When should players challenge the DM and when should they be quiet?

[S'mon]

Would you hate to think you killed a monster because of some error a player knew about but didn't care to point out? ;-)

Naw, taking care of the monsters is _my_ responsibility.

After all, I can make up whatever monsters I like, PCs are more important. This is particularly relevant because I've had 4 PC deaths & 1 cohort death in the last two sessions - and this is a group averaging around 12th level, some now permanently dead PCs had been around for years. One PC was raised but lost all her stuff and retired, then next session her brand new 11th level PC was killed permanently, so the player is currently generating yet another PC for next session. One reason her 1st PC died was that the player omitted to add her BAB to some grapple rolls, which kind of sucked.

 

[Arnwyn]

So is there ever an appropriate time to challenge a DM's ruling during the actual game session?

Contrary to how many at ENWorld feel, at my table, I welcome and encourage players to question and/or point out any rules mistakes that I make during the session. (As opposed to what seems to be the majority, in that questioning is to be done after the session is over - which I do not understand. By then, the result of the ruling can not be changed, and no one might remember what the original question was in the first place. That doesn't do anything for us.)

So, I'm quite pleased when players point out any mistakes I make so I can quickly rectify them. In fact, I've made it abundantly clear to my players that they are fully responsible for what's in the PHB. However, there are conditions - while I'm fine with them questioning anything in the PHB, that player had better be ready to point out the correct ruling. I'm not going to wait for him to fumble through the rules: know what you're talking about, and find it in about 30 seconds, or keep quiet and quit slowing down the game. Further, any questioning of what's in the DMG and MM will be promptly ignored. There are just too many variables for the players to know what's happening. So, for my game, there is never an appropriate time to "challenge" the DM's ruling when it comes to the DMG or MM.

Overall, though, I don't mind rules discussions - and I like to get group consensus on how to rule something for future reference. I have no intention of dictating a ruling.

 

[D+1]

Players can challenge the DM on ANYthing at ANY time. If you realize he's given a monster a +2 to hit that he shouldn't have you DON'T have to wait to bring it up, even though it's not a big, game-blowing error. Good grief the DM is not infallible nor beyond criticism, nor is the game-flow so sacred that it Dare Not Be Interrupted For Mundane Reasons.

The point is not so much when to mention it at all but when to make a BIG DEAL about it. If you mention an invalid +2 bonus the reaction from the DM should either be, "Oh, you're right. The actual bonus is..." or, "There's a reason for that, mention it again later and I'll explain," or even, "Objection noted and overruled. Moving on..." The player then has the option of being a jerk and making a mountain out of a molehill, or bringing the game to a screeching halt and explaining in detail what his concerns are. Generally that's going to be much more serious rules breaches or other important issues, but GEEZ, if you see an unneeded and unwarrented TPK coming round the corner it doesn't matter what the DM says you DO have the right to complain.

D&D is a GROUP effort - it's only directed by the DM, not utterly DOMINATED by him. Better that you should speak up, be an irritation, and prevent bigger problems before they start than to have to do major ret-con's because the DM was WAY off base and nobody said anything.

 

[The Sigil]

Here's the way I usually do it...

Rule 0.5: "Flow of the game is king."

Players are allowed to bring the PHB (or equivalent SRD sections) to the gaming table. If they are using 3rd-party stuff (cleared by me), they bring photocopies of only the pages relevant to the character/abilities they are using.

A player is permitted to "appeal to the PHB/SRD" if he feels I made an incorrect ruling regarding a spell's effect or what the proper procedure for a grapple is or whatever... but he has to be able to pull the rule up within about 30 seconds or we move along. The rationale is that characters would be familiar with how THEIR abilities work (the PHB) and how "normal situations" like combat, trapfinding, etc. work (the PHB) but NOT about how monsters work or about how magic in general works (specific spells that they can cast, yes, magic in general, no).

Monster stats, et al are the province of the DM and cannot/should not be challenged (the "player knowledge is not character knowledge" rule) in the first place.

In order to keep things running smoothly, I make rulings on the fly if I don't know the rule. But any time I make a "ruling on the fly," I tell the players such and make a note of it. Between sessions, I research the actual rule behind the ruling on the fly, and before the next session discuss any differences with them (i.e., "it worked this way last time, but I checked up on the rule, and in the future, it will work this other way"). If they think I "missed something," they can bring it up after the session as well, and I'll research it.

I'm open with my players - I tell them I don't know everything, and I'll try to do my best, and when I'm unsure, I'll research it... but nothing gets changed "retroactively" (too many continuity problems) if I make an erroneous ruling - only "from this time forward." This cuts down on any DM-player tension, because they know "I'm on their side" - but I'm not perfect, and shouldn't be expected to be so.

It's worked for almost 20 years for me - I've never had a "problem player" at my table (and some of the players at my table have been problems elsewhere).

--The Sigil

 

[Calico_Jack73]

I don't mind when I am challenged as long as I am challenged at the time whatever it is happens and the person doesn't wait until the story has progressed to challenge me then. Also, once I make a ruling I hate when players won't let the matter rest and keep arguing. If I don't make a change when something has been pointed out to me normally it is due to the fact that it is important to the story. The story takes presidence over the rules.

 

[Ottergame]

Heh, a lot more DMs claim to be understanding and welcome of challenges than there are who actually are. In all the games I've played over the years, I can think of only a couple who would actually hear out a player. The rest have been more likely to kick a player out of the group then to even check to see if they were wrong.

It's great if you are, be at least be honest here if you're not.

 

[Saeviomagy]

1. Flow of the game is very important.
2. Fun in a game is also important
3. DM rulings which penalise characters unexpectedly directly reduce the fun that a player is having.
4. 3 is likely to cause the player to argue, which is likely to reduce the flow of the game.

So - if you're DMing, and someone calls you on a rule, go with the option that's less restrictive for the time being. You'll enhance fun, you'll help flow, and you can always get it right at the end of the session.

If you continually choose the more restrictive option, then you WILL annoy players and you WILL slow the game down with arguments. If your DM does this in a consistent manner, call him on it instead of calling him on the rules. It'll be far more productive.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Everything the DM does is going to have a huge effect on the game.

Like when you give your DM one hard time too many and he says, "You know what? You're all dead, and I quit."

Better to concentrate on all the hard work your DM puts into running a game for you, rather than harassing him about that saving throw you think you should have gotten, or that the Jump rules don't work exactly as the DM thinks.

 

[Aethelstan]

DM: "Heed and obey...for I am the word and the word is law!"

Players: [trembling] "Yes, Dungeon Master...we heed and obey."

 

[Greyhawk_DM]

This is what I wrote at the beginning of my "House Rules" document...

Disclaimer: This is not an all-inclusive list of rules, but it is some of the ones that I could think of now that I wanted to change. As the game goes on and decisions are made then they will be added to this document so that everyone will know how certain situations will be run.
Not all rules will be known to the player. Some things you just have to find out through playing. Just like in real life sometimes we are not sure how things will come out before we try them.

Basically I have told them this...I am only one person...I expect them to know the basic facts about their class and how it operates. I should not be expected to remember every detail about what they can do. If they don't remind me or I don't remember then it just didn't happen. This way it encourages my players to at least read the info in the Players Handbook about their PC's and be able to "help" me along in the game with the player stuff.
This way I can worry more about the "DM Stuff" and not the "PC Stuff."

Another thing is that a gaming group is based on relationships...There is a relationship that is formed between the players and their DM. Just like a bf/gf or spouse that relationship has to have a basis of trust. If you don't trust your DM to run the game to the best of their ability or vice versa...then don't game with them...

Case in point...posted by Dracolich

That's right a DM can cheat. That's why every rules infraction that is caught by a player should be challenged, regardless if the infraction is large or small. Everytime a rules infraction goes unchallenged it just gives the DM more opportunities to try and get away with stuff like that mentioned above.

If this is really the way you feel about your DM then I suggest you find someone else to game with...

Another case in point...
There are some players that I have played with in other campaigns that have cheated...I will not be their DM because I cannot trust them to be honest in the game. It puts more stress on me by trying to figure out if this person is trying to screw me or is he being "honest" this time. Most people like this tend to be overzealous in their "corrections" of your mistakes and less so on theirs.

This is not to say that we do not discuss rules during the game. It is usually a minor issue that does not get blown out of proportion. As a DM you must have the ability to resolve conflicts in an honest and timely manner...If you screwed up...admit it and do what it takes to rectify the mistake. Players can be very attached to their pcs and dealing with them in a less than upfront manner could spell doom for the credibility of your game.

Anywhoo...just my 2 cents of rambling...