player over riding dm!

[Nail]

Do I smell a troll?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Quoting rules is not inherently a bad thing. Especially if he's just referring to the PH, as you say, he may be just pointing out rules that you don't know about.

I like to rules-lawyer with my eyebrows.

If the DM (or another player) is getting something wrong, or forgetting a pertinent rule, my first step is to draw my eyebrows down disapprovingly and catch the DM's eye.

That way, he knows something's not right... but he has the option to ignore me and 'wing it', without the objection interrupting the flow of play, if he prefers...

-Hyp.

 

[Henry]

Perhaps you should quote the part of the DMG in the preface that says that it's the DM's game, and that he makes the final call on all rules. I'm afraid I don't have an exact quote, so you will have to look that one up.

For my experience, I'll take time to ask a DM if a rules change is meant in a circumstance, but if he says something is final, then I do not pursue it any further. If it's worth more than ten or fifteen seconds of game time, it's too disruptive IMO, and I leave it alone.

Recent example: This past weekend's Eberron game saw one of my players a little off-put when I allowed the Warforged Fighter PC in our group an attack I technically shouldn't have. Big flying thing passes by only ten feet over his head; he stands 6 foot five, AND has a greatsword, so he asked if he could leap and attack once as it passed by. In a spirit of fun, I told him he could, but gave him a -4 penalty to the attack. One of the other players thought I had just set a precedent for allowing reach attacks at a -4 penalty. In my opinion, I started a precedent to take a -4 penalty to try something fun. Then he started talking about laying on the ground flat with a greatsword and making reach attacks; in my opinion, if he wants to try, and takes the penalty for being prone and the penalty for making the attack he's welcome to it.

I also agree with being consistent, however; it's why I gave the benefit of the doubt to another player in the group when I couldn't remember if scrolls provoked op-attacks. I allowed the op-attack, and as I found later, he was indeed correct. So players knowing the rules is NOT a bad thing, it's just that arguments in a group need to be limited out of respect both for the DM, and the fun of the group as a whole. The whole argument about "DM is final arbiter" is not about some Dungeon-Master power trip; it's about harmony, moving the game forward, and keeping the pace at a fun level. Right or wrong, somebody's gotta be where the buck stops.

 

[barsoomcore]

The whole argument about "DM is final arbiter" is not about some Dungeon-Master power trip.

Oh. Darn. I must be doing it wrong, then.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Refuse to believe that the player could possibly know more about the rules than you could. Make up rules which harshly penalise the players on the spot. Be sure the totally negate anything he attempts to do. Argue with him without looking up the reference. If he looks up the reference, ignore it unless it proves you right. Complain that he's disrupting the game. Refuse to drop the issue, even if he tones it down. Resort to physical violence if he doesn't. Kill his character repeatedly via GM fiat. Kick him out of the game, but only after you've made sure that you've collectively ruined the fun of every other player at the table. Make sure that you tell the other players that it's all his fault. Kill the character of any player that agrees with him or sticks up with him. Burn the rule books on the grounds that they contain inflammatory material and threaten the stability of society. Shoot his favourite pet.

 

[Frost]

"It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you....Within the broad parameters given in the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons volumes, you are the creator and final arbiter." - E. Gary Gygax, DMG.

Enough said.

 

[Saeviomagy]

"It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you....Within the broad parameters given in the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons volumes, you are the creator and final arbiter." - E. Gary Gygax, DMG.

Enough said.

So, does that apply to this particular quotation too?

The attitude "I'm the GM, therefore what I say goes" is NOT widely recognised as good GMing style.

 

[jmucchiello]

The attitude "I'm the GM, therefore what I say goes" is NOT widely recognised as good GMing style.

Yes, but nothing says you can't have Pit Fiend suddenly appear behind his character, tap him on the shoulder, and say, "Cut it out."

 

[Frost]

So, does that apply to this particular quotation too?

Ok, point taken. But the question was about a player being a rules lawyer, not a DM.

The attitude "I'm the GM, therefore what I say goes" is NOT widely recognised as good GMing style.

Widely recognised by who? To me, the DM is the refree. Challenging him on every call, would be like a football player breaking out a rule book and showing it to the refree. Sure, for important calls, a player should be able to throw a "red flag," but it should be done sparringly.

 

[Hammerhead]

What if the Ref doesn't know what off-sides is, calls pass interference on plays with no passing, whatever else that horrible refs do...then that sorry excuse for a ref gets fired and will never be seen again (hopefully).

My attitude would be to learn the rules so that people will stop correcting you.