what do you do when you don't coincide with your DM

[dreaded_beast]

i'm sure this has happened to everyone before, long and deep, heart-felt and thought-provoking discussions on the mechanics of the DND game between players and DMs regarding interpretations of rules during in-game sessions.

from the player viewpoint, what do you do when you do not coincide with a DM's ruling? do you shut-up and just take it as is in order to hurry the game along or do you argue with the DM for half the game session, listening to why the DM thinks their way is the right way and you are wrong?

 

[Ruined]

I have a pretty good situation with this as both player and GM. The first and foremost rule is that rules-disagreements don't descend into arguments at the table. The DM has final authority because it's their game, said arguments interfere with the flow of story, and (in most cases) they're not out to screw the players.

In the game I play in, I've talked with the DM about this. He's totally fine with going with my rules points because I play and run a lot more d20 than he has. And I'll always try to reference the passage from the book if we're unsure. Of course, I usually pipe up in favor of the enemies more than the heroes... ("Umm, he has reach, so he would get an AoO if we make that move...")

It's the same way when I DM. I try to know my rules, but they're not as prevalent in my head when trying to orchestrate a story. Players are welcome to clarify my judgements, and I always listen to appeals as long as they're brief. If we can't find said passage or it makes little sense, I'll make a fair ruling, and then we can look into it in between sessions (usually here on EN World).

To me, it boils down to respect between friends.

 

[EricNoah]

do you shut-up and just take it as is in order to hurry the game along

Yep, pretty much! If I have a big issue with it I will e-mail the DM later, so I can be sure I understand what to expect in a similar situation.

 

[Zappo]

If I am absolutely sure that I am right and he is wrong, then I just say "The standard rules say this. Do you still want to do that?". If the answer is yes, it's fine for me; I'll remember the ruling for when I can use it to my advantage though!

If I'm not sure or if the rules are open to interpretation, I try to clear up each of the different possibilities, ask the DM which one he's going to use, and go with it.

Basically, I accept any ruling, but I want to make sure there is clarity and consistancy. I never strongly express my opinion about rules during games, so as to avoid arguments, even if the DM is doing something out of whack.

 

[dreaded_beast]

To me, it boils down to respect between friends.

Bravo! Very well said!

 

[Malcolm]

Do what the GM says.
Its their game, they may have reasons for rulings which are affected by other rulings or special game mechanics that they have worked on.
After the session, then start a polite discussion; and don't expect to come away with an agreement. Perhaps an understanding, perhaps not.

If you follow this as a player, you'll find that when its your turn to GM you'll receive the same respect and trust from your players for your rulings that they may not agree with at the time.

Its not like an MPORG, the Players will never know All of the rules because We, the GMs, aren't telling you.
If we did, would you really play?

 

[Henry]

Arguing at the game table only accomplishes one thing: wasting time. Disagreeing with a point is better done after the game is over, and during the week between sessions. While everyone is a valued player, respect has to be laid for the DM's ruling while the session is in progress. Otherwise, the fun is ruined for all while the argument continues.

The only exception to this instance is if ALL the players at the table like rules debates more than the actual gaming itself. In that instance, why waste time gaming, when you have the night's fun right there? Just go to the D&D rules forum, download the latest 15 ot 20 longest threads, and pick the question out of them for debate!

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

Well i accept the Dm ruling at the table then discuss it after the game or before the next game. of course after i've made my case it is up to the Dm and or group to decode so to speak. I play in several games where I am not happy with the dm rulings or styles at times but it is a shared game one person can't be right all the time , except when I dm LOL
Ken

 

[alsih2o]

i recently had a aoo "dispute" from one of my players who shall remain nameless (buttercup ) and when she asked i said "well, we will play it this way and check and see if i am wrong later, then we will know for the future" her response was "ok"

it was ultimately relaxing and made for better flow....this is almost always the way it should be handled.

some major errs may require in-game discussion, but a word to straighten it later is almost always best for everyone fun.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

If I am absolutely sure that I am right and he is wrong, then I just say "The standard rules say this. Do you still want to do that?". If the answer is yes, it's fine for me; I'll remember the ruling for when I can use it to my advantage though!

If a player gave me that kind of attitude at the table in front of the other players, that could be the start of some bad blood. Tact is always a good thing to use when discussion things among friends
ken