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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheEvil" data-source="post: 2243846" data-attributes="member: 23261">I gotta say, I don't think the role of trust in this debate really is larger then is accepted.  If you trust the GM, you will point out where he has gotten a clear cut rule wrong, and if they tell you it is different for a reason, you will accept this and move on.  Said GM is highly unlikely to say 'because I said so' IMNSHO.  If, on the other hand, you think the GM is meglomaniacal, egocentric, no good SOB out to screw you over, you will probably argue with them.On the other side of the screen, if you trust your players, when they push a grey area of the game you will likely rule in their favor unless you have a solid reason not to.  However, if you consider your players to be rules-lawyering, min-maxing, two-bit munchkins looking to squeeze every possible edge they can out of the rules, you probably will rule against them in every grey area.I have been burned enough times by what most people would agree was just plain BAD GMing both before and after 3.X edition that I prefer that the game be played as close to the rules as possible and that all house rules be spelled out ahead of time.  I will tend to argue what I consider clear areas of the rules until the GM says we do it my way or convinces me he is right.  This has led to strain in the past and I suspect it of being one the big reasons my wife and I were told we were out of a game by e-mail the day before the next session.  I am working on being more trusting. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek!    :o"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" /></blockquote>

Verification