Friend AND Rules Lawyer -- Need Advice Please

[Impeesa]

Perhaps you can point out that all the so-called "rules" in the 3.5 core books are just guidelines. IIRC, there is something about "rules" and DMing at the beginning of the DMG.

I have the same problem with rule discussions, but fortunately, the players agree quite quickly that a session is for playing a game, not for rewriting some tax declaration.

Remember, there is only one real rule in D&D:

Dungeon Master's word is law.

Period. Either the players accept that or they've to choose another group.

Careful not to throw that one around too often. One too many arbitrary calls and you'll lose the respect of your players.

As for dealing with your rules-lawyer, tell him to do what I do. I have a strong rules-lawyering instinct, but I generally don't pipe up unless it comes down to a matter of survival for a fellow PC (or is a particularly blatant oversight, whether it's in our favor or not).

--Impeesa--

 

[Arnwyn]

Well, first thing is that I have no idea how some people seem to have all these "rules arguments" in 3.xe. I don't get it... if there's one problem I don't have in 3e it's rules arguments. Most of the pertinent rules are right there in the PHB... how can someone screw it up? *shrug*

and the rules just might be too specific for my style of DMing.

This set off warning bells for me. You definitely need to discuss with him - clearly and coherently - what your "style of DMing" really is (with examples), what he can expect from you, and how he is being disruptive (again, with clear examples). Explain that you won't be changing your DM style, and he has to make a decision whether he wants to conform or find a group more suitable to the way he plays. (Also, the suggestion of him DMing is a good one, too.)

(Aside: As a DM, I love PHB rules lawyers - they make the game consistent and easy to run for me. Sadly, most of the baboons that I DM for wouldn't know a rule (advantageous or otherwise) if it clubbed them over the head... and yes, they all own their own copies of the PHB. I cheer when the few that do know what's going on speak up.)

 

[mythago]

"Rules lawyer" is a good term, because remember that in the lawyer analogy, you, the GM, are the judge. And your word is final, right or wrong.

In a real courtroom, the judge makes the final ruling. He or she hears arguments, then issues a decision. Anybody who continues to argue will, essentially, be told to sit down and shut up. You can appeal the decision later, but that's it. The judge doesn't argue back or try to persuade the lawyer that, in fact, the judge is right.

So let your player go on for a little while, then say "Nevertheless, my ruling is X. If you disagree, please make a note and we'll discuss it after the game." And that's it. Don't entertain more argument. Don't argue WITH him. Don't let the other players argue with him either. Just make the statement and continue on.

That way, if he feels genuinely aggrieved, he can talk to you about it after the game without holding everything up, and at a time when people have had a chance to calm down and think it over. If he's just arguing because he gets off on arguing, that will shut him down.

 

[ARandomGod]

I've had this issue before, and I've tried several potential solutions, depending on the person who was giving me the issue and his attitude.

First there's the simple talking to the player about the issue.

Second is talking to everyone one about the issue, but not directed at the issue itself. Make rules against talking out of character. Assign (before hand) set penalties to people who break the rules.
There are a number of potential ways of going about this, including not allowing players to talk to each other out of character, and having players need to pass a note to the GM when/if they need an out of character "pause" in the game to discuss an issue. State that, in general, any opinions against your rules, or if they notice that you're doing something different and wish to discuss this with you... any of this needs to wait to be discussed completely after the game session in question. After the game is completely over you can have all the metagaming conversation you want.

Point out that you are not playing D&D 3.5, you're playing D&Mark, which is loosely based on the 3.5 rules. But do be consistent within your rules. Inconsistency is a terrible bane to the players.

The third option I tried on the one person who just didn't seem to be able to get the "no out of character talking" rule... is I gave him a character that did not know any of the languages in the area of the world he was playing. If we wanted to communicate ANYthing he had to use gestures.
It worked better than I anticipated. He picked up on when he was "in character" and when he was not in only a few games. His overall gameplay improved drastically. And so he was rewarded with an "Amulet of Pentecost", which made his character fluent in every language. He went from being unable to talk at all to being the only one able to communicate effectively in certain areas.

 

[Saeviomagy]

My suggestion:

If you want some sort of support or judgement from us, give use some real information.

It's possible that he debates your calls because... gasp... you make calls that go against the rules as printed.

If you're flat-out calling things wrong, and he knows you're wrong, of course he'll bring it up. If you're doing it deliberately, then say why, and end the discussion. If you're doing it accidentally, then maybe you should consider yielding to him?

If, on the other hand, he's pushing for game-breaking rulings in areas where the rules are unclear, and continuing those arguments to the detriment of the game, by all means have a word with him, and get the rest of the group to have a word with him.

 

[Aluvial]

Thanks for the responses.

I would like to answer a number of the questions that you have asked and hopefully that will steer me in the right direction.

Telperion wrote: How about allowing this Rules Lawyer to DM for a while? Have you always been the DM of the group or does anyone else take seat in the DM chair every now and then? It could be that your friend just wants to run a game for a while and not sit on the side-lines while his character isn't actively participating (like when it isn't his turn to act) in the game.

This is actually one of the first things that I tried. Other players have run a game, in fact in our social group there are three games currently with 15 people playing. My group has run the longest, and I play in the group of the player who is thinking about leaving my game. The Rules Lawyer only plays in my game.

When I asked him if he wanted to DM, he responded that he knew that it was a big challenge and that he preferred to play. So he is giving me credit for what I do, just not enough respect to keep it down during play.

I have another player (remember I have 8) who will be taking up the DM's chair for a short adventure in the next month... I thought that if I switched out, the Rules Lawyer might see that he is being difficult with one of his fellows also.

KenM wrote: Has he just started to be a rules lawyer? Or has that been going on for awhile? Also, has anyone else in group said anything to you about him?

Good question. No, he has always been this way, not only in D&D, but in other areas also. For instance, he would argue with the Umpires on a Coed softball team he was on, he argues about the rules of Ping Pong and Pool in my basement, or when we play card games with other friends. I think it is a real problem for him, I'm just trying to figure out how to break it to him in the right manner.

Other players have mentioned his antics before, but since we are so close socially (most of us have known each other for at least 10 years), we don't want to kick a friend out of what is essentially a game. Now of course I know that D&D is more than that, for me it is a huge portion of my life and free time, but essentially it is a game, and games are meant to be fun.

Whisper72 wrote: Have you taleked to him about it at all??? I mean, if he is a friend outside the game as well, just talk to him on a non-gaming venue, and simply tell him literally you are sick and tired of all his rules-bickering.

... but if he is dead set on continuing, and you simply tell him to shut his trap because he is being annoying, he should get the hint and either stop being an , or he'll bow out of the game as he prolly won't enjoy it anymore. QUOTE]

That's just the thing; we've talked about it a number of times over the years. Usually things improve for a few sessions but slowly he just starts back with the arguments. Last time he brought up the fact that he thought he might be annoying us and would work on it. I think I was getting on him pretty bad during the session the week before, but like I said, 6 or 7 sessions have gone by and he was at his worst this last week!

Diaglo wrote: if you can't work it out. agree to disagree. and ask him if he would be willing to leave the group.

Good point... agree to disagree. I hope he'll see it that way. Up to this point when you bring it up to him, he argues his points about arguing.

JesterPoet wrote: And remember, just because you're the GM doesn't mean that this is just your problem. If other players are bothered by this guy's actions, they have just as much responsibility as you to talk to him about it.

Don't let yourself be forced to be the "bad guy" because others won't speak up.

This is part of my problem. I've spoken with individuals in my group about this a number of times, and they seem to agree with me, but only when we are together. During the game, they are pretty quiet unless he gets completely out of hand. This usually leads to more discussion about the rules and then about how we "feel" about the game. It's pretty Sally if you catch my drift, but these guys are in deep; they love D&D, love the game, and have been coming every single week for 14 years. I don't feel like it's my problem alone, but they need to stand up too!

The rest of you guys have really good ideas. I don't necessarily think that I'm screwing up the rules. I make mistakes here and there, I think that everyone does. When that happens and a player knows that I blew it, they tell me and if it made a hill of beans, I go back and change my decision. That to me is a normal way of dealing with rule problems. As for being consistent about decisions, the group wants to say that they remember decisions that have been made along the way, but many times they forget. Luckily I write these things down in a notebook and can flip around and look to see how I did it the time before. Since I'm not changing very many of the rules (perhaps 10 to 15 house rules), I don't think I'm forgetting them.

The problem seems to lie with the Rule Lawyer's style of play. First he brings in a ringer (Wizard) with Craft Wondrous Item at 14th level. The character is completely maxed out, with a perfect compliment of spells and equipment. Even with strict restrictions on the number of spells he could learn and the amount of items he could create, he still came away with two items that boosted his INT to 28. So now his DC's are out the roof. Then he manipulates and tries to bend every rule in the book so milk out the very best possible outcome for his PC.

I find myself having to curb his thoughts on his spell, and when I do, he complains that with such a high intelligence he should know 'exactly' what his spells do, and that in doing so, he would have never of cast the spell in the first place. Then when I relent out of pure exhaustion from his complaints, he tries again with another spell, bending it out of the confines of the description. It just kills me. When he gets shot down again, he usually gets frustrated and we have to have a 15 minute talk about what the game "should be," and "what it was like before." If I hear him say that the rules "screwed the mage" one more time, I think I might freak.

Anyway, that was just a few examples. One of the most frustrating things is when someone makes an error in speech. For example: in the last session one of the characters had cast Wind Walk. When that character turn came up, he tells me that he is going to Air Walk over to the conflict. Before I can say OK, the Rules Lawyer is spouting off with, "What spell did you say, because you can't Air Walk! That's a so and so spell and that would make your character too powerful." For Christmas sake, this goes on all night.

Then I swear he purposely bends the rules just to see if I know the rule in question. It's basically a test to see what he can get away with. IF I don't look up every single spell that he casts, then he gets me with the "well you let me do that last time, I should be able to do it this time" thing. Because I didn't read up the absolute entire description the last time and missed the partial saving throw line last time, he expects me to remain consistent this time.

Ok, enough of the raving. It's like I told one of the other players. D&D doesn't need to be like chess, where you need to think 8 moves ahead so that you can one up the DM, it needs to play like checkers. 2 moves ahead is fine, getting so carried away with every tidbit rule in the book just bogs us down in the muck.

Let me add this last thing. This guy is my friend. He is a brilliant strategist that gets off on winning and is sometimes a sore loser if the rules didn't go his way. This is in all things in his life, not just our game. When you play at our age, and with your best friends, it’s more than just the game, it is the companionship, the camaraderie, and the socialization. We have a very close knit group of buddies, spouses, and children who have been together for years. My father recently told me that there are always a few nuts in the bowl that make up your family. These friends are like family. I have to be careful that I don't ostracize this good friend of mine. Unfortunately, I don't think that I can have him play in my group either.

Thanks again, and other suggestions about curbing Rules Lawyers would be appreciated.

Aluvial

 

[Aluvial]

My suggestion:

It's possible that he debates your calls because... gasp... you make calls that go against the rules as printed.

If you're flat-out calling things wrong, and he knows you're wrong, of course he'll bring it up. If you're doing it deliberately, then say why, and end the discussion. If you're doing it accidentally, then maybe you should consider yielding to him?

If, on the other hand, he's pushing for game-breaking rulings in areas where the rules are unclear, and continuing those arguments to the detriment of the game, by all means have a word with him, and get the rest of the group to have a word with him.

I felt like answering this one seperate. I think I have the best grasp on the rules in our game. I have everything at hand, have the homemade screens, do the research, have the cheatsheets for the players (and myself), keep excellent notes (I could go back and recount a good number or the major battles in rounds for multiple opponents), a computer with the SRD, all of the stats for spells, feats, monsters, and tables at three clicks of the mouse, and essentially a immense grasp of what it takes to be a successful DM.

My friend IS a Rules Lawyer and bends, conives, whines, interrupts, and complains about the game. Out of 9 people at the table, his mouth is open more than the rest of us combined, including me as the DM.

I know I just need to grow a pair and have a little heart to heart with him. I liken this to asking your grandmother to leave house on Thanksgiving because you don't like her complaining that the turkey is too dry and that back in (2nd edition Thanksgiving) they had turkeys that blah, blah, blah.

With family you just don't kick someone out because they have a socilization problem. You smile, grit your teeth, swallow your words, and try to have a good time, despite the fact that your friend is driving you up a wall over a game.

I'll talk to him, but his issues aren't because I don't know how to play. I sometimes think that he might be better off with the miniatures game. Honestly, the rules are simpler, but strategy plays a huge part in making up a warband; attacking your opponents...

I wish they had a twelve step program for this.

Aluvial

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Sarcasm!

When he nitpicks over another player's slip of the tongue - "Air walk! You can't be casting air walk!" - you say "No, Jim, I levelled that character up before the session, he's epic now" and roll your eyes.

If "Jim" isn't a complete dunce he should get the hint that silly things like this don't matter and aren't relevant.

When it comes to the spells the wizard can cast - you ought to sit down and look at his spell list, then go through and write down your rulings and adjustments for each spell he can cast. Do the same for his items. Let him read over the list and even change out spells or items he "would never have taken" given your changes. But let him do this once, and make it clear that your rulings are final. If something comes up in later play that genuinely wasn't covered by your notes, make a thoughtful ruling then and write it down on your list.

When he wants to take new spells or make new items, make rulings on them as he acquires them, and make it clear that your rulings will apply in all circumstances.

Apart from this, make him a resource. When you can't quite remember a rule, ask him to find it for you - not quote it, but find it - and quickly discuss with him and other players how it should be treated if you, the DM, don't like the rule as written. Again, once a decision is made, stick to it. Make copies of your rulings for yourself if you need a reminder.

Okay, maybe the sarcasm isn't good advice - though I would try it, because a little gentle ridicule can actually wake people up to themselves - but I'm very serious about the rest. Unless this guy is basically a cheater, having a strict set of rules he can reliably use to make plans will satisfy him immensely - and you need not ever establish a rule that interferes with your personal vision for the game.

One final thought: Make it clear that, as a DM, you will not necessarily always present the party with challenges out of the book - so if your rules lawyer has a Monster Manual, he won't be able to object to unanticipated qualities or features of monsters or dungeons - but pledge that you'll always define the abilities of the opponents they face, even if they don't follow "the rules" and even if the players never get to see your list.

Then, having made that promise, you can keep it or not as you see fit.

 

[Aluvial]

When it comes to the spells the wizard can cast - you ought to sit down and look at his spell list, then go through and write down your rulings and adjustments for each spell he can cast. Do the same for his items. Let him read over the list and even change out spells or items he "would never have taken" given your changes. But let him do this once, and make it clear that your rulings are final. If something comes up in later play that genuinely wasn't covered by your notes, make a thoughtful ruling then and write it down on your list.

When he wants to take new spells or make new items, make rulings on them as he acquires them, and make it clear that your rulings will apply in all circumstances.

Apart from this, make him a resource. When you can't quite remember a rule, ask him to find it for you - not quote it, but find it - and quickly discuss with him and other players how it should be treated if you, the DM, don't like the rule as written. Again, once a decision is made, stick to it. Make copies of your rulings for yourself if you need a reminder.

Excellent suggestion. Thanks. I've tried scarcasm, believe me there is a depth of knowledge about everyone's personallity in our game, be it their strengths or their weaknesses and it gets used.

My player who is thinking of quitting made this exact suggestion for the R.L.; go through the spell and item list and make notations on each and every spell. Your suggestion to do this once any only once is good, because as everyone knows, we should all have a life outside of gaming. Looking up 40+ spells and anticipating every outrageous change that he could come up with is not my idea of a good time. However, if it leads me to have a better time and keep my friend in the game, all of us having fun, I'm willing to go to any extraordinary measure.

Perhaps I should just send him the link to this thread.... hmmm... maybe.

Aluvial

 

[tetsujin28]

My answer? Honestly? Learn the rules.