PCs questioning DMs

[Dash Dannigan]

It does appear that their expectations seem a bit askew. What did they expect fighting Lolth!? For goodness, or I should say, evilness sake! It sounds more like to me that your play group is a little spoiled with all their high-level hijinks and doohickies. How long did it take to get to the level they are at now? It is entirely possible that they don't know how to use or how high-level play is always done (especially high-level magic). For my part I KNOW there are better things than contingency (special researched contigency+ spells for example and combos with wish etc.) and I haven't even played epic yet.

Besides, epic play (especially at that level) uses a lot of custom things doesn't it? Custom spells, custom magic items, etc. Rules that work fine at lower level play tend to be bent or broken when involving gods, demi-planes with weird characteristics (no magic, dreamscape, etc.), and high-level abilities that habitually defy the norm. There shouldn't much of ANY way a player could question a DM at THAT level. Egads.

I think these players are just spoiled, but then again maybe the problems stem more from dancing amongst the gods and planar travels. Gets kinda weird at that level eh? I mean aren't they gods themselves? They should be trying to gather worshipers, etc. not dungeon crawling but with Gods as the BBEG in the demi-plane at the end of the planar "hallway". Gods often have alliances and wars, many allies, cohorts, etc....man what a mess. I think I'll stick with regular play and low-level epic thank you. Heh.

 

[fba827]

Oh, you could also instate a rule:

Anytime you question the DM, you must pay the penalty ...


(this could be cash, experience points, ability score points, or even (using apprpriate pinky gesture) One billion dollars...)






edit: adding the requisite smiley face

 

[Witch Doctor]

Hello, I'm a PC in DC's campaign.

First, let me say that I (personally) wasn't mad at any rulings or anything like that. What I was mad at was the fact that the battle took close to 4 hours! And half of that was just us trying to find her!

Basically, it wasn't that I was mad because she was using something different then us, it ws the fact that when we finally killed her, it felt cheap, and it felt like I had wasted my time.

I don't blame DC for this, I blame Epic levels; they just take too long for rounds to take place. So much dice going around and so many things to choose from, it just takes the fun away, IMHO.

So yeah, Epic level campaign are fun, but epic level battles aren't always the same.

 

[Dark Jezter]

One of the main rules of D&D is this:

The DM is always right.

It sounds like your own players have yet to learn that simple concept. Hopefully you can drill it into their heads.

Back to the question in the topic... In the campaign I'm DMing, I don't mind if the players point out a mistake I make regarding the rules, since the issue is usually resolved very quickly. However, if any of my players start getting whiny or petulant because something bad happens to their character, they just might provoke a casting of Greater DM's Wrath.

"The blacksmith turns into a dragon and eats you!"

 

[S'mon]

Hello, I'm a PC in DC's campaign.

First, let me say that I (personally) wasn't mad at any rulings or anything like that. What I was mad at was the fact that the battle took close to 4 hours! And half of that was just us trying to find her!

Basically, it wasn't that I was mad because she was using something different then us, it ws the fact that when we finally killed her, it felt cheap, and it felt like I had wasted my time.

I don't blame DC for this, I blame Epic levels; they just take too long for rounds to take place. So much dice going around and so many things to choose from, it just takes the fun away, IMHO.

So yeah, Epic level campaign are fun, but epic level battles aren't always the same.

It sounds to me like the DM played Epic levels as they're supposed to be played, by the book - the problem though is that Epic play in 3e just doesn't seem to feel very 'epic', hence the sense of anticlimax. Too much evasion/avoidance magic.
Making deity-level magic more easily suppressable (via eg anti-magic field type abilities) ought to help. In my own game no magic works in an anti-magic field, no matter its source or power.

In tackling a deity on her home plane, I think one ought to expect that she would squelch attackers by raw power rather than 'hit & fade', or else if overmatched, just leave. OTOH Lolth has always been famous for sneaky tactics, being a relatively weak deity in stand-up fight, so it may just be this one battle.

 

[David Argall]

actually, yes

"For example, are PCs supposed to be reading the monsters stats etc? Especially ones you plan on using against them?

I also closed Dieties and Demigods b/c.. well... it's basically another monster book. "

Within limits, these are things the PC would know about the monster or god. Where they know they will be risking their lives against these creatures, the PC would be normally be trying to learn all they can about them, which means the MM details.
One can note exceptions, such as a monster nobody has ever seen before, or some secret weakness listed in text but not known, but the basic knowledge is something the players should have access to. [& where matters should be secret, well, you are not bound to follow the text letter perfect. So the creature is vulnerable to cold instead of heat. Too bad you paid attention to the wrong drunk in the last town.]

 

[Mark]

You can't use material that players, who are also DMs, know...in name. If you are going to alter things, rename them as well. By using the original names you are setting up a situation where they feel they can expect certain things. Nothing wrong with using the materials if they save you time but rename everything and tell them that even if they suspect that something is one way, it may not be so.

For instance, if I wanted to use Lolth in a game where all the players are familiar with the material connected with Lolth, they have every right to expect it to be the Lolth they know. Why else use it? If I then make adjustments to it, I need to call it something else or I am the one leading them to believe something that is false, in a meta-gaming way.

If I hand a quarterback a basketball, I can't tell him it is a football, I can't tell him to play football with it, and I can't expect him to not complain. If I fill the basketball halfway full with water, tell him it is a wobbleball, and tell him that we will be playing Wobbles and Warthogs, he cannot expect the game to be anything like football nor complain when it is not like football.

 

[LostSoul]

Tell them to hang on until the battle's over, then spill the beans to them.

The DM is not always right.

 

[Drawmack]

Firstly I not only allow but encourage my players to question my judgements. I am the human DM and as a human I make mistakes. I've already had players tell me when I make a mistake in their favor and when I make a mistake that is not in their favor. I don't even award role-playing xp unless the player remembers the situation until the end of the game and reminds me about it.

I also do not ''close'' entire books. What I tell the players is chapters x,y & z are off limits. This way I allow them to learn the rules, feats, spells, classes, PrCs, etc. provided by that book without learning the things I don't want them to know. For example when we played in Freeport anyone from freeport could read everything except the NPC stat blocks but they had to max out knowledge local at first level.

I find it heavily encourages knowledge skills if you allow knowledge to open books. For example, someone with knowledge monsters can roll that check and based on the result will be given more info about the monster - a natural 20 means I hand them the book.

 

[Tsyr]

One of the main rules of D&D is this:

The DM is always right.

It sounds like your own players have yet to learn that simple concept. Hopefully you can drill it into their heads.

Actualy, I play under a DM that has very much proven to me that a DM is not always right. The DM always has final say... But that's not the same thing as always being right.