Quote from: Bill;651646So I ruined an otherwise good chance to play dnd by being an asshat in a game of magic.

Magic is a competetive game. Rules lawyering is part of the skillset of playing.

That group was wrong IMHO for applying the principles of an rpg to a competetive card game.

Quote from: Bill;651646What! the GM did not know stellar physics!

A GM must know everything in the universe!

If it had been a game ruling I wouldn't have gotten so up in arms about it. But he was wrong about reality! Like if he said that his binary stars circled each other the way they did because of magic, I wouldn't have said anything, but...

Ok yeah, I have no excuse, I was just angry cause he wouldn't listen to me, it had nothing to do with game rules and it didn't even AFFECT our characters.

and I was RIGHT.

(10 years later I sent a simple animated gif to his exwife who I am still friends with who had been playing with us at the time of two binary stars circling each other. I think the response I got was something like "JESUS FUCKING CHRIST". I didn't even send text with it. I wish I had still been in contact with the old GM, I would have sent it to him.)

A true dwarven grudge. This I can get behind.

Truth be told, there is no "sin" or problem to admit a fault as a GM at the table. Sometimes you may wish to hear the players' criticism and take it as valid, rather than dig a trench.

Quote from: Rincewind1;651691A true dwarven grudge. This I can get behind.

Truth be told, there is no "sin" or problem to admit a fault as a GM at the table. Sometimes you may wish to hear the players' criticism and take it as valid, rather than dig a trench.

That requires communications skills and a degree of socialization.  These are gamers we're talking about, man!

Quote from: Exploderwizard;651217What in your opinion, makes a tavern brawl, NOT a combat? I'm curious.

Is it because there are only improvised weapons being used rather than swords?

No it's about immersion.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;651217I suppose an MMA match isn't combat either because the combatants are completely unarmed.

wtf does this even mean?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;651217If it has anything at all to do with with notion of some combatants being commoners and thus 'not important in the fiction' then you are fucking storywanking and not gaming in the first place so just narrate the 'scene' as you see fit and be done with it.

I thought you said you were curious about my opinion?
When was the last time you went into a bar got drunk and looked for the group of guys who have that 'Don't fuck with us sign' on their faces? Wha?  Oh, you haven't?
 Yet tavern brawls are a staple of "D&D"?  So much for "immersion".
Does it come from chartwanking?  Well I rolled reaction and the chart says blah blah, can't go against the chart.  If I ignore the result than I'm storywanking and that's whacked.

Ultimately it's about the actual consequences of a 'tavern fight as combat'.
Those plot hooks you tossed the PCs about blah, blah, and blah, whoops my bad, plot hook denotes story and that's whacked,  scratch that I mean 'hook'(yeah that makes it completely different :rolleyes: )
  Are you going to be impressed with an 'adventurer' who can't even roll into the legs of a drunk farmer?  You going to be impressed with an 'adventurer' who can't even grab and swing from a chandelier, but does a great job of face-planting?  Aren't you gonna giggle just a  lot at the 'adventurer' over there grunting and groaning in effort trying to flip that 10'x10' 6 inch thick table with the 3 full grown men fighting on it?
What happens to the PCs when they fail 'tavern fight as combat'?  Nothing?  So much for immersion.

Sommerjon's stance:  A tavern brawl is not combat, but if you want to cut a rope, you better take a -2 initiative check.

:huhsign:

Quote from: Benoist;651223Note Sommerjon conveniently ignored my response to him, which basically cuts through the bullshit to the heart of the actual play issue.

Just for you.

Quote from: Benoist;651021At an actual game table, you'd be the idiot because you would be a dick to everybody else stopping the game to a crawl engaging in arguments with the DM. Don't be a dick. After it's clear the DM has his ruling and won't budge, just roll with it. Play the game. If you think you can run the game better, you can take a shot at it yourself afterwards.

I didn't realize this thread was an actual game table.
You talk a lot about just roleplaying the character.  That is influenced by what you actually know, when a DM keeps ruling stuff that is sending flags up in the back of your head, at least for me keep falling out of immersion.  I also note what the rulings are, if more than 50% have negative connotations, I start to wonder if he is trying to lead me to what he wants to see happen.  When I do bring something up I look at the DM if he has that 'how dare you question me' look, I realize he a dick DM, who most likely thinks that we should feel so lucky that he allows us to game in his presence. So I have two options 1)  I bow out of the game or 2) I stick around to watch the train-wreck unfold.

Goody I can do this as well.

Sacrosanct thinks it's so difficult to jump and grab a chandelier and start to swing with it that it requires a Dex check,  ignore the fact that you have a minute to do so, also ignore that concept that billions of times children and adults have jumped and grabbed monkey bars and other playground equipment. :idunno:
 That's immaterial, fuck dude, it's combat!!:rolleyes:

Quote from: Sommerjon;651700Ultimately it's about the actual consequences of a 'tavern fight as combat'.
Those plot hooks you tossed the PCs about blah, blah, and blah, whoops my bad, plot hook denotes story and that's whacked,  scratch that I mean 'hook'(yeah that makes it completely different :rolleyes: )
  Are you going to be impressed with an 'adventurer' who can't even roll into the legs of a drunk farmer?  You going to be impressed with an 'adventurer' who can't even grab and swing from a chandelier, but does a great job of face-planting?  Aren't you gonna giggle just a  lot at the 'adventurer' over there grunting and groaning in effort trying to flip that 10'x10' 6 inch thick table with the 3 full grown men fighting on it?
What happens to the PCs when they fail 'tavern fight as combat'?  Nothing?  So much for immersion.

Nothing wrong with plots. It isn't an evil word. Just made sure that they belong to some entity in the game world and not the GM.

Being 'an adventurer' is a meaningless expression on its own. In game such as D&D featuring adventuers of vastly differing power levels, we cannot assume that every group of them that gets involved in a tavern brawl will wipe the floor with the opposition.

The outlined scenario made no mention of levels. It might be a first level group in the brawl. A 1st level fighter isn't much better than a country fed farm boy in a tavern brawl, and going against a handful at a time might get his clock cleaned. Oh noes! How could this happen? He's an adventurer after all.

So no, 'adventurer' doesn't mean special snowflake that plows through any ordinary thing with ease. At higher levels it may happen that way more often than not but it is by no means a universal guarantee.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651708Sacrosanct thinks it's so difficult to jump and grab a chandelier and start to swing with it that it requires a Dex check,  ignore the fact that you have a minute to do so, also ignore that concept that billions of times children and adults have jumped and grabbed monkey bars and other playground equipment. :idunno:
 :

There is always room for debate and such on these things. I don't think all systems need to require rolls all the time for things. Personally, I believe jumping on a chandelier and swinging has a reasonable enough chance of failure that a roll is called for (same for cracking someone upside the head). It is also a risky move, because you can fall, so I would see that as a good reason for having there be a roll.

Where I think this can become a problem is if the system doesn't accurately reflect the character's skill level (particularly if he is going up against someone who is highly unskilled in the case of the bar fight). If the system's numbers are okay, it shouldn't be an issue. Another approach I kind of like is only having to roll for things that not considered routine for your level of skill a(Bill gates shouln't have to roll to use DOS to start up a program but my dad probably should have to roll).

Quote from: Sommerjon;651708Goody I can do this as well.

Sacrosanct thinks it's so difficult to jump and grab a chandelier and start to swing with it that it requires a Dex check,  ignore the fact that you have a minute to do so, also ignore that concept that billions of times children and adults have jumped and grabbed monkey bars and other playground equipment. :idunno:
 That's immaterial, fuck dude, it's combat!!:rolleyes:

Monkey Bars: Stationary, stable, and built for that sort of thing

Chandelier:  none of the above.


Seriously, apply some common sense and it's not that hard to figure these things out.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651708Goody I can do this as well.

Sacrosanct thinks it's so difficult to jump and grab a chandelier and start to swing with it that it requires a Dex check,  ignore the fact that you have a minute to do so, also ignore that concept that billions of times children and adults have jumped and grabbed monkey bars and other playground equipment. :idunno:
 That's immaterial, fuck dude, it's combat!!:rolleyes:

It isn't that difficult to hit someone with a sword either but we roll a die for that.

So if the adventurers were fighting some goblins in a castle hall instead of some locals in a bar it would be fine to waive the requirement for a hit roll because someone swung on a chandelier? In B/X a goblin and a normal man have very similar statistics. Why would one be combat and the other not?

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707Just for you.

Thanks. Better late than never.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707I didn't realize this thread was an actual game table.

EVERYTHING we talk about should come down to actual play. That's what role playing games are for. If you take apart the DMs rulings systematically and confront the DM during the session over and over as soon as something doesn't go your way, putting a stop to the game to engage in your own private little war of self-righteousness, you are a dick. Period.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707You talk a lot about just roleplaying the character.  That is influenced by what you actually know, when a DM keeps ruling stuff that is sending flags up in the back of your head, at least for me keep falling out of immersion.

Well yeah, if the DM made bad rulings systematically that would send up flags in the back of my head too, and that would annoy me in the long run. I would just keep playing til the end of the session and then discuss it with the DM. If he's a dick about it, I might just drop the game and not bother.

But here's the thing. The DM might not be terrible. He might not be out to get you. He might not be an asshole. He might be oblivious, or inexperienced, or whatever else. If you start the game with the assumption that the DM is a dick and start playing with a confrontational attitude, the game is fucked, and it's on you - you're the one starting with the attitude of a dick in that event.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707I also note what the rulings are, if more than 50% have negative connotations, I start to wonder if he is trying to lead me to what he wants to see happen.

See, when you start noting down rulings and making tallies of what is positive and negative, that means you're not playing the game in the first place, but instead consider tallying the results more important. That's a problem, from my point of view. That means you're starting with a confrontational attitude playing the game.

That said, of course, if the rulings of the DM are systematically negative, then there might be some problem with the way he rules. That's something I would talk about with the DM after the game, assuming he isn't a jerk on top of the negative rulings - which should be pretty obvious in actual play.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707When I do bring something up I look at the DM if he has that 'how dare you question me' look, I realize he a dick DM, who most likely thinks that we should feel so lucky that he allows us to game in his presence.

Duh! If the DM gives you these kinds of looks from the get-go then yes, he is being a dick and you'd better move on, run your own games, find some other game, whatnot.

But if you're starting the game with a confrontational attitude pixel-bitching about rulings and noting everything down instead of, you know, actually playing the game and role playing your character, after a while the DM has a right to see this as disruptive, and ask you to tone it down and just relax. If you can't bring yourself to do this, and keep up with the attitude, then we're back to the start of this post: you are being a dick.

Quote from: Sommerjon;651707So I have two options 1)  I bow out of the game or 2) I stick around to watch the train-wreck unfold.

If worse comes to worse and the DM is an total jerk in and out of the game, the only appropriate response is to not play with this guy.

People who can't ever be wrong should not play rpg's, and even more so, should never gm.

Quote from: Bill;651725People who can't ever be wrong should not play rpg's, and even more so, should never gm.

People who can't ever be wrong suck at life, in general.