D&D 5E Was I in the wrong?

[FrogReaver]

Well, I feel that had he been paying attention he would have realized that the ring was still stuck to the gauntlet. I made sure to point it out (that the ring was stuck there) and they made no mention between putting the armor away and going to sell it of ever trying to remove the ring. They didn't even held an interest in getting a second look or trying to items out on their way to the city.
Seeing as they made no effort to remove the ring, I played it as the ring still being there, untouched and on the gauntlet's finger. The others all remembered and acknowledged the ring being stuck on the armor, yet the ranger somehow thought they had it stored somewhere else.
Simply put, I believe he just wasn't careful enough. This is also the same person that didn't even realize there was a set of magical gauntlets until we talked about it the next day.

Okay since that went no where let's approach it this way. Please explain what the player that controls the ranger character should have had his character do to avoid selling the ring with the rest of the armor without realizing it? Is there nothing the player could have their character do to avoid this situation short of the player remembering everything you expected him to remember.

In fact if anyone here that thinks the DM wasn't in the wrong in this situation can answer that it would be enlightening.

 

[randrak]

I honestly don't get why people are saying I did it as a passive aggressive attack because of cellphone guy. I would have done this regardless of him being on the phone or not. It wasn't a punishment for being rude out of the game, it was pretty much a warning for people to pay more attention to what they are doing in general. I only mentioned the cellphone guy because I felt that his reaction was the most outrageous and disproportionate. While the rest seemed generally fine with the development, the one guy that wasn't paying any attention at all was the one that got more aggravated by it.
This was not a punishment for being on the phone, I would never punish the whole party for something one person does out of the game.

Okay since that went no where let's approach it this way. Please explain what the player that controls the ranger character should have had his character do to avoid selling the ring with the rest of the armor without realizing it? Is there nothing the player could have their character do to avoid this situation short of the player remembering everything you expected him to remember.

In fact if anyone here that thinks the DM wasn't in the wrong in this situation can answer that it would be enlightening.

He had the time between they got the armor and the 2 days that took them to reach the city to try and remove the ring or at least separate the gauntlets. I asked them what they wanted to do during the trip but they didn't say anything. As such it was assumed that they didn't even touch the armor. When the armor was presented to the blacksmith, he again made no mention of it and neither did the others.
Had they, at any time, mentioned that they at least tried to separate the gauntlets and ring, or at least mentioned that they were not part of the deal while trying to sell them then this would not had happened.
Yes....YES, I expect my players to remember what they own. I remember every monster stat, every NPC and their personalities, every city and their locations and maps. I have to constantly remember everything about the world they are in...the only thing I expect from them is to remember their characters, abilities, skills, gear and everything. Yet he didn't even remember that the gauntlets were magical until we talked about it the next day.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I honestly don't get why people are saying I did it as a passive aggressive attack because of cellphone guy. I would have done this regardless of him being on the phone or not. It wasn't a punishment for being rude out of the game, it was pretty much a warning for people to pay more attention to what they are doing in general.

It was an in game reaction designed to address an out of game issue. Been there, done that. It rarely goes well.

He had the time between they got the armor and the 2 days that took them to reach the city to try and remove the ring or at least separate the gauntlets. I asked them what they wanted to do during the trip but they didn't say anything. As such it was assumed that they didn't even touch the armor. When the armor was presented to the blacksmith, he again made no mention of it and neither did the others.
Had they, at any time, mentioned that they at least tried to separate the gauntlets and ring, or at least mentioned that they were not part of the deal while trying to sell them then this would not had happened.
Yes....YES, I expect my players to remember what they own. I remember every monster stat, every NPC and their personalities, every city and their locations and maps. I have to constantly remember everything about the world they are in...the only thing I expect from them is to remember their characters, abilities, skills, gear and everything. Yet he didn't even remember that the gauntlets were magical until we talked about it the next day.

And here I think is the crux of the entire matter: differing expectations. You as DM are expecting the players to be more invested in the game than it appears they are. At this point I really think talking with the whole group about expectations is a good idea. You may need to be willing to admit that what you did was at the least a little dickish. From there you need to all decide where you are going in your campaign. It seems likely that you will need to adjust your expectations for some, if not all, of the players. The players need to understand what you expect and decide if that is what they want and if they want to continue playing. Similarly, you need to understand what they expect and decide if you want to keep putting in the hard work it takes to run a fun game.

Let's face it, not everyone comes to play for the same reasons. Some want an amazing immersive game that allows them to leave the real world behind. Others want to kill things and take their stuff, and some just want to hang out with friends and laugh. If what you expect and want out of the game is not in line with that they do, and some of you can't accept and adjust, then somebody's fun is going to end.

 

[Nytmare]

I just want to bring this up because in the vast flood of recent responses, it seems as though a essential bit of explanation was either missed, or is being ignored.

Cellphone guy and the ranger who sold the gear are not the same person. Randrak was complaining about two different things.

 

[Faenor]

I just want to bring this up because in the vast flood of recent responses, it seems as though a essential bit of explanation was either missed, or is being ignored.

Cellphone guy and the ranger who sold the gear are not the same person. Randrak was complaining about two different things.

That's a good point. So what was the connection between cell phone guy and the situation with the ring being sold? Was it because his character would have gotten the ring?

 

[randrak]

That's a good point. So what was the connection between cell phone guy and the situation with the ring being sold? Was it because his character would have gotten the ring?

I only brought it up because while he was the one paying the least attention, he was also the only one that got angry with what I did.

 

[Maxperson]

Except the players didn't screw up. The dm did...

Player had no knowledge at the time of the sell that ring and gauntlet was included. Dm even admits it with justifying why the blacksmith didn't mention the ring. In hopes not to draw attention to it. The dm admits it later when he mentions the other players were upset that they didn't know the ring and gauntlet were sold.

Yes, the player did have that knowledge. The player was the one that wrapped them up as a set, so he clearly had the knowledge. He just forgot about it because he wasn't paying attention. It's not the DM's job to protect the players from themselves. It's the players' jobs to pay attention.

 

[Goolpsy]

Here is my take on it. You describe the different magic items - amoung others an armor set consisting on a adamantine plate and Magical Gauntlets with a ring.

The Players say they carry the stuff together (Whatever words they used).

Ranger enters the blacksmith saying: "I want to sell the Adamantine armor" (Refering to the object)
You asking: "The Set?", and he says yes.

Again, I have no clue how he phrased the inquiry, but it seems there was a lack of communication of what a set of Armor is.
In most peoples minds 1 item is 1 item. 1 set of armor is 1 item. (If he said directly; and what about these gauntlets? - that would be his fault).

Bottomline; psychologically people have severe loss aversion. And the two of you having different meaning through vague communication punishing the player, will EVERY time result in annoyed players.

 

[Maxperson]

Bottomline; psychologically people have severe loss aversion. And the two of you having different meaning through vague communication punishing the player, will EVERY time result in annoyed players.

Speaking for myself, I would not have been annoyed at the DM here. I would have been annoyed with myself for forgetting that I bundled it all together and messing up the sale. I don't expect the DM to hold my hand like a toddler and protect me from myself. That's not his job.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Yup. Imo this is a clear example of malicious DM'ing. The DM was frustrated about an out of character problem, the player being on his cellphone, so he decided to enact punishment. How? By purposefully and maliciously causing not just the player he has a problem with, BUT THE ENTIRE GROUP, frustration. He's there to play a game. Another fun thing about all this, he starts his post by saying that he's playing with his best friends. His best friends. And he does this to them? In a game.. meant to have fun together.. So not only is he not willing to actually address the problem he's having with the specific player (apparently one his best friends), but he's going to resort to passive aggressive attacks against the entire group to vent? How do you have friends? This guy should be removed from the DM'ing role for a bit so he can cool off and realize that he's not there to punish people or be the parent. He's there to play a group game. If the guy being on his cellphone really bothers him, he should talk about it openly with the group next session (if there is one).. I would walk away from a table where the DM acted like this, friend or not. Wheaton's Law applies to everyone at the table, DM included.

Interesting that you mention that he isn't there to be the parent. I agree! The DM isn't there to walk behind his players with outstretched arms to catch them if they fall as if they were toddlers.

Okay since that went no where let's approach it this way. Please explain what the player that controls the ranger character should have had his character do to avoid selling the ring with the rest of the armor without realizing it? Is there nothing the player could have their character do to avoid this situation short of the player remembering everything you expected him to remember.

In fact if anyone here that thinks the DM wasn't in the wrong in this situation can answer that it would be enlightening.

What could the player have done? In the OP when the smith asked if the whole thing was for sale, the player could have asked him what he meant by that. A player mentally sleepwalking through interaction with an NPC has only him/her self to blame.

It was an in game reaction designed to address an out of game issue. Been there, done that. It rarely goes well.


And here I think is the crux of the entire matter: differing expectations. You as DM are expecting the players to be more invested in the game than it appears they are. At this point I really think talking with the whole group about expectations is a good idea. You may need to be willing to admit that what you did was at the least a little dickish. From there you need to all decide where you are going in your campaign. It seems likely that you will need to adjust your expectations for some, if not all, of the players. The players need to understand what you expect and decide if that is what they want and if they want to continue playing. Similarly, you need to understand what they expect and decide if you want to keep putting in the hard work it takes to run a fun game.

Let's face it, not everyone comes to play for the same reasons. Some want an amazing immersive game that allows them to leave the real world behind. Others want to kill things and take their stuff, and some just want to hang out with friends and laugh. If what you expect and want out of the game is not in line with that they do, and some of you can't accept and adjust, then somebody's fun is going to end.

To this I say that there can be mixed expectations and willingness to invest within the same group. Those willing to put more into the game are going to get more out of it. Casual players who just show up to hang out for a few laughs can certainly do that if that is what they find fun but might not get everything out of the game that a more focused player will.

This is simply how it is with hobbies. Those that are willing to put more into them get more out of them. Players don't improve by having the DM follow behind them cleaning up their poop. Players can either decide to try and improve their game and pay attention or keep it casual and continue to miss things.

In any event the DM shouldn't have to run his/her game geared toward a kindergarten class because a couple of players enjoy goofing off and refuse to pay attention.

If someone's fun is being ruined by not paying attention then they can fix that.