Kinda changing rules without telling players.

[Tsyr]

Nope, I never said that. So don't be a prick and try to put words in my mouth.

Why should you be the only one who gets to do that?

 

[Mallus]

OK, so what you're saying is that unless they make a dice roll or The Almighty DM tells them that they know it, they don't know anything. No character history reasons, none of that?

The Almighty DM frequently tells players "if you don't make the roll, it doesn't happen". What's next, railing against your DM because he/she made you roll to hit or save??

I fail to see how this isn't equitable to let the character make a roll to see how much knowledge the have in the given area.

Character background/story is something that should be worked out before the first session. But even if every detail isn't worked out, the DM still has the final word.And "your" character lives in my "reality", so "your" history, including all you know, is something we both develop.

DM = final arbiter. Does anyone here actually play in a game where this isn't the case?

 

[Arnwyn]

It's about as absurd as DocM's absolute decree that the DMG is never for the players, only for the DM.

*shrug* I don't think that players not knowing what's in the DMG is absurd. As a player, I would never question my DM on the contents of that book (or the MM). I suppose I don't have this weird non-trusting power-trippy my-DM-must-be-always-cheating-me-so-I'd-better-stay-alert "gotta win" attitude... (Which, to me, seems to be the only reason why someone would want to know everything in there, as you don't need the DMG to effectively play your character in any way, shape, or form.) Different ways of playing, which is cool.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

*shrug* I don't think that players not knowing what's in the DMG is absurd. As a player, I would never question my DM on the contents of that book (or the MM). I suppose I don't have this weird non-trusting power-trippy my-DM-must-be-always-cheating-me-so-I'd-better-stay-alert "gotta win" attitude... (Which, to me, seems to be the only reason why someone would want to know everything in there, as you don't need the DMG to effectively play your character in any way, shape, or form.) Different ways of playing, which is cool.

Or maybe instead of insulting us, you could think hey maybe he is a Dm too, so of course he would have access to the book. Maybe it is a case of at my game where I don't; feel the need to keep my players in the dark so If they ask me some thing, I may hand them the book and tell them to read up on it.
The fact that you haven;t or don't need to read the DmG doesn't make any less right or wring if some one else does. often times in the game I play in where the DM actually follows the magic item creation rules we will spend hours as a group reading the magic item section to figure what we can and cannot create and or how much it cost etc.. there are many ways to play the game and many different styles, what works for one group may not work for another, the original post if I recall, stated though that several of the players had a problem, so it sounds to me like not every one was happy, when that happens rather then etching rules in stone perhaps it si time for dialog.

Ken

 

[Desdichado]

What I would have told them up front: I'm not necessarily using all the monsters and rules for monsters exactly as written; they will be customized. While you can always expect the rules to work as written for your characters don't expect them to always work as written for your opponents. Note that I'm not cheating, I'm changing some rules up front that don't directly relate to you, so I'm not telling you exactly what they are. So, keep on your toes, and don't expect to be able to use meta knowledge successfully.

That way, they know what to expect (or what not to expect, at least) without being upset by seemingly arbitrary changes.

 

[Renaissance Man]

Feel the love!

Bran Blackbyrd - thanks for reattributing my words to, um, me.

DocM - "Prick"? Why the hostility? You asked the community for feedback, ostensibly in the interest of hearing what others had to say. Berating people for disagreeing with you is just poor form, and does nothing to strengthen your argument.

As I stated earlier, this is ultimately a matter for you and your players to work out. If they're happy, no harm, no foul. We can discuss the theoretics of gaming until the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it's all a matter of how much you and your players are enjoying the game.

I am curious on one point, however. Brown Jerkin asked whether you specifically informed your players in advance that the DMG and MM were off-limits to them. You responded by stating your expectations as a DM, but you didn't really answer the question. Was this point explicitly communicated to your players? Just curious.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Re: Feel the love!

Was this point explicitly communicated to your players? Just curious.

Yeah, Doc...'fess up.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Re: Feel the love!

[snip]

I am curious on one point, however. Brown Jerkin asked whether you specifically informed your players in advance that the DMG and MM were off-limits to them.

[snip]

If I have been too harsh I appologize, I was not trying to be a Jerk. Or at least I hope it was just a typo.

 

[WisdomLikeSilence]

When they attacked and hit he would continually remind me that the weapon in question had magic weapon cast on it.

Follow-up question here. How precisely did you respond when he reminded you about the magic weapon?

Did you say something along the lines of "Yes, and I know how magic weapons affect DR. But you know, this sword just doesn't seem to be hurting the rat-creatures that much."

Or did you just try to continue with the combat?

-WLS

 

[Renaissance Man]

Re: Re: Feel the love!

Or at least I hope it was just a typo.

How embarassing... all this time, I thought the name was Jerkin . My bad. No offense taken, I hope.