D&D 5E Hex Shenanigans

[Mort]

You're right - I should have that some people seem to think that and that there are a lot of gray areas in between.

Personally I'm probably a bit extreme on the "DM is always right" side of the spectrum.

The DM may always be right - but that doesn't stop or excuse the DM from being a jerk!

I try to keep that in mind when ruling "Is my rule really what's best for the game, or am I just being expedient for myself?"

I don't always get it right - but I try not to be a jerk when possible.

 

[Oofta]

I may or may not have gotten this t-shirt for my wife when she DMs.

Edit: added picture you can actually see.

 

[Fanaelialae]

But that's the point! The average joe, falling/jumping off the cliff just sees the cliff and the ground - SPLAT. Batman sees the various indentations in the cliff, soft spots to bounce off of, perfect landing points etc. and knows how to exploit them. This is something HPs can model easily.



As I just said above, it doesn't have to be cartoonish at all. It's all about how you choose to look at it.



The players and the DM being on the same page/level is the most important thing - as you say. I've been playing with my group for a LONG time and we keep things in the heroic/mythic arena - never straying into cartoonish. It's not even a discussion anymore, we just all know what we like.

I just don't think we're nearly as far apart as you may think.

In certain respects, I think you are right about us not being far apart. We both want to run enjoyable games for our groups (and presumably play in such games as well).

That said, I (personally) find your justifications rather implausible. Though I'm perfectly willing to admit that's just my own (and my group's) taste.

That said, I think your criticism of my approach also comes down to personal taste.

 

[Oofta]

The DM may always be right - but that doesn't stop or excuse the DM from being a jerk!

I try to keep that in mind when ruling "Is my rule really what's best for the game, or am I just being expedient for myself?"

I don't always get it right - but I try not to be a jerk when possible.

There are many ways a DM can be a jerk whether following the strict letter of the rules or not. I think that's a completely different issue.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

My problem is the assertion that the rules should be yanked away when the DM disagrees with the players motivation and nothing more. I see that as a blunt and heavy handed use of DM fiat that should be discouraged.

Perhaps the issue is that I am not the one asserting the "motivation" issue and that this has been an introduced as a point to argue about.

It would be similar to saying that the issue with the Bag o' Rats is the player motivation; it's a canard to try to say that the real problem is bad DMs encroaching on player agency.

I was being nice in trying to explain the quote you were disagreeing with, but do you see how smug and condescending you post is? I'm not the one calling DMs jerks repeatedly.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

There are many ways a DM can be a jerk whether following the strict letter of the rules or not. I think that's a completely different issue.

Yeah.

And if the DM isn't giving you what you want, that doesn't mean the DM is being a jerk.

 

[Mort]

There are many ways a DM can be a jerk whether following the strict letter of the rules or not. I think that's a completely different issue.

Too be clear, I was mostly agreeing with you.

I don't think A DM following the rules strictly (or not) is what determines them being a jerk or not.

I think it has to do with trusting and respecting the players and acting in a way that hopefully has them trust and respect you.

None of which is easy to express in a board discussion like this -so may come off the wrong way. I'll apologize if I have - certainly not the intent.

 

[Fanaelialae]

My problem is the assertion that the rules should be yanked away when the DM disagrees with the players motivation and nothing more. I see that as a blunt and heavy handed use of DM fiat that should be discouraged.

It isn't that the DM doesn't agree with the player's motivation.

It's the the player's motivation is not in accordance with the agreed upon thematic elements of the game, and the DM is enforcing that accord. Obviously, the DM should talk to the player first to make it clear that such an action is inappropriate to the campaign, but I have not seen a single person who agrees with this view who claimed they wouldn't warn the player.

 

[Mort]

Perhaps the issue is that I am not the one asserting the "motivation" issue and that this has been an introduced as a point to argue about.

It would be similar to saying that the issue with the Bag o' Rats is the player motivation; it's a canard to try to say that the real problem is bad DMs encroaching on player agency.

The problem is a lot of people are asserting the motivation issue, so responses have been framed in that vein - it's not easy to separate them out and responses may get muddled.

I've already stated that I basically agree with your core statement (from previously) and don't actually think anything I've said is contrary to it,

I was being nice in trying to explain the quote you were disagreeing with, but do you see how smug and condescending you post is? I'm not the one calling DMs jerks repeatedly.

I wasn't actually calling anyone a jerk (certainly not intentionally - it's a long thread). The one post that may be on point about it was a poster taking an accidental misquote (where I accidentally used the quote feature improperly and didn't catch myself to edit until later) and rubbing it in.

As for smug and condescending your post came off as a pat on the head and "guess you're just not evolved enough to understand the correct perspective" vibe when I first read it - but that could very well be me taking out the thread on the post. So apologies and I shouldn't have said anything about smug or condescending.

 

[Mort]

It isn't that the DM doesn't agree with the player's motivation.

It's the the player's motivation is not in accordance with the agreed upon thematic elements of the game, and the DM is enforcing that accord. Obviously, the DM should talk to the player first to make it clear that such an action is inappropriate to the campaign, but I have not seen a single person who agrees with this view who claimed they wouldn't warn the player.

I think staying within agreed upon thematic elements of the game is a good metric and as stated it is the DMs role to ensure the group keeps within those themes. I just think that existing rules are usually a good guide to staying within those thematic elements (is there a wound system, how difficult is healing, how likely is a character to walk away from a fall etc.) as long as the result is not absurd/unwanted.

One problem is that jumping of a 200+ foot cliff for the lulz is an absurd situation so is very easy to see leading to absurd/unwanted results.