Should a DM assume your character does something?

[Desdichado]

I never make assumptions like that. As a player, I'm likely to split off from the group at times as well -- we like to be a rather independent lot.

But as a DM it's only fair. Don't ever assume your players are doing something, especially if they haven't even ever shown a tendency to do the expected. In my opinion, it doesn't tip your hand, as Ashtal says, if you do it all the time, even if there's nothing the players need to worry about.

 

[Henry]

The DM messed up. It's quite simple, really.

As DM, I always try to make it a point to know EXACTLY where everyone is at a given moment. It may take more time, but it ensures no hurt feelings or misunderstandings.

We also use miniatures in our games, and I make it explicitly clear that everyone needs to be sure their mini's are where they SAY they are, because if they don't take steps to be sure their mini's are placed where they need to be, then regardless of what they SAY they are doing, they are exactly where their mini dictates. The first time someone gets burned by a trap because they wouldn't get off their butts to move their mini where it was supposed to be, they start taking it more seriously. (As an aside, I always make sure that the first trap encountered is surviveable.)

It is the DM's responsibility as well as the players to ensure positioning of everyone when exploring unknown territory. If the DM makes an assumption that is disputed, he needs to give the player the benfit of the doubt.

 

[Numion]

I'd go with the DM on this one. Usually players in my group don't explicitly state that they're following when someone says "I go", but then they bitch if they miss the surprise round because of that.

It's only a reasonable assumption that the DM shouldn't confirm everyones actions. Especially those confirmations tend to be asked when something is amiss. (Like a trap.) I though tend to have some fun with asking confirmations in normal situations - "There's a coin on the floor" "I pick it up!" "Are you absolutely positive you want to do that?" "uh... no?"

 

[Uruk]

I would've asked what everyone else was going to do, but unless you we're going to stay down at the bottom of the steps for the rest of the game you would have set off the trap eventually.

 

[tburdett]

Does not compute!

Did everyone else miss the part where he argued with the DM at the game table? Do you guys actually allow this in your games?

You may all enjoy sitting around the table arguing all night about whether or not a certain character did a certain thing this way instead of that way, but I do not.

When I took over as DM we all sat down and hammered out a set of rules/guidelines to handle problems that may come up during play. The first and most important rule that was adopted is...

There will be no arguing about the rules during the game. Period. I am very open to players CALMLY pointing out errors as they happen, but if I decide to go against the rules on a particular occasion, that is my prerogative. I will always correct any error that results in the death of a PC. DM's shouldn't kill PC's, your dice and your bad decisions should kill your PC's. If your character dies and you do not agree with the situation, you have two options.

The first option is to search through the rules to find the mistake that you think I made. If you can find supporting evidence for your position, and you present that evidence calmly during a break in play, I will make your character whole.

The second option is accept the situation, regardless of whether you think a mistake has been made or not, and generate a new character.

There is no "Argue and be an (rhymes with glass bowl) about it" option.

 

[Tsyr]

Re: Does not compute!

Did everyone else miss the part where he argued with the DM at the game table? Do you guys actually allow this in your games?

You may all enjoy sitting around the table arguing all night about whether or not a certain character did a certain thing this way instead of that way, but I do not.

When I took over as DM we all sat down and hammered out a set of rules/guidelines to handle problems that may come up during play. The first and most important rule that was adopted is...

There will be no arguing about the rules during the game. Period. I am very open to players CALMLY pointing out errors as they happen, but if I decide to go against the rules on a particular occasion, that is my prerogative. I will always correct any error that results in the death of a PC. DM's shouldn't kill PC's, your dice and your bad decisions should kill your PC's. If your character dies and you do not agree with the situation, you have two options.

The first option is to search through the rules to find the mistake that you think I made. If you can find supporting evidence for your position, and you present that evidence calmly during a break in play, I will make your character whole.

The second option is accept the situation, regardless of whether you think a mistake has been made or not, and generate a new character.

There is no "Argue and be an (rhymes with glass bowl) about it" option.

One difference.

This wasn't a rules call.

Are you saying that, as a player, you wouldn't object -and indeed, argue- if your DM started basicly telling you your character did things you never wanted him to do? Multiple times a night?

And please. What your table's rules are is one thing. That's not our rules. So don't damn me because I broke one of your rules. We have no such rule. We are all human. We disagree. We argue. It happens. We live with it, and get over it. This isn't a game of Hackmaster run by the HMPA, here.

 

[dren]

Although I haven't done this in a while, let the players decide upon an announcer. Then the rule is, what the party announcer says goes until the PC states otherwise. If the player doesn't hear what the announcer states, or if they didn't discuss it, that's between the players as they didn't speak up.

And I always prompt PCs for decisions when soneone takes an unexpected or potentialy move. Sometimes it does give the players a hint, but use cryptic language, and they may start doubting an innocent situation.

 

[Fast Learner]

Re: Does not compute!

Did everyone else miss the part where he argued with the DM at the game table? Do you guys actually allow this in your games?

Yes, I do.

We're all people, and we're all friends. There are no "rules" about how we're allowed to act. If we run into something we start to argue over, we find a way to work it out.

To sum: we act like adults, even though some in our group are under 18.

It is a shame you need to have such rules in your group.

 

[nopantsyet]

I generally confirm who is going where. My players split up alot, so I'm used to the idea that one going does not mean all going.

 

[tburdett]

Does anybody actually read?

Fastlearner,

Please go back and read the very first message in this thread before you take a condescending tone with me. He states in that message that they were SHOUTING at each other. Creating rules to prevent things like this from happening IS the adult thing to do.

We game in my home and my children are present when this takes place. Any responsible parent would enforce a set of guidelines that did NOT allow for players to take hostile acts against either the GM or another player.

We have never had shouting or physical violence at one of our game sessions. Why is it wrong or unfortunate to create a guideline to reinforce in the players minds that this type of behavior will not be tolerated?

Tsyr,

If you are not happy with the decisions that the GM is making, leave the table. Shouting at another person over a GAME is never mature or appropriate behavior.

(Edited to remove my inflammatory remarks.)