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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jhaelen" data-source="post: 3774992" data-attributes="member: 46713">Exactly. As I already mentioned above, I've already played with that kind of players.Well, he _might_ get upset if the DM changes his interpretation of the rules / house rules arbitrarily if he thought that this was part of the DM'sstrategy to 'win'. However, it could even be an advantage for the player, if the DM's arbitrary ruling was in his favour.Again, this is something I've already experienced in play:One of my fellow players was so skilled at arguing his cause that the DM (almost) always decided in his favour - even when the new ruling was a contradiction to an earlier ad-hoc ruling. For some reason the DM failed to notice how he was manipulated by the player.If someone else pointed this out to the DM he would sometimes agree and reverse his decision, and sometimes he wouldn't.To give an example of the opposite kind:I know another player who favours rule-heavy games. He's not one of the 'Playing to win' faction. He just seems to enjoy arguing about rules, even if the DM's interpretation would favour him (or the group). Obviously the other players typically aren't particularly happy about him pointing out rules that are to their disadvantage.So: Favouring an adversary/cooperative is orthogonal to preferring a rule-light/rule-heavy rpg system.P.S.: I agree that it's better to introduce players to roleplaying games by teaching them how to roleplay rather than teaching them the rules. It's one of the reasons I don't consider D&D a good system to introduce players to roleplaying games.And before someone starts arguing how that may be true for 3.X but not for earlier editions of the game: The suggested way to play the game in 1st.ed. was to designate a party leader who would be the only one actually communicating with the DM stating the actions everyone would take (hopefully after asking the other players about their intended actions). This isn't an approach I'd consider appropriate for a roleplaying game.</blockquote>

Verification