Should a DM assume your character does something?

[Tsyr]

This happened a couple weeks ago, so it's not like it's urgent or anything, but it's sorta sat in the pit of my stomach like a rock since then.

I was gaming with a fairly small (3 players, 1 DM) group, and we were exploring a building that we suspected had connections to the plot.

I was playing a fairly inteligent, fairly wise, ruthelessly independant character. If you have read George R.R. Martins "A Song of Ice and Fire", think Tyrion... my character I was playing was very similar mentaly to Tyrion.

We had cleared out the bottom floor of the building, and it was kinda a tower-like building. One of the other characters says "I go up the stairs".

Ok, fine so far, right?

The DM rolls a D20, kinda grins like a child given a candy bar (This guy has no poker face to speak of), and says "Ok, as you guys go up the steps, Dylan's character sets off a trap, and you see a gas..."

At this point I spoke up. "Wait, 'you guys'? When did I go up the steps?"

DM: "Well, Dylan went up the steps, I assume you guys would be following him."

Me: "Uh... no? Did I say I followed him?" (Side note: I make it a habbit, when someone says "I go XXXX", to say "I follow" or similar, if I do indeed follow... normaly my characters are quite content NOT to be involved in the initial round of combat, or sphere-of-annihilation traps, thank you )

DM: "You're just trying to avoid the trap now that you know it's there. There is no reason for you not to follow, you killed everyone on this floor."

Me: "Um. The reason for me not to follow is that I never said I did? Did you hear me say that I followed him?"

From there, I regret it sorta went down hill and got a bit more... loud... than I would have liked.

But really, which one of us do you think was being unreasonable here? The DM, for assuming if this "level" was "cleared", I would be going to the next one along with my party, or me for assuming my character had more independant thought than a Final Fantasy NPC? We were both wrong to let it degrade into shouting, I know, I don't need that pointed out...

 

[Psychotic Dreamer]

Well usually unless otherwise stated I assume the party stays together. Although personally I would have said it was fine when you said your character did not follow after the trap was set off. Then again I'm a fairly kind DM.

 

[Eternalknight]

I'm a fairly ruthless DM, but in that situation, when Dylan said he was going up the stairs, I would have paused to ask what everyone else was doing. I don't think your DM should assume that your characters do anything.

 

[CrazyMage]

As long as it cuts both ways (ie the other guy finds treasure, and suddenly you're next to him, even though you didn't specifically say you were following), the DM shouldn't have assumed everyone followed the first guy. Maybe if you were all moving as a group one could see how the DM might assume if one went up the stairs, all did. But if you make it a habit to be specific of when your character follows, then it's a DM foul.

Just one DM's opinion.

 

[Storminator]

I've seen assumptions go both ways (follow or not) and I've seen them go bad both ways. In those situations it's roll-off time.

Beat me on opposed d20s, and you get it your way. I sometimes allow the PC to add the CHA modifier. Simple method that works in many PC-DM conflict situations.

PS

 

[ForceUser@Home]

What's done is done. I'm sure he's now well aware that unless you say your character is doing something, he isn't. Expect him to plan encounters with nasty surprises for characters who don't immediately follow the rest of the party. At that point, though it may seem petty to you, it's important that you roll with it and just roleplay accordingly. Once he's got it out of his system he'll forget about it and the game will go back to normal.

 

[Draconis Imperium]

AS a DM I wouldn't assume a character does anything. I always ask what each character is doing to avoid this sort of problem. I used to ask just before a ambush or trap but the PC's figured it out and there was just the character there! Imagine that.
When I play, my character is a rogue who always ventures ahead by himself. (you never know what goodies you will find). So I dislike when I find something and everyone says they are suddenly there, unless of course its a trap then I all alone.

 

[Grazzt]

I'm a fairly ruthless DM, but in that situation, when Dylan said he was going up the stairs, I would have paused to ask what everyone else was doing. I don't think your DM should assume that your characters do anything.

That's how I've always done it. And I agree that the DM shouldnt assume the PCs all stay together.

 

[nsruf]

I'm a fairly ruthless DM, but in that situation, when Dylan said he was going up the stairs, I would have paused to ask what everyone else was doing. I don't think your DM should assume that your characters do anything.

That is how I try to handle it, too. As my players don't seem to believe in staying together very much, the only way to keep sane is to continously make sure what everybody does

With larger groups of players, it really helps to go around the table and let each PC have one "action" of equivalent length ("Ok, X goes upstairs, now what about you?"). Things like springing traps only happen after everybody got a turn and it is clear where they are.

 

[Black Omega]

This is fairly close to my own normal GMing. Ask everyone what they are doing, so I know. Then if someone goes off alone somewhere and sets off a trap I know exactly who hears the boom and who gets to see the body parts fly.