arguing with my DM: The Leadership feat(and a wizard)

[carmachu]

Sure. Although I do think he has the prerogative to say,

"This character is not a fighter, so you cannot take Weapon Focus, because I've decided that it's a fighter-only feat in my game."

"This character is not that diplomatic, you cannot do an Aid Another for a Diplomacy roll, because I've instituted a minimum Diplomacy score for doing such Aid Another checks."

"This character's Double Wand Wielder feat works only for wands, I won't allow it to work with staves."

"This character doesn't have a Dexterity of 14, which I've house-ruled to be the minimum Dexterity allowed for taking the rogue class, so he can't take a level of Rogue."

You see, I dont disagree with any of those items above. So long as its laid out ahead of time. But now that I'm 10th level and you started, as the DM, to pull these and the leadership feat as descriped by the OP's DM? I'd have a problem with it midstream. It require a polite discussion between me and DM. Its the one thing I really dislike as a player and to do as a DM.

It feels like the rug is pulled out from under one. Its not to say the OP couldnt take leadership at some point. All characters grow. But there are a few examples of low Chr folks in real life that folks flock to. The paladin is more likely to draw a widely range of followers. the mage a narrow focus of ones-most likely only other mages.

 

[pawsplay]

I think perhaps some people may be injecting their emotional reaction into events about which they have little personal knowledge, and in any case deserves an impartial response. Whether his player is acting entitled is a different issue than whether the GM is being reasonable. We can certainly address both issues, but saying someone doesn't deserve to set at a GM's table is hyperbolic, probably not helpful, and in any case against the forum rules as it constitutes a very fierce personal attack.

 

[aboyd]

Hey, thanks for the XP everyone. That was nice!

 

[Dzyu]

You're right about one thing, aboyd and Oryan77. I should cut the DM some slack and let him play it out his way. He's the DM and he deserves my respect. It's just that I have certain expectations as a player myself, and naturally I get disappointed if the DM gets all... argh.. what's the word... [Harsh judgement without good reason]!
After all, I consider listening to your player and "saying yes" to be a very basic thing in D&D for any DM to learn, and we've actually been through it before with him, so I'm very disappointed that he's suddenly so brazen on this. It's bad when the DM pulls the rug out from under you and makes you feel stupid for even thinking that his character can't do a certain thing even the core rules allows. It is in fact a gross violation of my character that the DM should superimpose his judgements on him like that as well! Cause that's what the issue is here. When he threatened to nerf my character, remove all feats etc etc if I discussed the issue further that's when I decided that uprooting this problem is far more important than to keep playing with a DM with this attitude, and since he doesn't want to discuss it further I wanted to collect opinions and came here, seeing it as the only opporunity to knock the DM off his high horse and level with me. It's probably not the best course of action, but I just don't respond well to this kind of negative behaviour.

I do not try to manipulate my DM to gain power with faegan. I want the new players in my group to feel on par in power, and I actually said that I didn't even wanted personal feats and thought we shouldn't have them in the beginning, but guess what my DM said? "I want you guys to have specials feats. I've always had them and I think it's fun, and it gives you, the players, more fun things to do and more options to choose from. Besides, I usually use encounters that are very difficult, so you're gonna need it! It worked really well in my last campaign. I learned alot on the first campaign with you guys, so what happened then won't happen again. By the way, all healing potions are 50% off. And you should consider taking the Die-hard feat. It is VERY good and will save your lives MANY times." and so I went along with it. Well, except the die hard feat... this is where I had that game balance discussion with him... But so far, he's right. What happened the last time we played with him (super-imba personal feat hell lvl 5 monstrous PCs annihilating lvl 10-15 NPCs and monsters for warmups) hasn't happened so far, so he has learned. We're still powerful, but when we met a lvl 15 fighter this time he actually got the better of us and we had to flee. A good sign.

I don't want more than what the rest of the group has got, but I don't want less either. And I CERTAINLY don't want to get punished for being enthusiastic and taking an interest in my character and the campaign! Taking what I consider being new and original paths! I've never seen the leadership feat in play, so naturally I want to be a part of it!

I don't hang over the DM manipulating him like a puppet every step of the way either. I mostly just refer to a feat in one of the old books and ask simply "approved?" on my personal forum. Usually it's a simple yes or no, or some conditions/adaptions needing to be made before it's ok, so it has worked well, and he opened for this himself by stating that it's ok to use things from 3.5 books as long as we take it through him, so I've been playing ball even though I would've ran it entirely different, and it has worked well. Different, but fun all the same.

A DMs job is to try to make everybody have as much fun as possible. Denying people things the rules normally allow is a GREAT way to ruin a player's fun.

Anyhoo, while I first started DMing 15 years ago, I haven't been playing continually since then, and I've mostly had the same players, so we're a pretty isolated group. I guess we do things differently... Though it's not monty haul... If anything we're a bit on the cheap side when it comes to handing out treasure. We have been behind in treasure up until lvl 5 in this campaign, where I kindly reminded the DM about the treasure tables, and now we're on par more or less. 25 int on lvl 7. Is that really so bad? I've spent ALL my money getting that +4 headband. I don't have much wands, scrolls or anything else, really. Also, consider that almost every single encounter is at least 3-5 levels higher than what we should be facing. I need that kind of int for my spells to work. A fireball with a reflex save of 17 is almost useless vs what we're facing every day... It's how his games are, and I've had that entire game balance discussion with him and I'm reluctant to bring it up again because I don't want to nag or seem like I try to control him. It's important that he figure this overpower part out for himself.

The politics and plots in our campaign worlds are deep and engaging. This is something he does better than me. Politics/story/world design. I'm more of a memorable locations/events/NPCs/fantastic relics kind of guy. He mentions that he wants to be a fiction writer, and he's definitely got it.
We also have great RP situations in the group. I can be a powergamer. It's easy to get lost in the moment and want more, but I am also a storyteller, an actor, a tactician and so forth, so regardless of what you see and make of this tiny aspect that I've presented, and even presented poorly here, is just a tiny facet of the gem that is the big picture, and you should therefore keep your derogatory speculations to yourselves, please.

 

[Oryan77]

I mostly just refer to a feat in one of the old books and ask simply "approved?" on my personal forum. Usually it's a simple yes or no,

You mention this as if you're completely ok with the DM rejecting your requests, but then you follow it up with....

Denying people things the rules normally allow is a GREAT way to ruin a player's fun.

So I don't get it. Has he rejected anything you've asked him for yet, or is the Leadership feat the first time he has told you "no" when you've requested something?

you should therefore keep your derogatory speculations to yourselves, please.

I haven't said anything derogatory at all. I have speculated....a lot. That's because you posted here telling us about your problem and from what I'm reading between the lines, I'm assuming there is more to this than a DM not letting you have a feat when 'by the book' you actually can take the feat. You have even made comments in your own words that lead me to believe it is not just the DM with the problem. If you don't like strangers on a forum speculating, then don't ask them for help. Now it sounds like you're just mad that not everyone is taking your side.

I've even been the victim of a former player complaining about me online (right here on Enworld). 12 pages in the thread, everyone had her side and was calling me all kinds of things. I couldn't believe what I was reading....because she was full of crap. So I gave my side of the story, and the tables turned. People realized she was just whining and I was not to blame. So I'm not the type that will just listen to your side and assume your DM is a bad DM. I speculate and try to see where he's coming from. But so far you haven't really acknowledged whether or not my assumptions about why your DM really won't let you have the feat may be correct or not. Instead you just tell me to shutup

 

[aboyd]

I do not try to manipulate my DM to gain power with faegan.

I wanted to collect opinions and came here, seeing it as the only opporunity to knock the DM off his high horse and level with me.

No speculation or other commentary needed.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Your DM's wrong: there has never been a Cha requirement for Leadership, the feat will be much weaker to you without a decent charisma anyway, and historically many uncharismatic people have been leaders. But...he let you take that houserule feat and didn't bother to ammend Pathfinder's stupid aleterations to point buy that allowed your 25/7/7 monstrosity (and actually gave you bonus points to further max int by minimizing the other 2) stat allotment in the first place, so I feel no pity for you. As Thatdarnedbob put it, "You're playing a level 7 wizard with 25 Int. Stop complaining about things being unfair."

 

[Wik]

Yeah. I've been saying this from the start, and your points sum it up pretty clearly - you're not getting what you want, and you're trying to browbeat your GM. If the GM says no, and you keep pushing, it's not cool. It ruins the fun of the game.

there have been times where I've said "no", and players have gotten ticked at me. I made a few "no" callings even though my rulings went directly against the rules. In all of those cases, the players made their case, I listened, and I said "no". Not once did they come online and post a case against me. At least, to the best of my knowledge.

Sometimes, they have come back with negotiations... and I've either said "yes" or "no" to those. The thing is, when I say "no" as a GM, I mean it, and my players respect it. Even if they feel it is unfair towards them directly.

And the same has applied as a player. There has only been ONE time, ever, where I've come online and complained about a GM's behaviour... and that was more to vent after a very poor session (and poor behaviour on the part of the GM, outside of the game's parameters). And, before that event, when that awful GM said "no" to something, I accepted it, and went with it.

The GM said "yes" to one PC, and "no" to you. That is a little messed up. However, in the context of the characters, it makes sense. You described your character - a loner, misanthropic scholar - and that became your vision of things. In the GM's mind, that does not jive well with "leadership" - I'd agree with him.

My personal favourite bit of your posts is the fact that you act like you are not a powergamer, that you just want a small henchman... and then you turn around and point out how you've already worked out that you're going to get the maximum level cohort possible, through manipulation of the rules.

And that reminds me of this player I had, once, who would roll the d20 when making an attack, and not even announce the result. "I hit", he'd say. and then he'd roll damage - he figured he knew everything, and didn't really listen to me as the GM.

There were plenty of times where I'd stop play, ask him what his roll was, and even though it was actually a hit... I'd smile and say "Sorry, that was a miss."

My point there being, there have been plenty of little hints in your post that suggest that the GM has just had enough of being browbeaten, and is making a stand. And I want to applaud him.

He isn't being the best GM by limiting the feat from you... but you're not being the fairest player by how you're seemingly treating him from the comments you've made in this thread.

 

[Dzyu]

I came to gather statistics to see which one of us was right about the leadership feat. If he would read it, then say "okay, you're probably right. What you and the guys on enworld says makes sense, but I still don't like it, so no" then I'd shut up and play ball again, but he did no such thing. He said it didn't make sense, that it was stupid, fueled the debate and challenging me, and then threatened to nerf my character because I didn't shut up and agree with him. I won't let a DM bully me around just because he's a DM. It's not his game, it is our game, and if he can't come to terms with that and behave like an adult I sure as hell won't give an inch.

Oh, and I HAVE linked him here, so if he dared, he'd post here...

He has rejected many of my ideas and I don't have a problem with it because they're usually from other books than core, or they're custom ideas for spells, feats or the like. This is the first time he's directly interfered with core like this.
I may have exaggerated when I mentioned that this occurs on a daily basis. It really happens only in the first 1-3 days after any gives session, which usually refreshes my inspiration and enthusiasm, and I'm busy updating my character sheet/preparing for the next session.
And then it usually is requests such as:

"Can I have a sneak spell which works exactly like the jump spell?" after the paladin spent a whole fricken session walking around almost useless because he had to take off his plate armor to be able to sneak along with us.

You know, the funny thing is, I'm not even sure I want the damn feat. I was just telling him I was considering it when this issue arised, and haven't decided yet, so it's more of a principal issue than anything else, really.

Most likely, if he changes his mind, I'll thank him for being big about it, as usual, and possibly pick craft magic arms and armor. I know the rogue and pala has alot of gold saved up so we're just waiting for some crafting time now...

 

[Theroc]

I'm not going to jump into the whole can of worms here, but would point out that fighting with your DM on principle isn't necessarily a good way to keep the game running smoothly. However, if you value the principle more than your game's continuance, that is your choice. I wouldn't presume to tell you what is best, since I am not part of your game.