D&D General I need a D&D counseling session! Help! (Re: Update ("Argument-Stopping Protocols" -- please advise!))

Droop-in-soup said:

@Sabathius42

I don't yet know what OP means. Could you clarify that?

Click to expand...

Sometimes Original Poster (in this case Dungeonosophy) and sometimes Opening Post (the first post in the thread.)

This is the kind of answer I find so helpful. Thank you. Your traps post was also excellent.

Droop-in-soup said:

You're describing my unfortunate behavior of the past, and I acknowledge that problem. I asked the question of GMs that can actually enjoy joining players who want to be creative at the table.

Click to expand...

Let me expand on what I am trying to say....

Let's assume for this example that you are a player at my table and I am the GM. We have never played before. You are a friend of a friend so I know little to nothing about you other than its your first game with me.

ME: OK, Droop, we are playing a homebrew game. We use all the official WotC books as source material for your character. I don't usually allow 3rd party or homebrew material, but if you REALLY need to try something out I will take a look at it.

YOU: I want to play a fighter that uses polearms. I want to use the rules for High Elves, but I want to storywise be a Wild Elf (i'm odd in my tribe). I want to start with a magical polearm that has been in my family for generations, and was once a powerful artifact that was used to kill the Dragon Queen eons ago which ushered in the era of magic in the world. I took the liberty of statting it up...

SuperAwesome Dragon Queen Slaying Polearm
+2 to hit/damage
+3d6 damage vs. dragons
Resistance to dragon sourced elemental damage
Can never be taken against my will

************

Your creativity in this example is deliberately written to go from "least disruptive" to "most disruptive".

You pick a fighter who uses polearms: Great choice 100% by the book, no issues at all.

You want to reskin a High Elf to be a Wild Elf: You have only changed story. My campaign certainly can accommodate this with ZERO effort. Go for it! (Note that reskinning is my favorite way of sticking to the rules but flexing my creativity as a player).

You want to start with a magical polearm: This the request that puts you on the edge of creativity bouncing up against my game. Magical items are designed to be used sparingly in 5e, and even then not usually at low levels. I COULD figure out a way to give you a starting magical polearm however I would balance it by assigning it some trade offs to keep it fair for the players who DON'T start with a magic weapon. If, however, I didn't want to let you have one FOR WHATEVER REASON then the correct response on your end is to say "OK, I guess Sabathius42 likes to stick to those item level suggestions pretty closely".

You want your starting magical item to have been super powerful in the past: Once again, I could make this happen with some thought, but that is going to mean that its going to take the item the entire course of the campaign to "level up" alongside of you. You can't just start with a powerful artifact, no matter how many negatives are assigned to it.

You describe there existing a Dragon Queen (easy to add to most campaigns history) which is fine and reasonable but then you add the super background changing idea that her death allowed the other races to use magic. No, you can't design something this big as a player. You can suggest it. Maybe I can make it work, maybe I can't. Its odd to suggest something that "BIG" when it has no impact on the character you created. This is the level of creativity that players shouldn't be expecting the GM to incorporate.

You custom designed actual stats for a item your character shouldn't have anyway: Absolute hard no. If you are asking the GM to grant you a magical weapon for a starting low level character you are already asking a lot of them. Take what they give you and be happy with it. Furthermore, in the example I provided you are asking for a weapon that would be considered Legendary, which a low level character shouldn't own for rules balance purposes.

**************************

Continuing my example, if you showed up at my table and asked for all those things I'd generate a low powered magical polearm for you and tell you that it can "power up" over time. I would then, behind the scenes, work out a system for that "powering up" and roll it out when the design was finished. That really should be the end of the conversation on the mechanics of the polearm for the campaign.

If the next week you showed up for session 2 and told me that your family also has a magical suit of armor that goes along with the polearm, and that you would like to get that also, I would be annoyed and tell you no, you already have one item ahead of time, you aren't going to get two. If you complained that your story demands you have magical armor, I would be super annoyed.

If you showed up on week 3 and had a bad combat because your magic polearm negative kicked in and complained aloud about how it doesn't make sense that a super powerful magic polearm should be really awesome, not hindering you I would be tempted to take it away, be annoyed again, and begin to reconsider wanting you at my table if you are going to be like this every week.

If you showed up on week 4, had a great combat, defeated the big bad guy, and complained when the magical armor you wanted didn't show up in the treasure pile I would have a personal conversation with you that you need to reel it in or maybe my game isn't for you.

If you showed up on week 5 and during a session of interacting with the town your character begins proselytizing about how all magic users are evil because their power flows from the blood of the Dragon Queen flowing into the ocean even though I have no interest in incorporating this fiction into my campaign world I am going to ask you to not play in my game anymore.

***********************

I realize that this fictional example is "putting words in your mouth" but I am trying to illustrate to you that there is a line that exists between the players and the GM and creativity on the players part should never infringe on the other side of that line. You can suggest a reasonable number of things, but the GM has the ultimate right to say "No, that isn't how it is going to work in my game." and that should be the end of the conversation. You should limit your number of suggestions and those suggestions should all have a tie in with your character's story.

If you are only a player, not a GM, stick to creativity involving only the story. Do not get creative with rules or mechanics. This goes quadruple if the GM has literally asked you to stop doing so and just play the game as it is written.

Charlaquin said:

Sometimes Original Poster (in this case Dungeonosophy) and sometimes Opening Post (the first post in the thread.)

Click to expand...

And, even more confusingly, sometimes Overpowered.

"As stated in the OP, the OP's magical polearm is extremely OP."

Droop-in-soup said:

I realize I have a question to add to your post. And I would love to hear some people at least verify the validity of the point I would like to add.

I have to agree with your assessment of my situation - with this specific DM.
I would add this too, that also no DM wants me to act out about dice rolls, etc. Any bad behavior I have to own and deal with. That is universal.

But I am not yet convinced in overly fixing the separate rolls between player and DM . If I have potential as a DM, then it is clear that a DM (me) would be very happy to have a player engage on the level of correcting facets of things that might offer rich experiences and learning. Feats, spells, whatever. Isn't this the basis of friends who like to home brew? Sure, I'd have limits, but I expect I can't be the only one who imagines a friendly partnership between players and DM in this way.

Click to expand...

You can certainly imagine it, but you can't impose it as a player, and asking after being told 'no' is being pushy in a way that quickly enters bad player territory.

Some DMs allow basically no input into the game. Others might let you dabble in ideas only for the story of the game, while others might welcome only mechanics. The possibilities are endless, and the level of input the DM allows is not something you should try to negotiate once he's drawn the line.

On a personal level, I am far more interested in things like letting pcs research unique spells than I am in things like giving a player some special magic item just because they want it or it suits their character. The treasure you find is not something you get to have any input on, unless you provide that input via in game actions, such as going after a monster known to collect gems or into a gem mine if you want to find gems.

Droop-in-soup said:

I don't see myself as pure DMs nightmare. I do see myself as a nightmare for my friend DM. Are people going to insist that my asks are in the majority a problem, or ok in themselves and just need the right DM. My asks are one thing. Bad behavior is another thing.

Click to expand...

I suppose there's a right game (and DM) for everyone. You have a lot of playstyle preferences, such as no traps, no pc death, loose and changing rules, etc., that fly in the face of what I prefer, but to each their own. The real problem is that you keep trying to push what you want in the face of the DM not wanting it. Take no for an answer and learn to live with it or find a group whose DM is 'looser' and more tolerant of what you're after.

See, that's the thing: after a certain point, your asks are the bad behavior, if you won't stop asking.

Please understand, I'm not trying to say that your playstyle preferences are bad or wrong, just that they are bad for this group. The best resolution, I think, ends with you running your own game and/or in a game run by a DM who is in to allowing a lot of input and a group who is accepting of your preferences.

Droop-in-soup said:

I am separating the two things and looking for whether another culture exists here than those who relate to my friend as DM.

Click to expand...

Yes. I have seen or played in groups that are very much what you are after. Though your playstyle preferences don't provide what I want in my game, they can be tons of fun for those who enjoy them. The right DM is out there for you, you just have to find them.

Welcome buddy. I admire your courage in wading in. Bold move! Well done.

(Fine handle: Your "Droop" goblin sidekick really jumped into the "Soup" this time. )

There are two priority issues:

1) That we remain good friends.

2) That we as individuals, devote our time to what is nourishing (=fun), edifying (=virtue-building), and healthy (=sane). In my case, the question is whether (or how) I am able to game with you (and especially DM with you) without feeling crazy.

I've already sent my best hand-written letter through the local post office. I have already decided that I cannot DM with you any more, barring an unprecedented change in character.

What is an unprecedented change in character?

***

Some things you say here, seem to be a continuation of changeless misperceptions. Which I could and may (or may not) respond to in detail.

For my part, I understand that the changes I mandated in my campaign, via the 13-point "New Way Forward" plan, back in February, were difficult for you. It was a big shift toward individuation. Some, but not all, of the points would've best been crafted via discussion. I had intended to actually sit down with you and go over (and possibly modify) the 13-point vision. Yet I took your emailed semi-agreement as good enough. That was a mistake, which could've been partly (though not totally) sidestepped though a face-to-face convo. I was tired of convo (as a gateway to negotiations and arguments), but that doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake to skip it.

***
Other things you say in this thread point to the possibility of genuine change, with a long will.

In such a scenario, though you would not have to be absolutely perfect, I do know that it would be treacherous to go forward without anything less than a long-willed, consistent, steady practice of good faith. I'm speaking over a span of months and months, or year. Week in and week out.

I wonder what accountability and support would help you to succeed, in the long will?

Would others in the group best know the details of our troubles, so that they can be supportive of you? Or not?

To help firm up our memory, would I or you need a newly written, less sharply worded, condensed, player-specific, inter-personal document, in hard copy? Or not?

Would this thread of the E.N.World community continue to serve as a forum for long-term mediation and check-in?

What outcome do I want now?

What outcome do you want?

***
For the sake of honoring the wound between us, there's got to be a pause for reflection.

In any case, a pause is mandated by outside (corona) circumstances.

If New York weren't shut down, I would have no problem reading D&D fiction with you and the gang next Monday. In fact, I would be glad to. Or researching D&D-themed and Middle-earth-themed cardgames and boardgames to pick up and try out. (My nephew and I recently played a D&D cardgame called Dungeon Mayhem, and it was simply fun.) Or picking up some old or new D&D Endless Quest gamebooks (choose-your-own adventure novels), where we have a simple vote to decide what action to take. Thoughts of things like that do not strain my emotional wariness.

Yet, as of today, thoughts of sitting down with you again at a Tabletop RPG which involves adjudication, does strain.

I have not totally lost all interest in the array of the cool adventures I told you I was prepping, but the glow is very dim.

-Travis

Dungeonosophy said:

Welcome buddy. I admire your courage in wading in. Bold move! Well done.

(Fine handle: Your "Droop" goblin sidekick really jumped into the "Soup" this time. )

There are two priority issues:

1) That we remain good friends.

2) That we as individuals, devote our time to what is nourishing (=fun), edifying (=virtue-building), and healthy (=sane). In my case, the question is whether (or how) I am able to game with you (and especially DM with you) without feeling crazy.

I've already sent my best hand-written letter through the local post office. I have already decided that I cannot DM with you any more, barring an unprecedented change in character.

What is an unprecedented change in character?

***

Some things you say here, seem to be a continuation of changeless misperceptions. Which I could and may (or may not) respond to in detail.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the post, and the letter I received today.

The mood and message you choose to lead with is consistent as always. Thanks for that.

I agree with your 2 points. Well said.

Personally I wonder why you say "unprecedented" in relation to change in character? I expect it means you think the ways that I cause you trouble are so many and so fundamental that it would be unprecedented to expect your experience to be different with me. That is what I think you must mean.

I actually intend to change myself quite significantly. Not as a main purpose of being able to play D&D with you, though I expect I might be glad to if I managed my side of the bargain, but fundamentally I want to change out of the commitment I have to life in general, which your 2 points admirably express a lot of concurrence. I say it this way because I don't need to convince you in words, or change your mind about me. If I change, that will show itself in fact. Otherwise, what would words now mean? I can only say something of my intentions and what I learned.

I started to write about what I learned, but it is not finished and I don't have time now to share it. I expect I will share it, also for the chance that it will bring some value to the Enworld community as well.

My last open-ended no-expectations ask is this: If you or others perceive that I am continuing in changeless misperceptions, I am sincerely asking for those misperceptions to be corrected. It is clear you, the OP, are in your own process, so that is why I ask with no expectations. Open-ended means, if possible, I am interested if the opening comes.

IF others on the forum are willing to try again with me if they know what your are talking about or have their own take on it, then I hope they do.

I have not come to a complete conclusion as to whether it was ideal that you, the OP and my friend, brought this thread to an open community. As to how you portrayed me in those posts, I am sure it has cost me in some fashion by creating a certain picture of me here before I could present myself, but my focus on it is, as I've said before, that I don't need you to be perfect for my sake, so you can judge that for yourself. In the future, you may want to ask your co-creator before you choose to 'let it all hang out,' but for me, I've no reason at the moment to do more than make the most of it.

That said, I am convinced that I gained a great deal from engaging in this process here, even if it were not an ideal method for me to come to clarity.

In a good way, I do NOT now feel impelled to seek the kind of asks that I was pursuing with you consistently. It has, in a good way, partly been beat out of me, but also I think it is the change in my perceptions of the situation that shifts a lot in me.

I would characterize my feelings about myself and my inner focus is that at the moment my focus is to be a good player. Not a self-appointed co-creator who insists on demanding agency where my way is not in harmony with my friends.
I can admit that I always felt that you said "no" too much, for what I felt were the wrong reasons. But I am no longer satisfied with my assessment. Maybe I never was satisfied with my assessment, but I didn't have control of my feelings to feel anything else. I take the position now that I have missed something, and expect that I still don't see it all. What I do see is that I pushed when I should have stepped back and asked deeper questions. I acted naively.
I realize that both of us let it go on a long time without getting to the bottom of it. I would like to learn why some things take a while for a door to open for a truly new step. Unfortunately it took a full crisis that necessitated a break for our shared D&D adventure year.

AND, I credit you a great deal for reminding me so often, and repeatedly, that my behavior did not accord with what you felt our agreements were. For some reason that wasn't enough for me to be pointed toward the right response or thoughts. I realize that had conflict with those agreements, and didn't address that in the right way. Fundamentally, that is my mistake. So in that it is fair to put the majority of the blame on me. That is on the level of agreements. I agreed and didn't agree. And my behavior reflected that. That has been most unfortunate and costly to us both.

On the level of bad behavior, the pushing also falls into that category, and also all my general difficulties with my emotions, grumbling, pouting as you put it, and the like, these are my lifelong challenges. It is hard to bear them, because these inappropriate behaviors are so out there to see, with only the conclusion that that kind of behavior isn't acceptable. It gets tolerated by friends, but it is lamentable, period.

People who know me know that I have changed a great deal in my life. I still will change more. This collaborative D&D and personal-growth experience over this past year has been valuable to teach me a lot, gave me a lot of great memories, challenges, and also through my mistakes, gives me motivation, because I regret strongly want to learn from them and do better.

This seems adequate for this post.

Thanks to all who contributed. I've experienced a lot of people with quite strong character and presence.

Perhaps some time in the future I will share some of the insights that will come as I reflect and work further on this experience. For now, just know that this was an overwhelmingly positive experience for me, because of the good will and generosity of the contributors, even though I felt that I have been perceived as someone most people would expect to firmly eject from their gaming table, based on what they saw come through the forum. Even so, people were honest and respectful and supportive. That says a lot about the people here.

- Michael

Sabathius42 said:

OP is short for Original Poster. In this case, your friend.

"Trolling" is an activity in which a person or persons deliberately stirs up drama instead of genuinely engaging in whatever activity the medium is there for.

A "Sock Puppet" is a separate account a troll might use to help create drama. A lot of times you can identify a sock puppet by comparing the style, vocabulary, and format of one accounts posts versus another.

April 1st (aka April Fools Day) is a day where many on websites and forums takes the opportunity to "trick" people into believing and engaging in a story that is fiction.

***********

If you are exactly who you say and represent yourself to be then great! Welcome to ENWorld!

If you are interested in this community then it really is a great source for discussing D&D and other RPG topics.

Click to expand...

@Sabathius42

Do you mean to say that your comment saying you thought we were trolls was an April Fools joke?

I ask because I am not clear whether your mention of it was an explanation of you poking fun. I usually enter my thinking so seriously that if people say something seriously I experience it as intentional, not a joke. I like to joke, but I miss a lot of jokes if I don't catch the cue.

Also, I hoped people would read my post today, which is basically a closing post to my friend and the folks who have helped me. Unless others offer me insight to anything I missed, it feels like people have moved on, and my friend has concluded this phase to the point of us agreeing not to play, as so many of you recommended and expected. I may share some insights in the future to this group, but after some reflection.

I also wanted to say thanks to you especially, anyway. So many people went above and beyond to accommodate my questions. Thanks for that.

So, five minutes each for fighting.

Drop the puck. Play on.

My mention of April Fool's Day is a data point to why OP/Yourself showed up on my possible troll radar.