Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5729809" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Okay, we're in agreement so far.Was this the first session with his players? It sounds like it (otherwise I'm not sure why this would be setting the tone in the way you describe), so I'll be responding as if that's the case.If he has new players, I'd like to know more about the player that requested it. There are many possibilities as to why this took so long, or why a debate ensued. Did the player not give up? Did the GM want to clarify because he's new to the system? Did the player have a history or reputation of trying to game the system and calling it "thinking outside the box"?It's very possible, however, that the GM just took too long, and that you're right. I can't make that call yet. I do know that the GM might be prodding his players to think within the box until everything gets settled. If they're new players, he may not want them getting used to "gaming the system". While I don't see that spell usage as gaming the system, it is a willingly liberal interpretation of the spell, and I might want to let the players know that they shouldn't try to game the system.It's also possible, as I mentioned earlier, that the GM was new to the system, and didn't want his players to take advantage of him. That trust has to be built both ways.Whoa, I did not get that out of your story at all. Trust is nowhere in there at all. After about a ten page debate with Hussar on the definition of trust, I'm just going to post it now and hopefully skip it:Just for my two cents, saying "convince me" does not mean that you don't trust someone. The rules didn't cover something. This isn't someone saying "I saw this, you should believe me" and the GM saying "I don't believe you unless you convince me." That'd be the case if the GM was ignoring the rules in the book. In this case, it'd be like me saying (and forgive the analogy) "I think that modern rock is better than classic rock" and you saying "I don't know... convince me." Now I can name songs, artists, and state my biased opinion, but there's no way to prove it. Trust is not involved at all.That's some incredibly wild extrapolation. And while I see why some people might make that jump, I can definitively tell you (as someone who approaches questions with a "it depends" attitude) that this could be a very wrong assumption. If you assumed that with me, then you'd be cutting yourself off from some very inventive ideas in the game. Just because one idea is disallowed or discussed does not mean that the rest of the ideas will be shot down.I still think that taking thirty minutes to decide is probably a problem, but, again, that's an entirely different issue. Trust is not an issue at all, in my mind, and while you have a chance of being correct when it comes to this GM's response, you're completely basing that on the fact that you believe everyone has a standard answer they lean towards. To those of us who prefer "it depends" and would like to see themselves as a fairly neutral arbiter (or referee), all I can say is that we strongly disagree.I think you're really jumping the gun, or you've heard more than you've relayed and you're basing your opinion on that. Because, really, I don't mind someone saying no to something when I ask. Taking thirty minutes is a problem, but no amount of "no, that won't work in this instance" will keep me from trying things in the future, unless it's qualified (with actual words) that I'm playing a completely RAW game, and that if the action isn't listed then I can't try it. I probably wouldn't play in that game, though.Just my thoughts. I think either you're really, really into first impressions (when they aren't nearly as indicative as you might imply), or you've got more information than I do and you're basing your opinion on that (and, since I don't have that information, it's an unfair fight <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />). As always, though, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification