D&D General The Tyranny of Rarity

[Oofta]

Are you saying that you don't use hypotheticals to suss out the truth or falsity of issues/rules/arguments? Unless I understand you wrong you're basically saying that you don't accept any argument by analogy, ever.

The problem I see with the vast majority of hypotheticals on this thread is they they all seem to paint the DM as a jerk who makes random decisions without a care in the world about what their players think.

I've had bad DMs. They exist. I just get tired of being lumped in with every bad behavior because I have a clear vision of my campaign world that only includes a limited number of races.

 

[Zardnaar]

Or more generally: if all of your players are pushing back against your restrictions, perhaps this isn't the right game for this group.

If only one player is pushing back, it's them. If all of them are - then perhaps you should be doing something differently.

Hypothetically yes the problem would be me. I haven't experienced that though as I've already discussed what I'm offering with the group.

I've had problems with new potential players. One person didn't like my restrictions in my last Drow campaign. I told them "pick something's appropriate to Underdark" gave a recommend list and answered his questions about playstyles.

We had incompatible views and that's fine.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Nice way to take my reply out of context... I didn't say the issue was with clear rules. But claiming that the most fun is attained when the majority get the outcome they want should, in theory eliminate the need for rules... right? I mean you just vote whether a monster hits a character or whether sneaking past the guards works and so on... since the most fun is attained when the majority playing get what they want.

I was responding to this "Then why have rules to determine uncertain outcomes in D&D? just let majority decide what happens... right?" because it wasn't about a rule, but about a ruling. Levitation still triggering a pressure plate. That's a bad call and I'd push back on the GM for that. The entire group did, in this case.

So yeah, I'd say in this case, the majority rules method makes sense.

What's the benefit of allowing the GM's ruling to stand?

I didn't say you shouldn't think on it...

There was a point in time when the majority believed the world was flat... guess we should have just labeled those who though otherwise the problem, right?

There are still a minority who think the world is flat.....guess we should label those who think otherwise the problem right?

It's not about being factually correct. It's about a conflict of two opinions, one held by one participant of a game, and the other by multiple participants of a game.

 

[Mort]

The original intent was to give advice to DMs and Players, and basing this on cases that never happen is not the right way to go. This is also why, having had many (actually infinitely since I've never had a bad DM, but I'm willing to hear that some people have encountered bad DMs -

Really? You've been playing for what 30+ years, have experienced many multiple DMs and NEVER encountered a bad one?

I mean, that makes me really envious!

I've been gaming for a long time too (35 years) and have encountered my share of bad DMs (though I don't recall the problem ever being allowed races, classes etc.).

Dming is hard, DMing WELL is not only hard, it requires practice, a willingness for self analysis and a willingness to change that many people don't find easy.

Heck, I'm sure I've been the "bad DM", especially early on - very few people start and are good at something right away.

although I'd like to know the specifics because, on forums, 95% of the people coming to complain about their "bad DM" are actually in the wrong) many more cases of bad players than bad DMs, I'm basing my arguments on facts. Solid facts are always better than nebulous hypothesis of cases that never happen.

That seems way high no? 95% of forum complaints about DMs are in the wrong? I've seen plenty of these threads, and while I can't come up with an actual number off the top of my head - it's certainly not that high!

 

[Imaro]

I don't think that being dissatisfied with a GM ruling needs to be the same thing as not being happy with the result of a roll or what have you. Things are difficult for the characters and things don't always go their way.....that's fine. But if the GM makes a call that you don't think is fair or accurate, that's something else.

It's the equivalent of an umpire or referee making the wrong call.

I think you're missing my point... the justification given for the DM running back his ruling in the presented situation has been the majority wanting something being equated to the most fun/what's best for the game (I mean even you used the appeal to popularity as a justification in some of your posts)... and the most fun was then equated to the goal of most/all peoples games... so in theory using those random determiners only detracts from the fun that could be had since the most fun is when the majority playing get what they want... right? If not... why are we using an appeal to popularity as some kind of valid argument for why the players opinions should take precedence over the GM's?

 

[Umbran]

This "conversation" is over, go find someone else's words to misquote, since it's your only way of making "contributions".

Mod Note:
As you wish. Please find another discussion to take part in, hopefully in a more cordial manner.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

The problem I see with the vast majority of hypotheticals on this thread is they they all seem to paint the DM as a jerk who makes random decisions without a care in the world about what their players think.

I've had bad DMs. They exist. I just get tired of being lumped in with every bad behavior because I have a clear vision of my campaign world that only includes a limited number of races.

I'm an amazing DM so I can't relate :'3

 

[Oofta]

I'm an amazing DM so I can't relate :'3

Humble too.

 

[Imaro]

I was responding to this "Then why have rules to determine uncertain outcomes in D&D? just let majority decide what happens... right?" because it wasn't about a rule, but about a ruling. Levitation still triggering a pressure plate. That's a bad call and I'd push back on the GM for that. The entire group did, in this case.

So yeah, I'd say in this case, the majority rules method makes sense.

Why? I mean you can state it but why does the majority rules method make sense? Please answer this in the same way I am answering your inquiry below...

What's the benefit of allowing the GM's ruling to stand?

The GM is privy to a clearer understanding of the situation as well as the game overall including hidden situations, how magic functions in his world, etc... We also are not increasing the power of already powerful casters by enabling them to circumvent one of the restrictions on the levitate spell to levitate multiple creatures or objects with one casting.

There are still a minority who think the world is flat.....guess we should label those who think otherwise the problem right?

It's not about being factually correct. It's about a conflict of two opinions, one held by one participant of a game, and the other by multiple participants of a game.

Please quit trying to define my argument for me... it's not about being factually correct... it also shouldn't boil down to numbers make right, especially when there is a clear driver for bias... mainly my character not dying.

 

[Arilyn]

I don't think that being dissatisfied with a GM ruling needs to be the same thing as not being happy with the result of a roll or what have you. Things are difficult for the characters and things don't always go their way.....that's fine. But if the GM makes a call that you don't think is fair or accurate, that's something else.

It's the equivalent of an umpire or referee making the wrong call.

I think I read something else in this. I was responding to the idea that players shouldn't make choices for the game or the world because they'll automatically make things easy.

Yes, it's ok to have discussions around a potential bad call by the GM. I don't mind players letting me know if I've made a wonky call.