Armour Dilemma: Am I Wrong Here?
- Thread starter fusangite
- Start date
Numion
First Post
Caliban said:
I'm sorry for that. I indeed got a bit carried away by the whole debate. The truth is that I would've probably fared worse than fusangite in his situation - I don't take well to players who throw fits. My advice here has been given with the benefit of hindsight, and I don't presume that DMs can ever make the optimal decisions in thigh spots.
Having said that, I still maintain that the encounter had room for improvement, even within fusangites DMing style. He made suboptimal choices along the way, but so do we all. Taking this statement as an indicator of my arrogance isn't fair - we are all adults (well, almost all) and are supposed to know that nothing is perfect, without getting insulted.
Except that you did do exactly what I'm claiming.
Claim to be a better DM? No.
Claiming that fusangite was wrong? No.
I think that you're supposed to prove that I did keep claiming those things rather than I'm supposed to proof I didn't.
All I know is that calling me a kitten isn't a compliment, it's a bit disturbing at best
So are you. Because of what, I don't know. I do have respect for you, and I'm not alone here (because of your efforts in the Rules forum), but it sadly seems that on the internet societies general respect (and self-perceived importance) seems to come hand-in-hand with a big ego.
Numion said:
This is not the impression I have been getting from your posts.
You keep claiming that Fusangite didn't handle the situation correctly. (i.e. correctly by the rules, but incorrectly for his players).
And you keep saying that it should have handled it the way you would have handled it.
To me, that sounds like you are saying that you are the better DM and Fusangite should just admit that he handled it badly and do it your way in the future. (This may not be what you meant, but that is the impression you have been giving.)
In my opinion, both are valid ways of handling the situation. Sometimes PC's get to sit out a fight because of their own decisions, and sometimes you want everyone involved despite incorrect decisions on the part of the PCs.
Fusgangite felt this was the first type of situation and acted accordingly. You may disagree, but it's not a black and white issue.
All I know is that calling me a kitten isn't a compliment, it's a bit disturbing at best
That was my oh so subtle way of telling you to chill out before this escalates.
I'm not lashing out, but I am making my feelings known.
I think you have been coming on rather strong and not being willing to see the other side.
I'm not even go to comment Scarbonac, other than to say I'm suprised he's still able to post.
Last edited:
jdavis said:
Well after this post have at it gentlemen.
Metagaming is a bad thing, IMNSHO and in the eyes of the game designers, is says so pg. 13 of DMG and it says why to. Whether or not that rule was broken is another story. Afterall I'm told that there is no wrong way to play the game. I happen to disagree but that is a different thread. I happens that what they said on pg 13 applies. Many people have said why didn't the paladin go in a save the day why didn't everyone fold what they were doing to go in and take the chances that they should have as heroes? Because they don't as a rule play in character and they made decisions as players to play as characters. You can't always metagame and expect people to always play in character. This time they didn't metagame and played in character and IMHO they sat out for it. IC they had no reason to think that they needed to be there faster.
I gave some good advice somewhere in this thread and I think that it was well received. Peace out!
Scarbonac
Not An Evil Twin
Elvinis75 said:
Just to contribute something to the thread before the final ultimate ugly meltdown ensues, IIRC, the Paladin was apparently sick of being the frontline tank who would be abandoned there to sink or swim on his own by his fellow party-members, and was enjoying the hell out of the idea that he could leave them in the lurch (which wouldn't be completely out of line with a Paladin's code in order to ''teach them a lesson'' about teamwork and ''goodness''
) with plenty of in-game justification as the PC in question couldn't have possibly known how events were unfolding.
jdavis
First Post
Elvinis75 said:
Yes but how many places and times has it been said to play the game how it is fun for your group? I really don't see this as the same as the example of the lever in the DMG, this is characters having a in game discussion. Also if you get right down to the fact of it, 4 characters left to investigate but didn't come back, without any ingame discussion that's a sign of imminent trouble, some people think that them not coming back is a good reason for them piddling around with the armor, but it really is the other way around, why didn't they come back? well because they were in trouble. Your expecting a attack, you hear a attack, 4 party members leave and never return.......that seems pretty obvious to me. Of course when you look at the situation as it was given (which was the point here, not a popularity contest, not a style debate, it was a evaluation of the facts) they knew exactly what was going on and chose to ignore it.
I really don't care if you like the meta discussion or not, I don't care if the DMG say's it's bad, this was about looking at the situation as given in his game. I think he started a pole someplace else to discuss the other stuff. This was a case of given facts and descriptions. Everything that isn't a discusion of the given facts and descriptions is irrelevent to the "who was right" part of the argument. Every example I read of how he could of changed things to make it work better required him to change his game style, nobody ever came up with any sugestions that fit in with what he was saying and discribing. Every sugestion was to fundamentally change the way he played the game, and every time he pointed that out somebody got mad because he didn't agree with their situation, and acted like he was insulting them. Lets face it he doesn't have to agree, and he went out of his way to explain why every solution offered would not work in his game. Why do people get upset when he says that wouldn't work in my game and here is why? Me I would of gotten very upset very quickly with some of this crap and condesending responses in this thread, he remained civil throughout the whole thing, even when he was accused of hating his game group and intentionally trying to force people not to play. He's a better person than me, I had to quit the thread twice because my blood pressure spiked (it really did, I hit 170 over 120 last night). Why does everything have to get confrontational, why does everybody have to take responses personal and offer up attacks. Did anybody ever think "hey maybe his response was just a response and not some vieled attack on my person?" You know maybe the 70/30 thing was just a statement of how the thread was shaping out and not a attack on somebody.
Oh yea I actually think it's Baseball season
Similar Threads
