Rules Disagreement with my DM, please help!

[demon_jr]

The main rules is what you commonly use IYC. If you only use the three Core Rulebooks, then they're the main rules. If you also use the splat books all the time, they're main rules, too. If you play in Rokugan, The Domain of Dread, Faerûn, Krynn, whatever, then the respective Campaign Setting is also main rules. And all house rules you agree on beforehand (like: "we have LN Paladins here" before they make their charakters) are main rules.

Thanks for the answer.

What I find difficult are when new books are presented, be it from WotC or 3rd party.

Usually the DM is very up front about what he allows or does not allow in the game, but there are times when an ability or rule has been used from one of the newer "main" books, that the DM has not time to read fully, but a player has read it and decided would be a "cool" thing to do. During a case like that, the DM is usually forced to make an on the spot ruling, sometimes after the fact, if he feels the spell or ability is too powerful for the campaign.

Of course, the DM is not expected to be superhuman and know every in and out of every book that is used, but being a player, we tend to look for the little things that can make our character more powerful.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

New books aren't commonly used (yet), and can't be called main rules completely.

But the stuff in there is often more or less completely new stuff. Much of it, you didn't use at all before you had it: If you don't have Tome & Blood, you probably don't use the alienist. If you don't have the Epic Level Handbook, you have no Holy Strike weapons.

But if you have the book, and start to use that stuff as a DM, you'll probably read through it, either because you want to use it or a player will. Maybe the paladin will want to make his Holy Avenger a Holy Strike Weapon. He will ask you for it, you will look it up, and approve or ban it - or change it to suit your needs. And it will be OK, even if it loses those negative levels. If you just say "yes", the pal gets his sword, and at the final battle you suddenly say: "no, it doesn't bestow those negative levels", the pal's player is bound to be unhappy about it.

 

[Wikidogre]

Logic---- You control it, you supply its BaB through level and Ability Mod.------you can see through the illusions------hence you can direct it to attack correctly! Tell your Dm to read the spell closer.

 

[dkilgo]

Enough of this wordplay! Yea, we all know, the DM's word is law. He cannot by definition contradict the rules, because he dictates them.

But he can be wrong: he can make bad judgement calls, or treat someone poorly, and so on. He won't contradict the rules, but he will make mistakes. The mistake her is not to get the rules wrong, but to be jerk. In the end, he has the last word, and the rules stay as they are. But, on the other hand, the players have the last word, too, because they don't have to stay. If you piss off the whole party, you'll be alone. Of course, some won't care, because they're pushed into the position ("You know the game, you make DM") and he may not care if they don't like his DM'ing, cause they have no other DM. But usually they make the DM cause they want to, and then they don't want to lose the players over being childish.

I agree that the DM can make poor on the spot judgement calls.

I would like to think that we are not discussing how a DM might treat one individual person badly, and comparing it to his/her decision on the rules.

I would, also, like to think that timing is everything when it comes to confronting what you might believe is a bad judgement call. What if the other players didn't catch it at that moment, or at all, and are getting a little pieved at you for slowing down game play? Did you think about that?

 

[dkilgo]

I would also like to state that I think we have covered what the DM did wrong in this particular situtation, and how he might correct it.

 

[LokiDR]

I would, also, like to think that timing is everything when it comes to confronting what you might believe is a bad judgement call. What if the other players didn't catch it at that moment, or at all, and are getting a little pieved at you for slowing down game play? Did you think about that?

I agree. Which is exactly why the DM shouldn't stand up a game by changing the rules currently being used. If you catch the DM with a new trick he didn't expect and he stops you on the spot, you should talk about it after the encounter/session if it won't matter much. If it means a major change in the outcome, I say it will affect the fun over more of the game and should be settled right there.

 

[dkilgo]

Okay, perhaps the DM should ask the rest of the players what they think, after the inital complaint has been filed, about continuing on with the discussion until a resollution has been made. Asking the other players would definitely ease the tention of an outburst at the DM's bad call. Perhaps in asking them, if they mind the dispute, they would be little more understanding, and allow the banter to continue. What do you think?

 

[gfunk]

Okay, perhaps the DM should ask the rest of the players what they think, after the inital complaint has been filed, about continuing on with the discussion until a resollution has been made. Asking the other players would definitely ease the tention of an outburst at the DM's bad call. Perhaps in asking them, if they mind the dispute, they would be little more understanding, and allow the banter to continue. What do you think?

As the originator of this thread, I would like to comment on this. In my group, I'm the self-titled "house rule maker." I play an arcane spellcaster and I tend to find "holes," if you will in certain spells and run them into the ground.

For instance, when I took Polymorph Other, I changed each member of the party into trolls while adventuring. Once finished, I cast it again and they reverted to their normal forms. The problem was that it was sapping the fun out of the game b/c we were just ripping through encounters too easily. I suggested to my DM that we change the duration, but we both finally agreed to just nerf it entirely.

The same was true of the spell Ghostform in T&B. While Hasted I would be able to cast a spell and step into the floor or wall. This made me nearly impossible to damage. This spell, too, was nerfed. But I had no problem with it.

I think our DM may perhaps lack the creativity to counter certain spell combinations. The problem is, as a sorcerer, I am forced to pick spells that I can cast over and over. Unlike a wizard, I'm not terribly flexible.

For this reason, I got more than a little pissed with the whole "Bigby's CF can't see in the dark, even if you have True Seeing up." But in the interests of speeding up the game for everyone, I only put up token resistance and quickly accepted the DM's ruling when it was clear that I couldn't convince him in a short period of time. In this case, anyway, the encounter was pretty easy and the lack of Bigby's would hardly effect the outcome.

However, I feel that this problem will come up again. As we hit high levels and extreme power (9th level spells and up), it takes a very creative and skilled DM to continue to challenge and entertain his players. The easy thing to do, of course, would be to nerf everything that you would consider "broken." But this is just lazy.

Anyway, I will post again after my DM and I have a little discussion. Wish me luck!

 

[Skullfyre]

Wish me luck!

GoodLuck!!!

 

[dkilgo]

Yeah, goodluck!

Perhaps there are some excercises that you could coordinate with your DM to enhance his imagination. If he is an artist give him something that he could create, and from there his imagination should flow. That is how I get the imagination flowing for my drawings. I handle creating new and challenging encounters for my campaign. I read many novels on fantasy. Not just D&D novels either. They seem to keep the wheels spinning in the right direction.