Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Professor Phobos" data-source="post: 4034103" data-attributes="member: 18883">I never said anything about that, though. Presumably we're only playing D&D because we want the possibility of character death, after all. I wouldn't consider that a reasonable exercise of fiat, most of the time.But there are exceptions. Let's say I completely overpowered an antagonist and the players are basically annihilated instantly. I'd probably fudge that. It is my mistake I'm correcting, not theirs. But if they know the risks, and there was the possibility of failure or success, then I usually let things stand as they are. Sure, but if you make a mistake, you just try not to make it again in the future. It's not like this is life-or-death stuff here. People spill their beer on the Player's Handbook, it's okay. It's not the end of the world. I have enough confidence in my own ability to make judgment calls, and my player's willingness to call me on errors.Then maybe the DM should only break the rules when it is fun, and not do so when it is not-fun? I'm not suggesting anything else. You folks seem to be fighting some other argument. I disagree that it is reasonable for a player or a GM to operate on the extreme end of either curve. No player has the right to demand completely rigid adherence to the rules under penalty of death, nor should any GM discard the rules entirely. I maintain that there is a middle ground. There is good and bad fiat. I do not think adhering to the rules in one case demands adhering to the rules in every case. I do not think ignoring the rules in one case means ignoring the rules in every case.Yes, I shouldn't have called him out like that. It was unkind of me. I still maintain, however, that his play style is wholly incompatible with mine. I cannot accommodate him. This is relatively rare, as I have found I can incorporate a wide range of player expectations in my gaming. But zero-fiat? It's just not going to happen, if only because I am very lazy and I do not bother to look up rules when I do not think it matters.Not in my experience. If I wing it and it goes bad, I don't do it again next session. Or I say, "Man that was dumb. Sorry about that guys." Maybe I buy the pizza next time. It is, after all, just a game.But there are reasonable and unreasonable expectations. I'm entirely willing to pay a lot of attention to the rules, so long as the players are patient as, again, I am extremely lazy and often forget to ask for rolls. I have a "Say yes or roll the dice" policy, and I rarely say no, so most of my games don't involve a lot of rolling and only the occasional combat round.Fun is the primary objective of any recreational activity. If it is fun, it is good. If it is not fun, it is bad. However, if your definition of "fun" is so constrictive as to impede the fun of others, as I believe to be the case here, then there is a problem.</blockquote>

Verification