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

[Mort]

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.

I hadn't really thought about it from this angle.

Isn't (much of the time) the why or how pretty apparant?
As in:

player: I want to do x.
DM why?/how?
player uh - to do x/by doing x

I could very well be missing an element here - so am glad to hear the specifics.

Another thought though. By asking "why" aren't you often essentially asking the player "would your character really do that?/Are you sure your character would do that?" which many players don't like to hear at all.

 

[Agamon]

I try to take an approach that says, "Sure, you can try, but,"

a) will it work considering your aptitude and materials at hand??

b) what will the consequences be?

Those are the fundamental questions that subconsciously run through the mind of someone in real life whenever they do something, so I figure those are good rules to go by. So if a player were to ask if he can jump of the roof of a building and try flying by flapping his arms, I would say, "Sure, you can try."

 

[Mark CMG]

I hadn't really thought about it from this angle.

Isn't (much of the time) the why or how pretty apparant?
As in:

player: I want to do x.
DM why?/how?
player uh - to do x/by doing x

I could very well be missing an element here - so am glad to hear the specifics.

If there needs to be a question that can be answered by yes or no then it wasn't really apparent, I would guess, or the question need not be asked. (Unless it is something mundane like, "Does the tavern have an Orc sauce available for their Bugbear burger?") If the question is asked, then likely the answer "no" is expected while the answer "yes" is desired. Asking "Why?" or "How?" allows the player to put things in a way that perhaps the GM hasn't considered and makes saying Yes all the more likely, if the player is coming at the question from either a reasonable in-game perspective or a position meta-game-wise that stays true to both the game being presented and the play style of the group.

Another thought though. By asking "why" aren't you often essentially asking the player "would your character really do that?/Are you sure your character would do that?" which many players don't like to hear at all.

That sounds more like a problem a player has with his own play style and I am not sure it really fits with what is being discussed above, which I take more to be about a group of players all trying to play one game together and make it a cohesive play experience. What you are describing with that last question seems more like one player jockeying for more of an individual advantage. Even so, if a player doesn't like the question of "why" or "how" they probably also wouldn't like the answer "no" so they should look on "why" and "how" as giving them an additional chance to avoid the "no."

 

[Ahnehnois]

Although I am not a law student, I am currently taking a law class, and when asked if something can be done in the legal arena, he often responds:

"You can try"

Sounds like a good philosophy for gaming too, and it's pretty much my outlook.

 

[Dykstrav]

In short... I don't have a default answer to player requests. There's just too much to consider in any given request to come up with a typical blanket response to cover most situations. I'm glad that it's not a poll, because my reactions cover a spectrum.

If it's something obvious, logical, or flat-out inconsequential, I usually agree immediately. There may be caveats or limitations, but if it's not going to derail the session, I'm willing to hand-wave it or approve it quickly.

"Can I buy the ingredients to brew potions in this village?"

"Well, there is an herbalist, but he's an adept. You can get the stuff you'd need to brew potions for 0- or 1st-level spells, but that's it."

If it's something that adds to the game, either in immersion or verisimilitude, administration, or teamwork, I typically say yes with hearty approval.

"After we killed the evil druids, are there any of those medium or large dire rats that they were breeding as guard animals left alive? I'd like to care for them since they've been mistreated so horribly."

"Sure, you can care for the surviving dire rats. As you spend several weeks caring for them, you gradually domesticate them--the druids horribly mistreated the rats and they have never known true kindness. You feed them nourishing food instead of garbage, clean them up, and have their injuries tended. Basically, they lose the disease ability, but you can train them to serve as mounts, and they have climb and swim speed."

If it's something silly, my response is usually, "Why do you want to do that?" When the player explains their reasoning to me, we quickly discover that either they're being a goober or that they haven't really thought it out, and they usually change their mind.

"I don't want to spend money on a silver weapon to fight the werewolf--that's too expensive. Instead, I'm going to carry a pouch of silver pieces, and when we meet the werewolf, I'm going to hold a silver piece against its skin with one hand and pound it into its flesh with my warhammer."

"You don't have to get a silver weapon, you could just buy some silversheen. You want to walk up to a werewolf and kindly ask it to hold still while you hammer silver pieces into its flesh?"

"Yeah. All I have to do is hold a silver piece against it and then hit it with my warhammer."

"Okay... So I'll let you touch a silver piece to its skin as a standard action with a touch attack, but you're basically sticking your arm out--that's going to provoke attacks of opportunity, just like if you tried a combat maneuver without a feat."

"I don't care, I'm not spending my cash on a silver weapon or a disposable magic item for a single fight. I'm going to 'think outside the box' and solve this problem creatively."

"You want to smash a warhammer right on top of your hand?"

"Uh, just on the silver piece--"

"If you want to hit the silver piece without smashing into your own hand, you're going to make an attack roll against the silver piece's AC, not the werewolf's AC, but you're going to also have to hold it reasonably steady against it's hide--basically, you're going to be attacking a diminutive object on the werewolf, so it'd be at the werewolf's normal AC + 8 to hit the silver piece without smashing the hell out of your fingers. Furthermore, if you hit the werewolf's AC but not the AC + 8, you've hit the silver piece and your hand. You'll take full damage from the warhammer attack and mangle your hand, making it useless until you heal the damage."

"But then the werewolf would die because I just warhammered a silver piece into its skin!"

"Not quite. A werewolf's hide isn't a piece of lumber, you wouldn't drive in the silver piece like a nail. You'd hit it and squish the silver piece between the werewolf's hide and your warhammer. There's a chance that you could get it in to its flesh if you held the coin on-edge and struck it just right, so if you managed to do all that... I'd give you a 50% chance of considering your damage from the strike to be from a slashing silver weapon instead of a plain ol' warhammer."

"Hmm. Yeah. I guess I didn't really think that through, but you're right... Smashing silver pieces into a werewolf's hide wouldn't be very easy. Maybe I'll just get a dose of silversheen instead."

If it's something flat-out stupid or insipid, I just say no. I think that there's a push against a GM saying "no" in gamer culture today, but I'd rather be open and honest about the sort of game that I want to run.

"I saw the easter egg on the Lord of the Rings DVD, so I want to wear an extra magical ring as a genital piercing. If I get a Prince Albert, can my character wear an extra ring?"

"No."

"What if I took it as a feat or something?"

"No. Your character can be as pierced as you'd like, but I'm not making it a topic of mechanical advantage. If you're trying to be funny, you're not. If you honestly think that's a cool idea... Well, my game probably isn't right for you."

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

That really depends on what they're asking to do. If they're trying to do something that just isn't possible within the scope of the setting, the answer is "no". If they're trying to do something that's too difficult for their character, the answer is "roll for it".

On the other hand, if it sounds like it'll make the game more awesome, then the answer is usually "yes".

I've been playing a lot of FATE lately, and it has actual mechanics for that sort of thing. You can spend FATE points and make skill rolls to actually revise reality. War veteran? Spend a FATE point and the mercenary NPC is an old war buddy. Captured by a tribe of goblins? Roll a Lore check and you can make up their laws governing trial by combat.

 

[Mark CMG]

(snip)

Must spread XP around before . . .

 

[RangerRick]

I ask , "Why?" and/or "How?"

That is pretty much my take too. Now I am more of a player than a DM but I have DM'd my share in the past and I am pretty open minded but I also really want to get to the why.

But also there's a difference between characters wanting to take an in game action and wanting to change the rules around. Here's an example once my players were trying to get this guy to open a door and he wouldn't so they decided to pour oil under the door and light it on fire to really get his attention lol. So thats fine but I make them tell me all the little details like the floor is flat, how do you get it to flow under the door? and stuff like that.

On rules stuff I'm not so flexible because in my experience the why for the rules change has almost always been so that my character is more powerful basically. So I will listen to what they have to say for sure but my default going in is we're probably not changing the rule and you have to convince me its going to make things better across the board not just for you.

 

[Mort]

If it's something that adds to the game, either in immersion or verisimilitude, administration, or teamwork, I typically say yes with hearty approval.

"After we killed the evil druids, are there any of those medium or large dire rats that they were breeding as guard animals left alive? I'd like to care for them since they've been mistreated so horribly."

"Sure, you can care for the surviving dire rats. As you spend several weeks caring for them, you gradually domesticate them--the druids horribly mistreated the rats and they have never known true kindness. You feed them nourishing food instead of garbage, clean them up, and have their injuries tended. Basically, they lose the disease ability, but you can train them to serve as mounts, and they have climb and swim speed."

This a great example of saying "yes" over just saying "nope, no dire rats" (because the DM hadn't included any and did not want to bother doing so). I know a few to many DMs who would have just said "nope, no dire rats" because they hadn't thought of the idea and therefore it wasn't part of their plan/world etc.

If it's something silly, my response is usually, "Why do you want to do that?" When the player explains their reasoning to me, we quickly discover that either they're being a goober or that they haven't really thought it out, and they usually change their mind.

"I don't want to spend money on a silver weapon to fight the werewolf--that's too expensive. Instead, I'm going to carry a pouch of silver pieces, and when we meet the werewolf, I'm going to hold a silver piece against its skin with one hand and pound it into its flesh with my warhammer."

"You don't have to get a silver weapon, you could just buy some silversheen. You want to walk up to a werewolf and kindly ask it to hold still while you hammer silver pieces into its flesh?"

"Yeah. All I have to do is hold a silver piece against it and then hit it with my warhammer."

"Okay... So I'll let you touch a silver piece to its skin as a standard action with a touch attack, but you're basically sticking your arm out--that's going to provoke attacks of opportunity, just like if you tried a combat maneuver without a feat."

"I don't care, I'm not spending my cash on a silver weapon or a disposable magic item for a single fight. I'm going to 'think outside the box' and solve this problem creatively."

"You want to smash a warhammer right on top of your hand?"

"Uh, just on the silver piece--"

"If you want to hit the silver piece without smashing into your own hand, you're going to make an attack roll against the silver piece's AC, not the werewolf's AC, but you're going to also have to hold it reasonably steady against it's hide--basically, you're going to be attacking a diminutive object on the werewolf, so it'd be at the werewolf's normal AC + 8 to hit the silver piece without smashing the hell out of your fingers. Furthermore, if you hit the werewolf's AC but not the AC + 8, you've hit the silver piece and your hand. You'll take full damage from the warhammer attack and mangle your hand, making it useless until you heal the damage."

"But then the werewolf would die because I just warhammered a silver piece into its skin!"

"Not quite. A werewolf's hide isn't a piece of lumber, you wouldn't drive in the silver piece like a nail. You'd hit it and squish the silver piece between the werewolf's hide and your warhammer. There's a chance that you could get it in to its flesh if you held the coin on-edge and struck it just right, so if you managed to do all that... I'd give you a 50% chance of considering your damage from the strike to be from a slashing silver weapon instead of a plain ol' warhammer."

"Hmm. Yeah. I guess I didn't really think that through, but you're right... Smashing silver pieces into a werewolf's hide wouldn't be very easy. Maybe I'll just get a dose of silversheen instead."

Again a good example - And really you're just saying "yes, but" and the player realizes they don't want the consequences of the "but."

 

[nedjer]

in your dreams