Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6147485" data-attributes="member: 17106">I think the answer should usually be yes, but the DM still has the final say. There are occasional exceptions. For example, a player might say something in-character that his character does not know (metagaming), perhaps unintentionally. The DM might say that the character does not and will not speak the problematic information, if this is important to the game.A more common scenario is if a player declares an action that would be nonsensical for the character, because the DM has decided certain information about the setting, but has not told the players yet. For example, the players walk into a room, the DM describes a demon within the room. The players say they attack and start making dice rolls. The DM might disallow (or at least put on hold) those actions until he describes other threats in the room that might make the players reconsider.And, the DM might simply disallow actions he doesn't like. For example, you get that one problem player who says "I kill the other PCs in their sleep and take their stuff". That can very likely be done within the rules, but that doesn't mean the DM allows it and you move on. Rules don't really cover those types of scenarios; there's clearly more that needs to be done here.To bring the magic element into it, if a player says he scry/teleports and assassinates the king, the answer is very likely no. Does the DM bother to consult the rules for methods of teleport blocking, etc.? Maybe. Maybe not. (I don't think I've ever really rationalized my teleport blocking. I just say it's blocked and the players accept it as logical in the context of the world.) If a player uses Glitterdust on a crowd of people, does it blind them all for a round a level? No. Since that is overpowered, the answer is no. The DM changes the spell on the spot, and creates a more reasonable effect, which then becomes the standard. Ideally, that doesn't happen too often, but it is a part of the game.When there is a reason for the DM to be doing these things, the player will often (but not always) agree, and the result will be consensus.In general, I think that is a good approach. There is a large distinction between having the power to adjudicate the players' actions and actually exercising it. The DM should be trying to encourage and facilitate the players, and saying no only when necessary for the game as a whole.</blockquote>

Verification