Pathfinder 1E As a player, how do you argue your rules interpretation 1) successfully and 2) without being obnoxious?

[Fauchard1520]

Here's my take: If accommodating quirky ideas in the name of creative play is best practice for GMs, there's an important corollary for players. Make your case, sure. But once your GM has made the call, don't be the guy at the table who grinds things to a halt to argue your side.

And so, here's my question to the board: As a player, have you ever managed to sneak a close one past your GM? What was your approach to activating the old "I'll allow this once" response from the guy behind the screen? What makes a "good rules argument" as opposed to an annoying one?

(Comic for illustrative purposes.)

 

[nevin]

your question has two potentially contradictory ideas. If you have to argue your case there is always the possibility you won't be successful. Good arguments do not always mean winning arguments. A good rules argument for me is going to be an statement of how you feel the rules are stated, what you think they mean and if necessary why you think they are wrong. if those things are stated clearly it's a good argument. Doesn't mean I'll agree with you though.

 

[payn]

I think there is often two sides to a ruling. The first is how the ruling fits mechanically in the system. The other is how the ruling fits with the feeling the table is looking for. So, my advice for any player making an argument is to make sure allowing it is not going to create an imbalance in the mechanics or an exploitable loophole.

As for not being obnoxious, just know when its time to move on. If you are the lonewolf on the topic, don't die on that hill. The entire group will thank you. If you find yourself repeatedly arguing with the GM, they may be new or have a vastly different playstyle. In case of the first, be patient and be helpful. In case of the second, probably best to politely excuse yourself from the game.

As a GM, I try and side with my players. Unless, of course, somebody is trying to game the system. I had a player that was always trying to backdoor the rules to allow them bonuses they choose to pass up during level up. So, its always a balancing game when it comes to making rulings.

 

[univoxs]

My interest in making a rules argument is never to get away with anything. It is just as often that I am making the case for a rules interpretation that does not benefit me.

If your interest is in, balance, fairness and common sense, then you are more likely to get your argument through.

I don't believe in trying to "get away" with anything. That is cheating if not at least rule exploitation.

I avoid anything that would add a change to rules. We play all rules as written. We generally have these conversations around grey areas or things not covered in the book.

Also for ease, we have the understanding that the GM ruling settles everything. Some people don't like this but w/e. I think the reason a GM is the final arbiter is pretty clear and doesn't warrant explanation.

The worst thing is an "allow this once" because its a slippery slope into chaos. If a rule is being changed then it must be made permanent and the ramifications explored.

 

[Philip Benz]

Also for ease, we have the understanding that the GM ruling settles everything. Some people don't like this but w/e. I think the reason a GM is the final arbiter is pretty clear and doesn't warrant explanation.

Spot on.
The important thing is enjoyment in playing the game. A player can certainly suggest a different ruling from what the DM is telling him, but the DM has to have final say.

I tend to try to be as accomodating as possible with players, so that I'm not just saying, "no, you can't do that". But to keep the game moving, I feel it's important to sidestep any rules disputes, play the game, and eventually discuss it in the days following a session.

Also, DMs can make mistakes. A reasonable DM will try to recognize those mistakes and rectify them after the fact. Players need to recognize that the DM's job is a demanding one, and give him some slack.

 

[univoxs]

Spot on.
The important thing is enjoyment in playing the game. A player can certainly suggest a different ruling from what the DM is telling him, but the DM has to have final say.

I tend to try to be as accomodating as possible with players, so that I'm not just saying, "no, you can't do that". But to keep the game moving, I feel it's important to sidestep any rules disputes, play the game, and eventually discuss it in the days following a session.

Also, DMs can make mistakes. A reasonable DM will try to recognize those mistakes and rectify them after the fact. Players need to recognize that the DM's job is a demanding one, and give him some slack.

I think this short article from Scott Malthouse on the subject of GMs is pretty good. The GM is just another person at the table and while they are doing more paperwork than everyone else. The players are just as responsible for the experience as the GM. I would like it if everyone GMd and took turns. That is what one of my tables does. Because we all GM and have different ways of interpreting things, we often have conversations about rule interpretations.

The biggest thing here is trust. And I see this time and time again with questions about how should a GM handle this issue or as a player handle this or that ruling form a GM. You either trust each other to have an interest in a fair and entertaining time or you don't. If you don't move on. And if you have never felt that trust, perhaps, but not necessarily, examine your own expectations. Its a game after all.

 

[James Gasik]

Don't ambush your GM. Ask them way in advance if something works the way you think it will. At the table, you're going to get knee jerk reactions, and more importantly, most GM's don't want to set precedents they will regret later.

Plus there's always the chance that you'll fall flat on your face when the GM rules against you.

ANECDOTE: so I was playing a Fighter in Pathfinder who used a reach weapon, and I had Whirlwind Attack (I know, super optimized build!). The rules stated that during a full attack, you are allowed a 5' step between attacks. So I figured, well, I'll start the Whirlwind, hit everyone I can reach, then 5' step to add a few new targets.

The GM immediately shut me down saying that while I COULD 5' step using the Feat, he didn't believe it let me acquire new targets. Which made my big plan for the turn (Tripping a ton of enemies) fall a little flat. To be honest, I was surprised there was another interpretation, but if I'd brought up my plans for Whirlwind Attack before the session, I would have done things differently...

 

[MGibster]

Here's my take: If accommodating quirky ideas in the name of creative play is best practice for GMs, there's an important corollary for players. Make your case, sure. But once your GM has made the call, don't be the guy at the table who grinds things to a halt to argue your side.

That's pretty much it. Just talk to the GM like a normal human being and he or she will likely consider your points and make a judgment. Sometimes it'll be a bad judgment. During the one Alien adventure I ran over multiple nights I made a bad ruling after the player argued her point. After the game, I gave it further thought and at the next session I apologized and agreed with her interpretation of the rules.

Honestly, this isn't Pathfinder specific. This applies to all games.

 

[glass]

I generally have the most rules knowledge in my local group, so if I am sure about a rule the other GMs in my group will generally defer to my judgement. If I am not sure, I will look it up after the session and put it in an email to the group (unless something really major like a PC's life is at stake, in which case making sure everything is correct in the session is warranted).

_
glass.

 

[Fauchard1520]

If I am not sure, I will look it up after the session and put it in an email to the group

This was our approach back when we were first learning Pathfinder 1e. We'd make note of the issue and then make a post in the group forum trying to figure out an answer.

Only trouble is that it got draining. All those trips into the rules forums can begin to feel like work if you let them.