Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6201891" data-attributes="member: 22779">At this point?&nbsp; Me?&nbsp; Barring some bizarre situational thing, yeah, I'd vote with my feet.&nbsp; The DM has agreed to play this game and you did absolutely nothing outside the mechanics.&nbsp; You are using the game exactly the way it was intended to be used and the DM has decided that no, his opinion is more important to the game than yours.&nbsp; You have no ownership in this game.&nbsp; Any action you take can be vetoed by the DM through fiat.&nbsp; Why would I want to play in a game of Calvinball?Actually, yes, you can.&nbsp; That's precisely what diplomacy does.&nbsp; It controls how NPC's feel.&nbsp; The reason that we have these rules is precisely to avoid DM's doing exactly what he did.&nbsp; Prior to 3e, there were pretty few rules for players to influence NPC's in any manner.&nbsp; It was largely done freeform.&nbsp; 3e added rules specifically to avoid exactly this issue - DM's simply invalidating player actions.To me, there is absolutely no difference between the DM invalidating your character's diplomacy and invalidating another character's attacks.&nbsp; The issue is invalidation, pure and simple.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6201891, member: 22779"] At this point? Me? Barring some bizarre situational thing, yeah, I'd vote with my feet. The DM has agreed to play this game and you did absolutely nothing outside the mechanics. You are using the game exactly the way it was intended to be used and the DM has decided that no, his opinion is more important to the game than yours. You have no ownership in this game. Any action you take can be vetoed by the DM through fiat. Why would I want to play in a game of Calvinball? Actually, yes, you can. That's precisely what diplomacy does. It controls how NPC's feel. The reason that we have these rules is precisely to avoid DM's doing exactly what he did. Prior to 3e, there were pretty few rules for players to influence NPC's in any manner. It was largely done freeform. 3e added rules specifically to avoid exactly this issue - DM's simply invalidating player actions. To me, there is absolutely no difference between the DM invalidating your character's diplomacy and invalidating another character's attacks. The issue is invalidation, pure and simple. [/QUOTE]

Verification