Correcting the DM

[Crothian]

How do people feel about correcting their DMs? My DM is very good, but doesn't know the rules that well. So, sometimes he uses them wrong. But he does do it fairly in that it applies the same to PCs and NPCs and monsters equally.

I usually don't correct him because it would slow down the game.

Let me give you two examples that happend last night. We were fighting in total darkness. Instead of treating it as concealment he gave everyone a minus to hit hit. Also, with the lightning bolt spell he had it stoip after it hit one person. What is should have done is toasted most of the party and also most of the things we were fighting in a long completely dark hall way.

Thoughts?

 

[prodawg]

I think the best way to approach this is to talk to the DM out of game. However, if everyone is having fun I really don't see a big problem. Sometimes, these things solve themselves. When I first started DM'ing, I made my share of rule mistakes. You become more familiar with these rules as you play more.
As for lightning bolt, it does stop at first person it hits unless it drops the first person. This is according to 3e. In 2e, the bolt would go on and bounce around.

 

[Baron Von StarBlade]

As for lightning bolt, it does stop at first person it hits unless it drops the first person. This is according to 3e. In 2e, the bolt would go on and bounce around.

Actually Lightning bolt affects everything in it's path.

Here is the Quote from the SRD:

The character releases a powerful stroke of electrical energy that deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 10d6) to each creature within its area

 

[Rashak Mani]

In order to avoid confusion later, were the same rule could determine the death of a whole group its better to stick to the rules as they are. House Rules are exceptions of course...

With DMs that are less experienced I tend to take the role of Rules Consultant... I basically tell the DM how the rules are and he makes his call. Most new DMs accept this kind of help and dont feel bad about it... they are supposed to make good stories not rule calls.

I do have to state all the rule calls... good or bad for the group... after a while the DM should have a good grasp himself of the rules. Since I do have the best english in the group my "interpretation" of the rules in portuguese tend to have some weight too... everyone basically reads the rules when we have a doubt. Sort of by consensus among the various DMs who play.

 

[Caliban]

I will try to help the DM with the rules, but if he decides to go with his own ruling, rather than the rulebooks, I generally won't argue with them. (Unless the DM is changing a core rule to something that is directly detrimental to mine or someone else's PC, without any warning.)

Of course, in my circle of gaming friends most of the DM's come to me ahead of time with any rules questions they aren't clear on. (One of the few upsides of having a reputation as the Rules Monkey.)

 

[Dr_Rictus]

I tend to take about the same role as Caliban describes in my gaming groups (without claiming to be the expert that he is).

It depends on the DM, really, but my friends generally know that I have considerably more of the rules in my head than they do, and are secure enough in their role as DM to be okay with that. And conversely I'm respectful of their perogative to rule however they see fit when I point out what the books (or the errata, FAQ, Sage Advice) actually say.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Normally I am the rules monkey, and it especially was true in my last gorup since I followed the 3rd edition releases closely, being quiote vocal with my oppinion even, and so I picked up the 3rd edition rules well before anyone lese in my group did. It worked fine, I would point things out the dm would make a decision on whether or not to follow the rules or go with ahouse rule and the game went on.

My current DM really isn't putting much time into trying to learn the rules, he buys books and doesn't read them, which annoys me. And also he has a different DM style, he is much more into dm fiat I'm telling a story here style dm, which since I hate railroading I also am annoyed with. Considering his style of dming I'm not sure helpful rule hints will be appreciated, and so I keep my mouth shut until asked. Like when he asked how to handle a combat maneuver, and I let him now about bullrush and how it worked.

 

[jhallum]

Rules Lawyers

There are two rules lawyers in my troupe, me and another guy. There are two DM's in the troupe as well, me and a third player. Between the three of us, we all try to arbitrate the game as best we can. I think we do ok, really. No one has gotten really annoyed yet. I take that back, there was the time before Expert Tactician was errata'd that I had to lay the smackdown in my game on the feat. Luckily my solution and the errata were fairly close.

 

[hong]

Re: Rules Lawyers

There are two rules lawyers in my troupe, me and another guy. There are two DM's in the troupe as well, me and a third player. Between the three of us, we all try to arbitrate the game as best we can. I think we do ok, really. No one has gotten really annoyed yet. I take that back, there was the time before Expert Tactician was errata'd that I had to lay the smackdown in my game on the feat. Luckily my solution and the errata were fairly close.

I don't think there's anything wrong with correcting the DM when they make an inadvertent mistake. Most reasonable DMs will know that they can make mistakes just like anyone else, and shouldn't mind being called on it. That said, in the end the DM is the one who makes the decision; if they rule against you, that's their prerogative. Also, there's a difference between making sure the rules are followed, and being annoying and disruptive. You want to ensure that the events in the game remain consistent, not point out minor transgressions for their own sake, or try to exploit obscure inconsistencies for your own benefit.

I don't find I have to correct the DM a lot, though. Our DM is probably the biggest rules monkey in our group, so the issue doesn't come up much.

 

[Umbran]

I, too, tend to be the house rules-dude. I find that there are times when one can correct the DM during play, and times when you shouldn't...

If the DM makes a small flub, and it takes just a moment to correct, and it isn't in a particuarly tense moment, then sure, a correction makes sense.

However, if it's a particularly intricate rule, or might require a good deal of clarification, so that it'd take more than a few seconds to describe or explain, then I find it best to hold my tongue. And inserting rules-discussion breaks game flow and rhythm, so it's less likely to be useful in tense or dramatic moments or combats. You'll have all the time in the world to enlighten the DM after the session.

There's no good hard and fast rule on when one should correct the DM. It varies from one DM and gaming group to the next.