed to.

Guess I will find out, he just showed up on IM.

 

[Slife]

Call him a RuleSlayer. Only one letter away!

 

[BlueBlackRed]

I don't know what name I'd use, but "ruleslayer" sounds good to me if the guy is intentionally not telling you what rules are modified.

But I would go about making this guy's DMing night a royal pain.
Turn into the biggest rules lawyer around.
Record the games and/or write down every single special rule he has and use them against him.
Then look for any loopholes he has and exploit the daylights out of them.

Do this until he breaks down and quits DMing.

Harsh? Yeah, probably. But I have a low tolerance for bad DMs.

 

[BlackMoria]

Send him the rules (cut and paste out of the SRD) concerning SR and the Web spell. Highlight the salient points supporting your argument in 30 pt font.

Oh, right....you don't want to be snarky. Ignore me. (but it would be what I would do )

 

[brehobit]

Hummm....

The exact example (the web thing) is something I could live with. I've played with DMs who often go for the "simpler" answer. The partial movement in a web can be really difficult to understand on the fly if you've never dealt with it before. I could certainly see myself saying:

"For now I'm going to make it a save or no effect, but I'll read up on the rules and do it right next time just to keep the game going. If I do end up nerfing your spell I'll let you swap it out later".

I think this falls under rule 0. As a DM I'd be unlikely to _do_ this unless I really didn't want to slow down the game (say trying to keep the interest of a few new players) and the fight wasn't likely to kill anyone.

Edit: Oh, the SR thing is just bogus....

Mark

 

[Nightfall]

A bad Rules Improviser then?

Bye
Thanee

No kidding...

Tree,

Dude he has a problem using Web?! WTF?! *shakes his head* Sounds to me like he didn't want his encounter ruined. Should have considered that when you made it up.

 

[Grunj]

I disagree with the concept of Rule 0 being, "The DM Is Always Right."

I believe that Rule 0 should read, "The game is supposed to be fun for everybody."

If that isn't happening, then something is wrong. It could be a player or the DM that is responsible, or even a combination of both. When there is disagreement it needs to be resolved in a better way than, "I'm the DM so that makes you guys my bitches!"

That attitude doesn't work in a game any better than it does in real life.

If a player has an issue with the game, the DM needs to listen. If the player has a point, the DM needs to give a little.