| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
genebateman
Acolyte
23 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 02:50:43
|
i have this rules lawyer and he been ruining the game.
so i turned the rules on him about gods not granting spells to other gods followers.
the player is a cleric of Eldath
i told hi since she is a non violent god she would not heal the followers of Tempus
he got mad and stormed out.
later i told him the rest of the group got fed up with him nick picking everything so i nicked picked him
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4685 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 04:06:47
|
You might have made a bad call, if you are the DM.
A PC clearly can decide to heal or not, once the spell is known the PC can heal a vampire (causing damage to the unlife). As DM at best you could have deity withhold spells from the Cleric, you as DM do not have the right to say the deity watches over every spell cast and say it does not work at your whim.
Of course it sounds like you had other issues with the player and appear to want the PC to die and player to leave. There though are better ways to handle this problem then rather extreme house rule. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
 |
|
|
Cbad285
Learned Scribe
160 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 05:51:30
|
well first off, everyone believes in all the gods, since the realms is a polytheism. So saying someone can't heal someone else because they believe in a certain god doesn't uphold this idea. idk if your campaign is run differently but never the less, a cleric might find himself unable to heal say, a cleric of a god opposing his own. But this is a rare occasion and you need to be certain to set this precedent in your game rather than just throwing it in there as a '**** you' to the problem pc.
Sounds to me like you need to talk to your friend, outside of D&D and figure out whats bugging him. A game is no reason to lose a friend. However, if he/she isn't a friend...well then to hell with them. |
"Beware the Dream Fever!" |
|
|
|
mikie
Seeker
USA
73 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 11:30:30
|
| Remember, that it's YOUR campaign & adventure. The rules are guidelines not solid. You can be flexible with them. Plus, if there is a discrepancy (whoa big word) talk it out among the group to make everyone understand it. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11701 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 18:05:25
|
| Yeah, and if I were the player, I would have told you Eldath is not about punishing other people. She believes in compassion. Therefore, for her to be intolerant enough so as to refuse to heal someone would be out of character for her. Now, a priest might act that way, but the god wouldn't. After all, the best way for her to show the path of kindness is to be kind. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 23 Mar 2014 : 19:53:15
|
| Well, I fully agree with what you did. I've had a similar problem in the past with players who try to nit-pick or twist rules to their advantage and end up ruining the game for everyone else. Sometimes you really DO just have to step in and enforce the DM's prerogative. If the player is disrupting the game that badly, if it means taking a drastic measure and turning his own rules-lawyering habit against him, so be it. You also did the right thing by talking to him afterward, to let him know why you did it. Of course, the optimum solution would have been to put your foot down early before it became a problem, and let everyone know from the start how the game will be run. Ever since this problem popped up in one of my games a few years back, I've made it a point to inform everyone exactly what is and isn't allowed in my games. It helps to keep things like this from happening. Just my two cents. |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
Drustan Dwnhaedan
Learned Scribe
USA
324 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2014 : 00:44:44
|
Since I've only DMed a few games (and hated every minute of them), I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with how you handled* the situation. Although, you seem to have dealt with your group's rules lawyer/pain in the @$$ than my DM handled ours (had all the stats of said nuisance's PC drop to 0, with no in-game explanation as to why this happened).
*Actually, you probably handled the fellow better than how I deal with such individuals, i.e. automatically killing said individual's PC whenever they get involved in combat (or trigger a trap), and keep killing every one of their characters until they learn to play by my rules, or leave (this is probably why I've DMed so rarely; nobody I know particularly likes my way of DMing). |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4685 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2014 : 01:03:58
|
DMing is a skill that not all can do well.
The problem I see with the OP was it appeared ruling was made in middle of a game, causing player to "stormed out", which clearly disrupted a play session for the other players. Resolving or discussing the issue after the game might help heal that one player, however the other players were damaged by the game being disrupted.
The other thing that concerns me, though details are not known, is if this rules interpertation was imposed by the DM as a new rule. It clearly reads like it did. This would indicate the DM broke trust with the players on the rules of the game.
The issue of rules clarification should only be rare during a game. The DM house rules should not change during a campaign.
Oh and a DM clearly should not target player's PC to always to fail, be first target. If the player is the problem he should not be permitted to play after concerns are discussed away from game and not during a gaming session.
The DM builds a world and provides quests, the PCs decide which to take and decide what to do. If they choose wise they thrive in the world. The NPCs in that world some will help them many will oppose them - this is the game. The DM should never focus NPCs against one PC because of player action. Now if the PC goes and does something that arises the anger of a nation, that is part of the game. Wise PCs that travel with that PC have a choice of protecting the PC against a nation or deciding that maybe their companion went to far and arrest the PC.
Embarrassing a player, angering a player, etc. at the gaming table is not the way to go. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 24 Mar 2014 : 07:35:42
|
I've an opinion concerning Eldath and Tempus. It's been stated in canon that Tempus is not a warmongering brute. He desires war to occur between times of peace. Tempus recognized that constant warfare would be detrimental to all (including his own portfolio...where do you get followers if they're all dead?) and he recognizes that there must be peaceful times. To this end, I see Tempus actually respecting Eldath a great deal and I think Eldath would respect him in turn.
They are NOT listed as enemies despite their portolios being diametrically opposed...because I don't think thier portfolios are in opposition...they are complimentary. Besides, it makes some logical sense that a deity would allow the healing of another's clergy just on the general notion that one might convert to the other (a stretch I know but it is possilbe).
Add to that the fact that a god is not always paying direct attention to a priest. The RAW say a priest prays for spells before casting them (not on the fly where said god may actually pay direct attention). Regardless, it's up to the priest to act on their god's behalf in the world. They wouldn't be denied the healing spell...but perhaps punished later in some fashion for committing a 'sin' against their beliefs.
*************************************************************
As far as handling problem players goes...we don't have all of the facts. Some are making assumptions about it. It may very well be that all the other players wanted him/her gone and are all happily playing the game now. I still think it was poorly handled...but it's not at my table for me to know how best to handle it. *Shrug* |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
MrHedgehog
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2014 : 01:02:12
|
| You ruined the fun of the game. That was a very silly and far fetched "ruling". Of course the player stormed out. It sounds like you did not like that player and were being mean to make them leave. Its a bit funny you came here thinking we impartial observers would choose your side. Although others are being more polite your decision was clearly petty, illogical and childish. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2388 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2014 : 02:29:59
|
Counter-munching and "rocks fall" never improve the situation unless it's "rocks fall, everyone dies" restart.
But on a more generic level - the problem is in lack of consistency. For some reason the party got this composition in the first place, ran along for some time and... then SUDDENLY! there were issues which for some reason no one have seen and resolved in the first 5 minutes. If the game would run on the same level of "in character"/"out of character" consistently, there won't be much problems, as usually big issues have to be resolved early on.
That was the sort of thing that happens when someone tries to sit between two chairs and then moves the weight between them. IMHO. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2014 : 02:35:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by MrHedgehog
You ruined the fun of the game. That was a very silly and far fetched "ruling". Of course the player stormed out. It sounds like you did not like that player and were being mean to make them leave. Its a bit funny you came here thinking we impartial observers would choose your side. Although others are being more polite your decision was clearly petty, illogical and childish.
While I will agree that the issue was not handled as many of us would have handled it, none of us were at his table. Even otherwise calm and reasonable people can be pushed too far, and who among us can say we've never made a bad decision during the heat of the moment? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2014 : 21:33:03
|
I've been at the table with disruptive players before (including rules lawyers) and I can tell you...I refuse to play with them. And I certainly wont DM one either. The game is supposed to be fun. But when you spend more time arguing with some jerk about the rules than playing and he/she refuses to let up...it's time for a change.
As I said above, I likely would have handled it differently. But I wont pass judgement on something I wasn't present to witness and I give the OP the benefit of the doubt. It's really not our place to bring heat on the OP for his post.
Just my two coppers.
Cheers. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7970 Posts |
Posted - 25 Mar 2014 : 22:04:12
|
I suspect this player was already inclined towards storming off, the pretense you provided might have as easily been some other player-DM-rules conflict. No great loss, says wise Great Reader Ayrik, the player‘s self-imposed banishment has saved you and the others from countless hours of sullen antagonistic defiance.
Incidentally, I don‘t place divine mandates on PC priests at time of casting ... and trivial or sporadic violations of ethos are often overlooked ... but a priest character is charged with upholding his faith and expected to maintain his deity‘s interests. Transgressions of faith do result in being denied spells or granted powers, or of becoming pariah to other priests/temples in that deity‘s service.
Sure, heal up that violent fool who serves Tempus, he‘ll just go get himself killed soon enough. But make him endure gentle admonishments towards peace, force him to become calm and sooth his wounds. An excellent opportunity to demonstrate Eldath‘s preeminence over some immature testosterone Chachi wargod who obviously isn‘t even competent enoguh to heal his own flock. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
genebateman
Acolyte
23 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2014 : 01:32:20
|
thanks for all the feedback
|
|
|
|
Mystic Lemur
Seeker
58 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2014 : 05:43:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
As DM at best you could have deity withhold spells from the Cleric, you as DM do not have the right to say the deity watches over every spell cast and say it does not work at your whim.
I take issue with the bolded sections. Clearly, as the DM, he is the only one who has the "right" (actually, authority) to say that things do or don't work a certain way in his realms. If the GM believes that a follower of one god should lose their spell access if they cast beneficial spells on a follower of another god, that is well within their purview.
That said, I think the issue was handled poorly. You didn't "turn the rules on him" because your decision had absolutely no basis in the rules. Unless your goal was to cause division with that person so that you didn't have to deal with that person anymore, as that seems to be the only thing you've accomplished. Targeting the character with an on-the-spot ruling that only affects that character is as good as slapping them in the face. If you want to continue having the person as a player and friend, it probably could have been handled with a bit more tact. |
"What mattered our lives now, when our world had been torn from us? Folk wept, or drank, or stood staring out over the land, wondering what new horror each dawn would bring." -A review of the FRCG ;) |
Edited by - Mystic Lemur on 06 Apr 2014 05:45:58 |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2014 : 22:06:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by MrHedgehog
You ruined the fun of the game. That was a very silly and far fetched "ruling". Of course the player stormed out. It sounds like you did not like that player and were being mean to make them leave. Its a bit funny you came here thinking we impartial observers would choose your side. Although others are being more polite your decision was clearly petty, illogical and childish.
While I will agree that the issue was not handled as many of us would have handled it, none of us were at his table. Even otherwise calm and reasonable people can be pushed too far, and who among us can say we've never made a bad decision during the heat of the moment?
I'm with Wooly. Personally, having had this same issue crop up, I can say there is only so much of such crap a DM can take before throwing up their hands and doing something a little drastic to A) keep the player from continuing to disrupt/ruin the game, and B) enforce their authority as DM. It really IS up to the DM in the end, and although it should be clarified right away as to whether that was a permanent rule or simply a one-time thing as a "god's divine judgment" (on the character), the DM still has final say over a rule-lawyering player. PERIOD. And if the player doesn't like it, they can find another game, or just shut up and deal with it. As others have said, the rules are not set in stone, they are guidelines. Sometimes you just have to get tough with a player. |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
different Gods inside of a party?
