Search results

You're claiming the cell phone using player threw a tantrum and believed himself entitled to a favorable outcome regardless of effect. You have no grounds to make the claim. Everyone at the table was unhappy with the actions of the DM. The DM is now claiming that the cell phone user was the...

Possible yes. However both represent an investment in the game at the table which the OP, it would seem, has stated multiple times now he's under the impression is not the case "because he's on his cell phone all the time".

Claiming that trusting the DM of a game (any DM in this case) not to be a douche should be par for the course vs calling the creator of the thread a douche are two different things. I did the former and not the latter.

You know what that tells me? Someone who complains about an event like that the most is probably one of the more INVESTED people at the table. So as much as I see the OP complain about a guy being on his phone, there's most definitely another side to that specific coin. Especially since the...

It's not personal, it might be the way I post that is leading you to that conclusion or the way I reply to others who seek to make the discussion personal (lowkey for example).

But even then Tony, I would argue that if the player's bad behavior spills over into character: You should be the better person and not sink to that level, resolving the problem out of character instead. Go for the source, not the symptom.

Responses in bold.

Sure, you taking only a portion of a sentence I wrote and ignoring the rest of the post seems to perfectly sum up your level of defense of the DM's actions. We'll leave it at that indeed.

But the ranger was paying attention. This was not cell phone guy remember? The ranger and the group had clearly stated they were selling the "set of armor", not the ring or gauntlet. So why then does the DM maliciously have the ranger sell items he (or the group) wasn't intending on selling...

Incorrect, he stated the group multiple times was unhappy with what he has done. However, he's focusing on the guy with the cell phone because that's his justification for his actions. You're falling for the justification doesn't make it legitimate or even relevant. Magic item identification...

His refusal to use the rules of the game he's playing doesn't change the fact that they exist. If he's not going to use them, he should make it crystal clear to his players via description etc what is or isn't magical. And I believe he did so as he described the gauntlet + ring as being welded...

"I'm going to get the set of armor appraised by the smith and then sell if it's a good price" "roll INT for the appraisal to see if it's a fair deal for the set of armor" *roll well* "You think it's a good price" "Ok I sell the armor." "GOTCHA! You didn't just sell the armor! You also...

I can just refer to the posts of the DM in question here. He's explained himself the following: He starts his post by saying he plays with his best friends, he's the DM, there's a player he's annoyed with because he's always on his phone (attempted justification for his actions, which as...

you skipped the part where the ranger said "I want to sell the armor" and the DM then maliciously forced that to mean "the armor + gauntlet + ring" which was a contradiction to what the players wanted to do and had expressed. Nice try though. You also skip the part where the ranger wanted the...

The DM here is using a guy being on his cell as justification for screwing over an entire group of people after they stated their intentions to only sell the armor and not the magical gauntlet and ring they specifically were interested in. The DM then sets them up to fail, doesn't give them the...

Not only that but the DM has a responsibility NOT to play the gotcha game with his players considering that he controls all of the information the players base their decisions on. AND he knew from the get go that the players only want to sell the armor, not the gauntlet or ring. So he totally...

Yup. Imo this is a clear example of malicious DM'ing. The DM was frustrated about an out of character problem, the player being on his cellphone, so he decided to enact punishment. How? By purposefully and maliciously causing not just the player he has a problem with, BUT THE ENTIRE GROUP...

Can we also talk about how the DM in this situation is resorting to in character passive aggressive BS to not even attempt to resolve an out of character problem: The player is on his phone. ???

So much this. You made a BUNCH of terrible decisions. You're not against your players man. You're not there to pull a fast one on your group when you CLEARLY knew what their intentions were. Next session you should apologize to the group and then rectify the items debacle by giving them back...

Anyone know when the book is going to be available on amazon.ca or other retailers? I've been trying to find it for a while and it seems no one has it in Canada lol... I know the question is off-topic but I'm just curious to know if anyone found it in Canada.