D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[prabe]

Precisely. I just don't get the kneejerk reaction to say no to all player requests. I have a buddy who does it when he runs D&D and it's maddening. We have to jump through so many hoops just to get to the point where something interesting can then happen.

I like to narrate past the boring crap pretty quickly and get to the interesting part of play.

It's not "Nope." It's "Here's the situation, does what you want seem plausible to you, as though it fits the narrative, here?" It works out so much better when the player says no, even if they're kinda guided to it. It also works out better if it's not the default.

 

[Bae'zel]

It's not "Nope." It's "Here's the situation, does what you want seem plausible to you, as though it fits the narrative, here?" It works out so much better when the player says no, even if they're kinda guided to it. It also works out better if it's not the default.

I actually hate to say “no” to players if I genuinely like them and want their characters to succeed.

However lines have to be drawn. A player recently gleefully said “aha I’m flanking this bad guy, I get advantage now!” To which I had to explain that flanking and ganging up rules only apply to certain classes and monsters (the PC was a Cleric). HOWEVER you could take the Help action to give advantage to your ally? Or attempt to grapple or shove the bad guy? That’s kind of a similar outcome?

In the end it worked out.

I’m much more likely to say “No, but…” than just “no”.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It's not "Nope." It's "Here's the situation, does what you want seem plausible to you, as though it fits the narrative, here?" It works out so much better when the player says no, even if they're kinda guided to it. It also works out better if it's not the default.

Absolutely. I find that my players are (most of the time) far less permissive than I would likely be. So I often put the question back to them as you describe, and very often they back down from whatever idea they had in mind.

 

[soviet]

Absolutely. I find that my players are (most of the time) far less permissive than I would likely be. So I often put the question back to them as you describe, and very often they back down from whatever idea they had in mind.

When I play D&D, if the DM calls for a group knowledge roll about something and I don't think my uneducated barbarian would have heard of it, I don't roll I just say I failed.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

You and I are fundamentally opposed in playstyle. No argument supporting the specialness of PCs is going to fly with me.

The basic rules of the game inform a certain playstyle, which is heroic monster fighting action. You keep running into problems because you keep supposing a model and world that doesn't reflect the rules of the game. Or would if you actually played 5E.

5E really doesn't support everything, and they've largely stopped pretending it does with ditching barely functional kludges like gritty resting. Its a poor fit for dirt farmer world because the players have access to massive amounts of magic. It's also not great at being a combat free dating sim. That's fine, there are games that do that better anyways.

 

[prabe]

I actually hate to say “no” to players if I genuinely like them and want their characters to succeed.

However lines have to be drawn. A player recently gleefully said “aha I’m flanking this bad guy, I get advantage now!” To which I had to explain that flanking and ganging up rules only apply to certain classes and monsters (the PC was a Cleric). HOWEVER you could take the Help action to give advantage to your ally? Or attempt to grapple or shove the bad guy? That’s kind of a similar outcome?

In the end it worked out.

I’m much more likely to say “No, but…” than just “no”.

That's about where I am. I'll say no if someone's actually violating like a clear rule, but I'll try to make something work toward the same end. I also have players who understand they don't need to surprise me with a tactic for it to wrong-foot their enemies, so they'll ask be about stuff between sessions before they try it.

 

[prabe]

When I play D&D, if the DM calls for a group knowledge roll about something and I don't think my uneducated barbarian would have heard of it, I don't roll I just say I failed.

I don't insist on this (who knows what the barbarian has heard somewhere?) but I respect the hell out of it.

 

[mamba]

Fantasy worlds consist primarily of non-PC's. The PC's are inherently special by virtue of them being PC's.

no, there is no difference between a PC and an NPC, except that the former decides that being a cobbler is not what he wants out of life

 

[Micah Sweet]

You'd be a schmuck in some of these game worlds to not be a caster, right?

I'd like to get an invitation to - NOPE, they don't know who you are.

I'd like to contact my - NOPE, logistics.

I'd like to get passage - NOPE, not realistic, aaargh my verisimilitude!

I'll just cast a spell - SURE THING BUDDY, PERFECT SUCCESS

If you don't want a spell that does that, easy enough to remove from the game.

 

[Pedantic]

I actually hate to say “no” to players if I genuinely like them and want their characters to succeed.

However lines have to be drawn. A player recently gleefully said “aha I’m flanking this bad guy, I get advantage now!” To which I had to explain that flanking and ganging up rules only apply to certain classes and monsters (the PC was a Cleric). HOWEVER you could take the Help action to give advantage to your ally? Or attempt to grapple or shove the bad guy? That’s kind of a similar outcome?

In the end it worked out.

I’m much more likely to say “No, but…” than just “no”.

This is a different issue, but also one encouraged by the lack of a firm goal of play; players should ideally know (or at least want to know) the rules of the game they're playing. My preferred approach goes a step further and maintains should not only know, but attempt to use, the rules of the game to their advantage.

If the rules are subject to change or worse, in the moment design, you can't really expect anyone to spend time learning them. If that's an option, then the game will naturally tend towards an at the table negotiation on an action by action basis, and you'll be training players that's the default mode of interaction.