Just had an argument with another player about our current dm and wanted to know what others think. Not looking for validation,just what public opinion might be.
The argument was about if I should confront the dm about some things in the campaign.
He has, not only in this game but also others, retconned events and decisions we have made. I have been under the impression that he was doing this for story but this still does not really make it justified. My fellow player has said that he does not care, as long as there is something to play and we keep from driving off the dm.
Another thing was ignoring character abilities, or sometimes taking them off for the sake of what he planned. This includes things like saying spells automatically fail, do not affect targets they were just effecting or the turning off of things like smite when we know a target is evil, then saying it works on an identical enemy in the same combat. Even when we try to investigate why, he will tell us nothing was different about it and in game research always turns up nothing.
I also dm/gm for the group, running the main campaign at the moment and he is running the alternate. It just aggravates me when he retcons events or refuses to let players do things because he did not plan for them.
Long story short, a fellow player does not want me to bring these up to the dm, which totally shut down last time we mentioned something about things in his game for the sake of keeping members in the group. Would I be in the wrong to try and get him to obey closer to the rules he set for us? I know dms need some leeway but I feel like it has gotten out of hand.
>>47514734
I feel you are completely in the right and applaud you for being sensible. There are somethings you can fudge as a DM, but never, ever go against the rules of a class ability. That is literally taking toys away from the player and it is never fun.
>>47515495
My biggest grip was the retconning player decisions but the ignoring player actions also got me.
The last example of this was when a player used color spray on an human thug that attacked up. He said that he was not going to roll the thugs saving throw and just ignored the spell effects. This was pretty low level and the character was not exactly a combat monster and was in an ambush.
Years ago, we were playing a 3.5 game in the abyss and threw a pretty serious fight at us. After the battle, I started using wands to heal the party and he ruled that they no longer worked, telling us the plane was draining power from magic items, but not casters. I started using heal spells and he said I suddenly lost 3/4 of my spells.
This caused me to quit his game years ago, with neither of us handling the argument afterwards very well. I am feeling like I am about completely done with this on the new go around and I might just stop playing under him at all. Just feel like it would cause some form of drama or a complete group split due to the groups composition and lack of anyone else to invite to sessions as we live in a mountain community.
Would you actually be in the wrong? No.
Would you be practically in the wrong as far as the group is concerned? Maybe, depends on how much any of the other players agree with you and want to square up to the GM.
You're stuck between a rock and a hard place, OP.
On one hand, that GM is a colossal faggot; retconning NPC actions is bad enough, but taking control of the PC away from the player is abhorrent. Not letting the PC do something in the first place, while not as horrible, is still a sign of really really bad GMing; at best he's painfully amateurish but most likely he's a control freak that is all about *his* story instead of y'all's story.
On the other hand, I sympathize with the other player's desire to not rock the boat unduly, especially if the gaming community is as small and insular as it sounds.
At the end of the day, there's no clearcut answer. You would be totally right in walking away from this shitshow, but doing that may cause more damage than you intended.
>>47514734
This DM sounds like he'd rather be a writer than a DM.
>>47515659
Sums it up pretty well, though I'd say confront him about it anyway. Ask him why you should be invested in the characters when he retcons things and alters your decisions.
Imo he's playing like how my siblings did when we were younger. "Nuh uh, that doesn't work because I have a super magic shield you can't see!"
>>47515855
>>47515870
Yeah, we live in the middle of nowhere and I am pretty far into the group.
On top of playing with them for about 15 years, I am related to members of the group and the childhood friends with another and we work together.
This is countered by the other gm being the founder of the group and is one of my relatives best friend and the only reason why they show up to play.
I am probably going to confront him anyway, as I am usually the bearer of bad news and the only one who wont just take it for a campaign's worth.
I can explain the tipping point from the last campaign and why I am on the fence if anyone wants.
>>47515964
Yeah, it'd be interesting to hear that.
Can you tell why he does these things, though? I'm a similarly bad DM (which is why I don't DM much) where I can't think of another way to involve the party or explain something to them if option 1 doesn't work. It's not that I'm trying to force the story to play out the way I want it to, just that there is no session if they circumvent it from happening.
i.e.
>The last example of this was when a player used color spray on an human thug that attacked up.
did that end up leading you into a quest, or is it more likely the DM just wanted it to happen so he ignored it for no good reason?
Not saying he's handling it well either way, expecting a party with magic users to not have color spray or heal spells
>>47516129
We were some 15 sessions into the campaign when he dropped a mcguffin on us in the form a crown that had artifact level power. Talking freezing all water within 50 miles, turning anyone who put it on into a lich with a permanent improved blur effect.
We keep it safe on a party member who is immune to all magic effects that are not from their plane of existence. This character was given to an ex girlfriend of his who showed up for three sessions then dropped out.
At the end of the session, we get plane shifted to a connected plane and into the capitol of a hidden dragon enclave. We make it through and get dropped off on another continent, then have a confrontation with an assassin trying to get the artifact, which was part of a hand to hand grapple that the magic immune character used to saw off the assassins head. Big fight and then we end for the night.
Next game, the player can not be there. When we all sit down and play, I do the recap until we get to the part about the crown. He says we gave it to the dragons as a gift. I say no we did not and missing player used it to kill the assassin. He refuses to acknowledge this, the only other player who looks to have a problem is the one from my first post about not wanting to rock the boat.
I tell them my character would have never given them the crown as my god, who I am a cleric of, said he wanted the thing and it was the point of us traveling to the main continent to try and contact him. No one speaks up, I leave for 3 hours and return to collect my things and they say my character switched gods with them while I was gone.
Found a reason not to go for two sessions after, when he stopped running in a huff when another player freaked out about him destroying all of his kit with no saves on mordikins disjunction. Been running since and trying all I can to take up session time, but he has said he is waiting for a chance to start a new campaign.
>>47516201
He wanted the thug to escape, so he refused for it to have a saving throw and the thug just got away.
He has done things like strip spells pr day to make things more hazardous and once removed the Turn/Rebuke Undead ability from a cleric because he did not realize feats could buff it and wanted to base a section of the campaign around undead.
My thing is, if you want to run a specific style of campaign and some characters just will not fit it, do not allow them in the game. If you wanted to run a evil pc game, ban good characters and things like paladin, do not punish them after the game has started without giving players guidelines.
>>47516440
It sounds like it's more than just your DM causing trouble. Other players are either in on it or just don't care enough to literally have your cleric switch deities on you.
Unless your character was named "Donald Trump" he should never have flip-flopped that bad.This is bait.
>>47516530
I think reducing the powers of Turn/Rebuke Undead is alright IF their is some kind of foreshadowing, and there is some way for the characters to reverse this nerf partway through (25-33% for a good part, 50% otherwise) that particular series of sessions. You know, something like "The old lich, long since defeated, had been researching means to harden his undead army against holy effects. He was successful in warding his keep, but the ward is only held in place by three arcane artifacts crafted under the blessings of an evil god. Villagers have reported seeing them around the keep at positions x, y, and z. Rumor has it that <insert good deity here> is interested in reclaiming/examining these artifacts, and will reward anyone able to deliver them."
And as these objects are destroyed/removed the nerf effect gets weaker, and/or once all three are collected they may somehow be purified and crafted into a valuable weapon against the undead.
>>47516908
Woops, didn't mean to spoiler that image, whatever though.
>>47516908
But you would understand that your players get pissed because you miscalculated what feats do and did not plan on it, so you nerf/remove it?
>>47517001
Yeah no what he did was just total dickery. Didn't add any interesting challenges for the players.
>>47514734
>refuses to let players do things because he did not plan for them.
A good GM will either anticipate, or be able to adapt to players actions in-game. Sometimes though, a player's actions can be disappointing in terms of imagining how a scene would play out. -- what I mean is that a GM will often imagine how a scene will go, only to be disappointed or frustrated at the table when players do something entirely different, or find a way to circumvent an obstacle.
It happens often. Being able to anticipate or "deal with it" is absolutely necessary as a GM.
That being said, when a GM puts an obstacle in the players' way, it should be a FEATURE of the game, not a denial. Let me give you an example:
>PC's are investigating a series of murders, and suspect an evil cult is involved.
>PC's investigate local officials and prominent people and witnesses, and the group's paladin uses "detect evil" on everyone he can. A few people ping as evil, and are dealt-with by the PC's.
>another murder occurs after
>Players suspect a particular person, and interrogate him again. Again, he does not detect as evil to the group paladin.
>Through events and adventure, the PC's solve the mystery and it was that guy all along. Frustration and indignation occur, as the group does not understand how or why he would not have been detected earlier.
Was the GM "cheating"?
Did the players miss something?
Now....a very experienced player may realize (without his character knowing) that there is a spell in the game that conceals alignment. A less than experienced player might not. The question is, does this confusion add something to the game?
>It turns out the suspect had an amulet enchanted with "neutral alignment" -- this amulet will lead them to the cult's involvement.
If this is done retroactively (after being disappointed at the players using "detect evil" everywhere) and it shows in the GM's frustration, it looks like GM cheating, which is not fun for the group.
