Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rezzin" data-source="post: 4897403" data-attributes="member: 67491">Holly hell!I admit the thread title is off-base.&nbsp; It should be &quot;Is the DM's decisions in game worth arguing over in game.&quot;&nbsp; Or something along those lines....The player just thinks the rule that the DM is the arbiter is lame and will not respect it at the table. Like I said he is the only one who stops the game to challenge rules.For example - he thought last game that an &quot;effect&quot; of a power could happen at any time, regardless if you rolled or not becasue of some silly wording of &quot;effect&quot; in the PHB.&nbsp; Something along the lines of &quot;effects happen with or without a die roll at times.&quot;&nbsp; So by his rationale, and this is verbatim: A bard could use the Song of Discord daily and, without rolling - let the effect happen (enemy makes a melee basic attack against an enemy).&nbsp; I told him simply no, there is a sequence to follow as errated and explained to him in the PHB2 appendix (I think) under &quot;sequence.&quot;&nbsp; Again, he thinks he can do these things because it doesn't say he can't - which is mind boggling to me.&nbsp; If he is challenged he basically sees it as an attack against him and his characters - like we are trying to bring him and his PC's down or something.&nbsp; He even stated something along the lines of why do we always question his actions....well becasue a lot of times they don't make sense.&nbsp; If you even go against one thing he says he is immediately on the defensive and then &quot;it's on.&quot;&nbsp; Argument ensues...I think we are on the right path but the player was proven wrong twice last game and I don't want him to be discouraged with the game as a whole becasue he made a mistake with wording/interpretation.&nbsp; I think it would be beneficial (and I will try and implement this at the next session) to not question his tactics at times and just let it go - for the good of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rezzin, post: 4897403, member: 67491"] Holly hell! I admit the thread title is off-base. It should be "Is the DM's decisions in game worth arguing over in game." Or something along those lines.... The player just thinks the rule that the DM is the arbiter is lame and will not respect it at the table. Like I said he is the only one who stops the game to challenge rules. For example - he thought last game that an "effect" of a power could happen at any time, regardless if you rolled or not becasue of some silly wording of "effect" in the PHB. Something along the lines of "effects happen with or without a die roll at times." So by his rationale, and this is verbatim: A bard could use the Song of Discord daily and, without rolling - let the effect happen (enemy makes a melee basic attack against an enemy). I told him simply no, there is a sequence to follow as errated and explained to him in the PHB2 appendix (I think) under "sequence." Again, he thinks he can do these things because it doesn't say he can't - which is mind boggling to me. If he is challenged he basically sees it as an attack against him and his characters - like we are trying to bring him and his PC's down or something. He even stated something along the lines of why do we always question his actions....well becasue a lot of times they don't make sense. If you even go against one thing he says he is immediately on the defensive and then "it's on." Argument ensues... I think we are on the right path but the player was proven wrong twice last game and I don't want him to be discouraged with the game as a whole becasue he made a mistake with wording/interpretation. I think it would be beneficial (and I will try and implement this at the next session) to not question his tactics at times and just let it go - for the good of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification