As a DM, what is your default answer to player requests?

[Rune]

Depends on the players. I have one group of players who are in it to have fun and participate in an exciting, awesome game. My answers to them almost always range from "Yes" to "Yes, but..." This is my preferred style of play.

Another group derives its enjoyment from trying to break the game. They rely heavily on the Rules As Written and delight in finding loopholes. My responses to them (when the rules are not sufficient) are usually "No, but..." or "No."

 

[steenan]

Recently, I'm running Nobilis and I try to follow the advice the book gives.
So, I nearly always say "yes, but...".

It's "Yes, probably you can, but how do you really do it?"
Or "Yes, but there will be consequences"
Or "Yes, but it's a level 4 miracle"

 

[SnowleopardVK]

Depends what they ask. If it's clearly reasonable, "yes". If it's not, "no".

If I can sort of see what they're getting at, but I'm not entirely convinced, my general response is "pitch it to me". If they player can intelligently convince me that what they want should reasonably get a yes, then they get a yes.

"Pitch it to me" most often comes up when someone wants to use one skill in place of another. Like say, wanting to follow tracks with perception instead of survival, substituting sleight of hand with stealth, or even trying to use knowledge of something the target relates to in place of actual skill at diplomacy (showing off your knowledge of religion to try and get the priest on your good side for example). I'd probably allow it, but at a penalty for "improvised" use of a skill.

 

[Plane Sailing]

If someone is creating a character and wants something outside the bounds described for this campaign setting, the answer is No.

If we are in a game and someone is asking something from the RPing point of view e.g. "Is there an air duct I can crawl through?" then the answer is Yes (or Yes and, occasionally Yes But)

 

[Mort]

It sounds so hip to say, "I'm a DM who says 'Yes!' to his players." The fact is that my answer is now, and always will be, entirely dependent upon the actual request. I don't want to say "yes" by reflex. That wouldn't be doing my job because players should NOT always get what they want.

The question here is which way do you lean toward? While the players should certainly not always get what they want, should the DM at least provide a mechanism to try it and fail vs. not letting them try in the first place?

Now admittedly, too often in the past I have denied even quite inconsequential requests for far too selfish reasons or without good reasons at all. That's something all DM's have to come to grips with because the position we are in is one of being the guy who DOES have to say "no" a lot if the inmates aren't to run the asylum.

Is that really a concern? Is it a real worry that if the DM says "yes" once to often the players will run away with "his" world. Shouldn't the players have an opportunity to make the world "theirs" as well as the DMs?

I think that "saying yes" is less a matter of training yourself to accede to player requests than of giving DUE consideration to ideas for the direction of the game beyond your own. Yes, the DM has the LAST word (by right, privilege and necessity) - but that doesn't mean his is the ONLY word. Saying "yes" is about removing your blinders, not about giving away the store.

I find that too much "due consideration" leads to overthinking and saying no quite a bit more than necessary - that's just IMO of course.

 

[Croesus]

If someone is creating a character and wants something outside the bounds described for this campaign setting, the answer is No.

This is also my initial reaction (mainly because the player who most often asks for such things tends to be a min-maxer). Then I usually ask why and, if he has a good reason, try to find a way to accomodate the request without breaking the game.

 

[IronWolf]

I lean towards the Yes side of the spectrum. Usually some additional details to be worked out - these are mainly tweaks to make sure it fits within the current campaign - a logical tie in for the request, etc.

 

[S'mon]

In practice, probably somewhere between "Yes, but" and "OK, we'll see how that works in practice".

 

[Herobizkit]

My response is usually "yes, AND". As in, "Yes, you can play a flying superhero that starts with wings and eye lasers. AND, there's a whole race of your people that is universally feared and/or hated."

 

[Mark CMG]

What is you “default” answer to player requests?

Is it “yes”, “yes but”, “maybe,” “no but”, just “no?” or something else?

I ask , "Why?" and/or "How?" It helps inform whether the request fits the style of game I am running and the play style of the group. Often the "yes" or the "no" becomes obvious to the player after asking "why" and/or "how" before the GM even needs to say it.


Griffins & Grottos, the game I am in the process of completing and which will be in beta release form shortly, builds on this very notion of being able to justify player choices and character choices as part of the roleplaying experience. This justification process maintains PC build integrity in relation to story and character concept allowing a more cohesive game for the players as they generate and then advance their characters. I believe the "why" and "how" are integral to the roleplaying experience.