Traveon Wyvernspur
First Post
I usually say "yes" unless it's something totally off-base and/or game-breaking in nature.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
As a DM, what is your default answer to player requests?
- Thread starter Mort
- Start date
Sidebar - that is my answer. It is important to hear the pros and cons of their request and then to look at my campaign setting to weigh the impact. I don't reject or accept out of habit.
WizarDru
Adventurer
I may not be expressing myself well, here. There was, and this should be clear I mean 'in my experience', a perception that many DMs in the late 1970s and early 1980s saw D&D in a competitive light, with an adversarial relationship to their players. There was also, IMHO, a perception among many that everyone had hear stories about DMs who behaved this way, most likely far in excess of any reality. I have no idea how this applied to whole, any more than I know how many 'Monty Haul' DMs actually existed.
I attribute at least part of that to inexperienced DMs who were running games during the D&D fad/boom of the early 1980s who actually had little interest in role-playing, but had heard of this D&D thing and ran some games. I know I've personally experienced both killer DMs and monty-haul DMs in my life, but I wouldn't classify them as the norm, even then.
greatamericanfolkher
Explorer
My default is usually "maybe" with a strong side of "yes." There is very little that I can see not allowing, but I won't rule out "no".
I don't have one.
If its ridiculous, they get an immediate "no", but everything else is dependent upon the particular request, player*, system & campaign.
* What works for one player may not work for all: one guy might have a firm grasp on what he asks and will use it only to improve the game for all, another might be looking to abuse the modification, and another might not have a clue about what the change would mean, requiring additional work on the GM's part to prevent things from spinning out of control or becoming otherwise unfun.
It really depends on who the player is that is asking.
Some players I know are just trying to have fun not break or game the game so I lean towards yes a lot more.
But I also have players that if you allow something they will expect it to be that way always they won't accept the I am going to say yes for now and then research the rules later. They will argue with the line but you allowed it that time.
For example I was not the DM but a player and we were fighting a dragon. The one player managed to get on the back and his plan was to hack away with his two handed sword at the dragon's wing joint. The DM ruled he could do it but each time he had to make a balance check not to fall off the moving dragon. Not being the DM I kept my opinion that attacking one particular part would make it a called shot to myself.
I mentioned it to the DM in private and she said she had thought of that but wanted to make the game fun and it was as a cool idea so she didn't want to penalize the player's idea to much. Plus since the dragon was huge and its wing joint was a rather big target it shouldn't be that hard to hit.
It came back to bite her in the butt because the same player was fighting another rogue and wanted to hit him in his sword arm so she told him it was a called shot and he threw a hissy fit and brought up the dragon. When she explained her reasoning he grumbled about DMings changing rules and played the long suffering player with I just want the rules to always be consistent. The reality is he is fine if the rules are bent in his favor.
Some players I know are just trying to have fun not break or game the game so I lean towards yes a lot more.
But I also have players that if you allow something they will expect it to be that way always they won't accept the I am going to say yes for now and then research the rules later. They will argue with the line but you allowed it that time.
For example I was not the DM but a player and we were fighting a dragon. The one player managed to get on the back and his plan was to hack away with his two handed sword at the dragon's wing joint. The DM ruled he could do it but each time he had to make a balance check not to fall off the moving dragon. Not being the DM I kept my opinion that attacking one particular part would make it a called shot to myself.
I mentioned it to the DM in private and she said she had thought of that but wanted to make the game fun and it was as a cool idea so she didn't want to penalize the player's idea to much. Plus since the dragon was huge and its wing joint was a rather big target it shouldn't be that hard to hit.
It came back to bite her in the butt because the same player was fighting another rogue and wanted to hit him in his sword arm so she told him it was a called shot and he threw a hissy fit and brought up the dragon. When she explained her reasoning he grumbled about DMings changing rules and played the long suffering player with I just want the rules to always be consistent. The reality is he is fine if the rules are bent in his favor.
airwalkrr
Adventurer
If a player makes a request, my answer is generally "yes." Of course, I do not say yes to silly questions like "Can my 1st level character have a +5 vorpal bastard sword?" I sometimes make a player request the object of a quest if the subject in question would grant the player character a great amount of power. In that regard it serves as treasure for defeating a challenge, which is perfectly fair in my estimation.
