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

[dreaded_beast]

I've come to believe that I am the type of player to challenge a DM's ruling when I belive them to be incorrect or wrong, mainly during the actual gaming session.

From what I have heard from other DM's, this is usually frowned upon and generally discouraged since according to them it detracts from the game and usually is seen as a challenge to their authority as DM.

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

 

[Joshua Randall]

If the DM makes an egregious mistake that is going to fundamentally alter the campaign, then challenge him.

If the DM forgets some minor rule that will make little difference, then don't bother.

 

[DarkMaster]

As a full time DM (after almost 20 years of game play I never had a single character), I personaly enjoy when the player challenges my call. As a DM I don't see myself as superior, I just have a different role And as I tell my player all the time, we are all here to have fun, not just the DM.

I must admit that my player and I have been playing together for a while and we all agree on our way of playing. When we introduce a new player and he starts to challenge me, I don't usually have to say anything, a more senior player will answer for me.

But I like those challenge because they help improving the level of the game.

And as I tell my player all the time, we are all here to have fun, not just the DM.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I've come to believe that I am the type of player to challenge a DM's ruling when I belive them to be incorrect or wrong, mainly during the actual gaming session.

From what I have heard from other DM's, this is usually frowned upon and generally discouraged since according to them it detracts from the game and usually is seen as a challenge to their authority as DM.

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

I am also this type of person. I'm trying to quit. It ain't easy.

AR

 

[Crothian]

Very simply, if the rule the DM is using is going to have a huge effect on the game, mention something then. But unless it's going to be tpk or something, make a note of it and talk to the DM after the game. DM's make mistakes, and there's nothing wrong with coreecting them. But there is a time and a place for it, it does disrupt the game and it can be very boring for the other players while you and the DM try to figure out a ruile they don't feel is that important.

 

[Gizzard]

I was just thinking about this, and for me, it depends on the sort of challenge.

I actually like it a lot better when the player can flat out contradict me; say "Right here in the PHB it says X". I don't have an authority issue about being DM, though I do reserve the right to smirk and overrule by saying, "Hmm, there must be something you don't know about in play...."

What drives me nuts is when a player thinks that something should be played another way, stops the game by suggesting it and then can't follow through by showing me the rule they are thinking of. Player: "I thought it worked like X. Here, let me get my book..." DM: "Zzzz."

It also bugs me when a player questions something he doesn't know about, like monster abilities. Player: "How can an Otyugh grab me and still keep on fighting! He can't do that, we're in a grapple!" DM: "He is a big tentacled monster and that's the sort of thing he does."

But, overall, its a touchy issue. Some people don't like being contradicted, even if they are wrong. In that case it's better to shut your mouth and maybe have a chat with the DM after the session. Player: "Hey, I found a rule that would have applied to that situation last week. What do you think of playing this way from now on..."

Even if your DM is fairly liberal about it there are still plenty of missteps you can make - slowing the game down with constant interruptions; being wrong more often than the DM when you contradict him; picking at rules that hose the party but ignoring the rulings that favor the party etc etc. So proceed with caution.

 

[Emirikol]

Life or death = challenge

Stupid little things /= challenge


jh

 

[Wormwood]

If the DM makes an egregious mistake that is going to fundamentally alter the campaign, then challenge him.

If the DM forgets some minor rule that will make little difference, then don't bother.

What he said. Now in bold.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

Face it, the rules are so complex (over a thousand pages in the core books), that no one person is going to be perfect.

That said, it depends mostly on the GM and how the player voices objections. I'm in the camp that likes my players to questions things: it relieves me of responsibility to know everything and can sometimes make a huge difference. As an example, in one combat I forgot to apply a cover bonus to one of the pc's. The arrow would have dropped the pc. The player reminded me, the arrow missed, and a close battle was (barely) won by the party. That kind of stuff helps the whole group.

OTOH, if the GM hears out the player, then overrules the objection, let it go. It can always be discussed after the game. In one game the GM ruled my true seeing spell did not work on a couple rakshasas because they were immune to spells below 8th level (his ruling was incorrect, per the rules). I questioned him at the time I cast the spell, he told me my character saw nothing wrong, and that's how we played it. A pc and an npc ended up dead because we couldn't find a way to unmask the rakshasas until it was too late. Serious consequences. Even so, we agreed that the GM's ruling stood: he was GM and made the ruling he felt was correct at the time. We agreed after the game to treat rakshasas differently in the future, so this particular problem won't come up again. And no one's feelings were bruised.

 

[Nighthawk]

Challenges are more than fine with me, whether I am a player or a gm. I like them, to be honest, because they make realize there is material to be learned and learned again.

The only problem I have with challenges is not the challenge itself, but how far the people involved are willing to take the challenge (i.e. it becomes personal). It has happened often enough to me that it is an active concern for me. Does it happen all the time? No, but enough so that I am on the lookout for the "it gets out of hand" interaction.