Pushy characters!

[Atsull]

This is a frustrating story about some men named Joe.

Me and my friends have begun playing D&D 3.5, and are have been playing for about 3 months, getting probably 8 adventures in so far. This is the first time any of them have played a pen and paper game, while I have done one campaign before, also in 3.5. One player was very excited to be DM, so I allowed him to. We will know the DM as Jeremy, to conserve the privacy of my friends.
I've given my friends essentially a crash course in pen&paper, and they are all very eager, and are having a lot of fun, as am I. we have two problems, however, and they go by the name of Joe. Joe 1&2, out of a 5 PC group, are a bit pushy IRL, and the DM is somewhat timid in nature.
I figured that in order to keep everything easy for Jeremy, we are playing completely core, unless Jeremy specifically brings in another source. The Joes, however, have taken this in a sort of "The book is god" idea, and are constantly suppressing Jeremy's abilities. whenever, for example, a character visits a shop to buy, say, a longsword. if that longsword is anything off the price listed in the book, the Joes will tell the DM that it's incorrect. Even if Jeremy tries to explain that metal is hard to come by here, or that maybe this blacksmith has a total monopoly on the area, but they still try to make it closer to the book.

I've explained to them that you can never argue with a decision made by the DM, but they've still done it. I have pretty large amounts of influence on the DM, as he often comes to me for help with rules or some basic adventure ideas, but I really want to help him become the best DM he can be. Any ideas?

Edit: A lot of people have been saying that perhaps Jeremy isn't a good DM. So far, he's been a very good DM, and the Joes have been enjoying it, they just abuse Jeremy's quietness, specifically with item prices.

[Tohsaka Rin]

"If you're not interested in playing Jeremy's campaign, you know where the door is."

Heavy-handed, but there's a pretty broad line between 'rules lawyer' and 'pestering'.

I would like to point out, that's your last resort. DO NOT open up with that statement. Only use it when you've exhausted all other options.

If/when they start correcting your DM, his usual reply (if the reasons for the difference between the book and his campaign are setting-specific) should be "That's fine, but that's not how it works here, because (reasons)."

If they try to push the point, well, that's too bad. It is how the DM says it is. As far as you've stated, your DM isn't being unreasonable. DM stands for Dungeon Master for a reason. Remind them what the M stands for.

...Lastly, the enter key is your friend. Please try putting some paragraph breaks into your posts. A wall of text is not friendly to a reader's eyes.

[(Un)Inspired]

Have you tried telling the two joes that what they're doing is making the game less fun for you?

[Sir Chuckles]

Hand Joe and Joey the Arms and Equipment guide. It has supply and demand rules in it.

Remind everyone of DM rule 0. What he says, goes. He is the DM, he is the creator of the world. It would be like telling the writer of a book that he's wrong about a character or scene.

Now, Player Rule 0 says they can contest it, but they should not be controlling their DM to this degree.

[Meth In a Mine]

Now, Player Rule 0 says they can contest it, but they should not be controlling their DM to this degree.

It's kind of like coaches and referees in baseball. The coach (the players) can contest the ruling, but have no actual say in the matter.

Simply remind Jeremy who's in charge and that if the DM says "all goblins can now fly" the correct response is "Yes Sir, how high?"

[MadGreenSon]

It's kind of like coaches and referees in baseball. The coach (the players) can contest the ruling, but have no actual say in the matter.

Simply remind Jeremy who's in charge and that if the DM says "all goblins can now fly" the correct response is "Yes Sir, how high?"

Exactly that! A long time ago, a friend was running a game and someone got all "the book says" at him, so he set the book up at the head of the table and stepped away for a minute.

When asked what he was doing, he replied "Since [name redacted] is so keen on what the book says, I'm letting the book run the game."

No further complaints were lodged. :smallbiggrin:

[gadren]

And here I thought this thread was going to be about optimizing bullrush.

If I may ask, how old are the pushy players?

[Stoneback]

Oh... pusHy players

Never mind

[delenn]

Exactly that! A long time ago, a friend was running a game and someone got all "the book says" at him, so he set the book up at the head of the table and stepped away for a minute.

When asked what he was doing, he replied "Since [name redacted] is so keen on what the book says, I'm letting the book run the game."

No further complaints were lodged. :smallbiggrin:

Ha! Perfect.


Did Joe 1 & 2 pull the same shenanigans on you when you were DM? If so, remind Jeremy of some examples, and how you handled them. The book gives baseline rules that are modified by all sorts of things, including the DM's discretion. Just because something is in the book doesn't mean it's available, or available at the price the PCs expect.

The immature option, which I do not actually suggest, but have fun contemplating, is to load their next dungeon with all the cursed artifacts in the DMG. When they complain, hey, they're in the book.

[Theomniadept]

I gotta disagree with most of the other people here.

What is Jeremy doing changing the prices? Does he know about the economics and exactly why prices would go up (they're not going down. DMs never lower prices and we all know it). What exactly is the DM adding to the game by changing the rules?

I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs who think the rules should change every single time something comes up that has already been ruled on. Sounds to me like Jeremy is someone who thinks that, despite a decade of entire communities debating, analyzing, and cross-examining the system, he is smart enough and experienced enough to make a ruling to change the system and affect the already lopsided balance?

And let's face it, you're not giving us enough examples, but given the one you gave us; a longsword costs more (I'm making this guess at above 90% chance of being correct). What kind of DM makes a martial character pay more? What in the actual hell is he thinking? The balance already says spellcasters pay 5 gold and get access to over 95% of all their godlike power. Something tells me this DM also has a knack for not following Wealth By Level rules, which only reinforces magic supremacy over every aspect of the game.

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

My advice: explain to him exactly why the rules need to be kept in tact for the most part, and that when you make rulings to cut content or make things difficult for players to do, you're doing exactly what every bad RPG video game maker does, and there are reasons why those games get bashed *coughdragonage2cough*.

And if you have any questions as to why he should reverse his rulings, post what they are here and we can review them. Seriously, before anyone DMs they need to know the system and to do that they need to havee their bad ideas shot down. Either they accept that all they are doing is widening the power gap between casters and noncasters or they go on DMing the game where noncasters die and players eventually all convert to the Church of Magic Supremacy. Heil Polymorph.

[Sir Chuckles]

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

But...it is. :smallconfused:
It has entire guidelines that span chapters on how to improvise.

[Theomniadept]

But...it is. :smallconfused:
It has entire guidelines that span chapters on how to improvise.

Please improvise base CW Samurai to Tier 4 please.

[Sir Chuckles]

Please improvise base CW Samurai to Tier 4 please.

That's not improvising, that's optimizing.
Huge difference.

D&D is improv because it's not a video game. You have live people playing live action. With or without a script doesn't matter, because there's no dialogue script for the players.

[MadGreenSon]

Please improvise base CW Samurai to Tier 4 please.

Set the bar kinda high don'tcha?:smallbiggrin:

Ummm....

Jedi Abilities, Force skills and a lightsaber from Star Wars revised edition!


Ok... I got nothin'.:smallfrown:

[delenn]

The players in question are as new to the game as the DM. I could very easily be wrong, but this sounds more to me like a new DM trying to learn and adapt rules that are meant to be adapted to fit his game, not a new DM trying to screw his players for no reason. And the game is specifically core-only, and the question about item prices, not classes.

You can argue with a DM, but in the end, the decision is not up to you - for better or worse. Better being the DM agrees with you, worse being the DM overrules you. For me, a good game has some compromise, but it's still up to the players if they want to participate. And if Atsull didn't have this kind of problem with the group before Jeremy DMd, all that indicates to me is that inexperienced players are trying to take advantage of an inexperienced DM. Just because the sword costs more at the blacksmith doesn't mean they won't find something better on a dungeon crawl. I can suspend a lot of disbelief, but the idea that everything is available everywhere for the same price just because it's in the book is beyond that.

[(Un)Inspired]

I gotta disagree with most of the other people here.

What is Jeremy doing changing the prices? Does he know about the economics and exactly why prices would go up (they're not going down. DMs never lower prices and we all know it). What exactly is the DM adding to the game by changing the rules?

I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs who think the rules should change every single time something comes up that has already been ruled on. Sounds to me like Jeremy is someone who thinks that, despite a decade of entire communities debating, analyzing, and cross-examining the system, he is smart enough and experienced enough to make a ruling to change the system and affect the already lopsided balance?

And let's face it, you're not giving us enough examples, but given the one you gave us; a longsword costs more (I'm making this guess at above 90% chance of being correct). What kind of DM makes a martial character pay more? What in the actual hell is he thinking? The balance already says spellcasters pay 5 gold and get access to over 95% of all their godlike power. Something tells me this DM also has a knack for not following Wealth By Level rules, which only reinforces magic supremacy over every aspect of the game.

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

My advice: explain to him exactly why the rules need to be kept in tact for the most part, and that when you make rulings to cut content or make things difficult for players to do, you're doing exactly what every bad RPG video game maker does, and there are reasons why those games get bashed *coughdragonage2cough*.

And if you have any questions as to why he should reverse his rulings, post what they are here and we can review them. Seriously, before anyone DMs they need to know the system and to do that they need to havee their bad ideas shot down. Either they accept that all they are doing is widening the power gap between casters and noncasters or they go on DMing the game where noncasters die and players eventually all convert to the Church of Magic Supremacy. Heil Polymorph.

It sounds like you've been served a pretty bitter drink from your DMs too many times. I'm sorry your experiences have been so negative.

I GM probably about 80% of the time I game and only get to be a player the remaining 20%. I regularly give players discounts on items from the books. They almost always end up making really selfless heroes and I like having shop keepers give them discounts cause the party just saved their town.

In the rare game that I play in my DMs have let the party haggle the bollocks off of shop keepers with intimidate and diplomacy and given suitable discounts accordingly.

Actually, now that I think about it, I've never had a DM charge more for an item than it's listed book price.

[Dr.Gara]

Actually, now that I think about it, I've never had a DM charge more for an item than it's listed book price.

That doesn't, by default, naturally mean that it's a negative thing to do. As long as it ends up making sense, then the players shouldn't really argue too much.

And beyond that, a missing supply of metal could make a nice adventure hook, anyway. Foreshadow a quest to attack a bandit party who is raiding caravans with higher prices at the weapon shop. It's the small things that count in foreshadowing.

[Theomniadept]

The players in question are as new to the game as the DM. I could very easily be wrong, but this sounds more to me like a new DM trying to learn and adapt rules that are meant to be adapted to fit his game, not a new DM trying to screw his players for no reason. And the game is specifically core-only, and the question about item prices, not classes.

You can argue with a DM, but in the end, the decision is not up to you - for better or worse. Better being the DM agrees with you, worse being the DM overrules you. For me, a good game has some compromise, but it's still up to the players if they want to participate. And if Atsull didn't have this kind of problem with the group before Jeremy DMd, all that indicates to me is that inexperienced players are trying to take advantage of an inexperienced DM. Just because the sword costs more at the blacksmith doesn't mean they won't find something better on a dungeon crawl. I can suspend a lot of disbelief, but the idea that everything is available everywhere for the same price just because it's in the book is beyond that.
See, here's my problem. Rule 0: DM fiat rules all.

When in the history of ever of anything has one action not led to multiple consequences?

I've had dumb DMs make really stupid rules. "Bags of Holding cannot go into Bags of Holding", for example. This stupid rule says every rogue now cannot carry all his tools unless literally everything he owns goes inside the bag of holding. If he has too much money (which takes up real space) then the Bag of Holding type 4 will push him into Medium load unless his Strength is 15 or more. If he's a Halfling of other smallfolk, he's dead in the water. Furthermore the party gives away their location every time they rest inside a Rope Trick or Mage's Magnificent Mansion because, again, extradimensional space inside another extradimensional space. This also means the Belt of Many Pockets cannot exist.

Unless the DM only means explicitly Bags of Holding in which case then you're just taxing the players because they need to store their Bag of Holding inside a Handy Haversack and if they need to carry more it just becomes a repeating chain of Bag of Holding inside Handy Haversack inside Bag of Holding, etc., in which case your ruling on such a thing has become 100% superfluous.

This is just one rule I've encountered twice already from player swho still think AD&D applies to 3.5, despite AD&D's mostly terrible planning (there is an entire site devoted to explaining its every flaw but I haven't been able to relocate it yet on this computer to save it to favorites).

Now let's look at the example you gave; those players aren't complaining about the price of a longsword. It's 15 gold, and a little higher won't kill someone. You're clearly leaving out details; those details are the fact that they want the sword made out of a special material and/or they want the sword made magic. If you charge a martial character more, you are reinforcing magic supremacy and Jeremy is punishing him for attempting to bypass Damage Reduction or he is punishing him for trying to do damage at all. This is not good DMing. DM fiat was intended for use to make magic artifacts or explain things the books did not have rules for. It was not meant for DMs to exercise every hour of game time as if to say "look at me I'm a DM".

Worse yet is when DMs do this specifically because a rule is brought up. Anyone else ever had this happen? Players in the past ask Wizards (the game company not the class) to rule on how to do X. X is published as something you can do in a book. Someone in game tries to do X. You explain X has a method of doing in said book. DM doesn't like the fact that books exist so he changes the rules into something completely arbitrary and on-the-spot that makes very little sense and either allows a character to get away with the impossible or makes the thing that needs doing impossible.

If anyone would like to actually discuss what makes a bad DM, please keep in mind last Sunday we were told using a Belt of Healing requires a Use Magic Device check. This is the same DM that ruled cantrips/orisons are infinite and thus with a Favored Soul we have infinite out of battle healing.

Personally, I think it's a problem of power. DMs need to understand themselves that they suck at DMing and proceed from said point before they can actually get good at it. I've had people who've DMed for years and apparently have learned nothing from doing it, so when I DMed my first game in Pathfinder I accepted the fact that the rules existed for a reason and built things around the rules. It is much easier to design encounters when the rulebooks contain ideas like spells and such that can put the hurt to players, rather than simply DM fiat a poorly integrated monster in and give it absolute immunity to everything unless the players find the DM fiat winbutton. (note: I only recently learned that some monster we encountered was an exact 100% ripoff of the Dark Souls Asylum Demon. Boy it sure was fun watching the DM's original character do not steal kill the thing in one shot)

[gadren]

Okay, is anyone else not really sure if Theomniadept is being serious or ironic?

[Sir Chuckles]

*snip*

So what would this good DM be to you?
Someone who follows every rule to the T? Who never improvises or invokes rule 0?
Because that's not asking for a DM, that's asking for a computer.

[MadGreenSon]

I have been at the table when the book was put in charge of the game.

Believe me when I tell you that rules alone do not make a game.

[Theomniadept]

So what would this good DM be to you?
Someone who follows every rule to the T? Who never improvises or invokes rule 0?
Because that's not asking for a DM, that's asking for a computer.

Believe me, a computer is a step up from a DM that attempts to fail at DMing. Yes, there are times when rule 0 exists. Don't get me wrong, it needs to exist for the stuff that has zero sources. Got a map of the Elemental Plane of Water? No? Well the players want to go there, it's time for Rule 0. Now how do you apply this:

Good DM: Require the obvious adaptations and when they make it there have them essentially travel through an underwater extraplanar setting. There are pockets of other elemental planes in there, feel free to have completely stable large air bubbles or places where other travelers to planes have setup bases of operations. Feel free to throw in material plane aquatic creatures, because there are a hundred reasons that they could make it to - and survive on - the plane.

Bad DM: Forbid the travel. Claim the spell doesn't work. Or let them go there and experience nothing but infinite water, with nothing interesting, basically shoe-horning them back onto your railroad tracks. Or have them travel there and encounter something 15 levels above them immediately to try to scare them back onto your original world do not steal.

Honestly, the OP needs to return with an example or two of the DM's use of DM fiat. I'm betting money the DM is trying to overwrite the rules with their own non-fleshed-out untested essentially arbitrary rules. This doesn't make an immersive game. This doesn't make characters feel anything more than powerless. This makes a bad game.

[Sir Chuckles]

Believe me, a computer is a step up from a DM that attempts to fail at DMing. Yes, there are times when rule 0 exists. Don't get me wrong, it needs to exist for the stuff that has zero sources. Got a map of the Elemental Plane of Water? No? Well the players want to go there, it's time for Rule 0. Now how do you apply this:

Good DM: Require the obvious adaptations and when they make it there have them essentially travel through an underwater extraplanar setting. There are pockets of other elemental planes in there, feel free to have completely stable large air bubbles or places where other travelers to planes have setup bases of operations. Feel free to throw in material plane aquatic creatures, because there are a hundred reasons that they could make it to - and survive on - the plane.

Bad DM: Forbid the travel. Claim the spell doesn't work. Or let them go there and experience nothing but infinite water, with nothing interesting, basically shoe-horning them back onto your railroad tracks. Or have them travel there and encounter something 15 levels above them immediately to try to scare them back onto your original world do not steal.

And what you just explained is improv.

Also, that's not Rule 0.

[Theomniadept]

And what you just explained is improv.

Also, that's not Rule 0.

How is that not rule 0? Whatever the DM says, goes, right? Well there you go: two scenarios in which the DM makes a ruling, one with the rules (allowing extraplanar travel, using ideas from sourcebooks), one without the rules (choo choo get back on the tracks players).

[delenn]

See, here's my problem. Rule 0: DM fiat rules all.

When in the history of ever of anything has one action not led to multiple consequences?

-snip-


Now let's look at the example you gave; those players aren't complaining about the price of a longsword. It's 15 gold, and a little higher won't kill someone. You're clearly leaving out details; those details are the fact that they want the sword made out of a special material and/or they want the sword made magic. If you charge a martial character more, you are reinforcing magic supremacy and Jeremy is punishing him for attempting to bypass Damage Reduction or he is punishing him for trying to do damage at all. This is not good DMing. DM fiat was intended for use to make magic artifacts or explain things the books did not have rules for. It was not meant for DMs to exercise every hour of game time as if to say "look at me I'm a DM".


Rule 0 exists because the game couldn't fully function otherwise. A good DM comes up with an interesting adventure, and a great DM comes up with an interesting adventure that has multiple paths, side quests, random RP opportunities, and satisfying conclusions based on player choices. But even the best DM can't plan for every eventuality. PCs are, if nothing else, notoriously unpredictable.

There's no evidence that Jeremy is punishing characters, just trying to interpret the rules to fit the adventure he's created. I left details out precisely because they require a lot more interpretation of the rules - a longsword is 15 Gp, but is there a blacksmith in town who can keen it? Cure light potions are 50Gp by the book, but is there a cleric here who keeps those potions in supply, or are they hard to find? Can the Wizard who wants to learn a new spell actually find anyone who can teach it?

[Sir Chuckles]

How is that not rule 0? Whatever the DM says, goes, right? Well there you go: two scenarios in which the DM makes a ruling, one with the rules (allowing extraplanar travel, using ideas from sourcebooks), one without the rules (choo choo get back on the tracks players).

By that interpretation, anything and everything the DM says is Rule 0.
It's not Rule 0 because it's following rules when asked by a player.

Let me give you these two lovely little tidbits:


The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don’t need any rules.


Rule 0: The unwritten rule in tabletop role-playing games (such as Dungeons & Dragons) which grants the game master the right to suspend or override the published game rules whenever s/he deems necessary. Emphasis mine.

[Theomniadept]

By that interpretation, anything and everything the DM says is Rule 0.
It's not Rule 0 because it's following rules when asked by a player.
Rule 0: The unwritten rule in tabletop role-playing games (such as Dungeons & Dragons) which grants the game master the right to suspend or override the published game rules whenever s/he deems necessary.
That's the problem exactly, right, there, bolded for my convenience. DMs that think necessary = whenever they feel like it. Again, most DMs won't look at actual necessity, they only use it like its some sort of free ride into not having to plan anything or learn anything about a system. Until we see the reason why this overriding of the rules is necessary, rule 0 did not need to come into play.


Rule 0 exists because the game couldn't fully function otherwise. A good DM comes up with an interesting adventure, and a great DM comes up with an interesting adventure that has multiple paths, side quests, random RP opportunities, and satisfying conclusions based on player choices. But even the best DM can't plan for every eventuality. PCs are, if nothing else, notoriously unpredictable.

There's no evidence that Jeremy is punishing characters, just trying to interpret the rules to fit the adventure he's created. I left details out precisely because they require a lot more interpretation of the rules - a longsword is 15 Gp, but is there a blacksmith in town who can keen it? Cure light potions are 50Gp by the book, but is there a cleric here who keeps those potions in supply, or are they hard to find? Can the Wizard who wants to learn a new spell actually find anyone who can teach it?

Here we are again; yes, prices are allowed to change. There's no evidence because the OP has yet to bring us real details. The reason the Joes are trying to get the DM to follow the rules is just that; bad DMs love to flex power muscles. Bad DMs love to nerf players who, in all honesty, do not need nerfs. Bad DMs will do ridiculous things like sell magic items for less than it costs to make them, which doesn't represent an economic state of being, it represents someone trying to go bankrupt.

OP needs to provide actual details, but I've seen this song and dance before over and over; it's like watching lemmings jump off a cliff and wondering exactly what prevents them from learning from others' mistakes. I'm willing to put my chips down on the fact that, just concerning the longsword price example, Jeremy is trying to overprice a magical sword in a core-only game where a Barbarian at max optimization would lose in every way to the Druid in the same books, and the Joes are trying to prevent such a problem from becoming ingrained into a fresh DMs mind.

[Sir Chuckles]

You're auto-assuming that this Jeremy is a bad DM.
You're auto-assuming nearly everyone is a bad DM.

You seem to be extremely biased. Let me say it again, with a touch of bolding:


The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don’t need any rules.

[Andezzar]

a longsword is 15 Gp, but is there a blacksmith in town who can keen it?Unless the blacksmith is also a caster, he should not be able to create +1 keen longswords. And if the DM fiats it why wouldn't the mundane PCs have the same capability?


Cure light potions are 50Gp by the book, but is there a cleric here who keeps those potions in supply, or are they hard to find?Whether the potions or other items are available are in the purview of the DM. Their price (un)fortunately is fixed unless the DM uses rule 0. Diverging from the rules should only be done with good reason. Without divulging those reasons a price change does seem arbitrary and punishing. The characters should be able to find out why the price for longswords is increased.

D&D simply does not work as a economy simulation, and I'm not only talking about ladders and 10 ft poles.


Can the Wizard who wants to learn a new spell actually find anyone who can teach it?A wizard does not need a teacher to get new spells. He gets any two spells (of a level he can cast) he wishes to learn each level (after the first). For additional spells he just needs to find a scroll or a spellbook with the appropriate spell.

[(Un)Inspired]

A Dungeon Master is trying to create a game for you to enjoy. Even at their worst, their function is to create a world that is entertaining for the players on some level. We all must remember that it is a difficult job and to err is human. Be thankful, even if they are inept at their jobs, without them we would have no worlds in which to game.

Even to this day her words ring true.

[Theomniadept]

You're auto-assuming that this Jeremy is a bad DM.
You're auto-assuming nearly everyone is a bad DM.


You seem to not be reading posts. Come to think of it, I think I remember you. Were you trying to defend Fighter in the thread all about how Fighter sucked?

I very clearly explained that we need more details, however from personal experience and the general newbie-DM mindset I said I was willing to bet on what this Jeremy was actually doing. You still have yet to dispute any of those clearly-legitimate points, and you keep running back to rule 0, just like a newbie DM with power issues.

[Andezzar]

A Dungeon Master is trying to create a game for you to enjoy. Even at their worst, their function is to create a world that is entertaining for the players on some level. We all must remember that it is a difficult job and to err is human. Be thankful, even if they are inept at their jobs, without them we would have no worlds in which to game.Even to this day her words ring true.If the world is not entertaining to at least two players, is the DM doing his job? Also thankfulness does not preclude a desire to encourage the DM to improve.

More on topic, let's wait till the OP provides more details.

[delenn]

Unless the blacksmith is also a caster, he should not be able to create +1 keen longswords. And if the DM fiats it why wouldn't the mundane PCs have the same capability?

That was exactly my point - If you want a weapon with a special attribute, you need someone who can create it, PC or NPC.


Whether the potions or other items are available are in the purview of the DM. Their price (un)fortunately is fixed unless the DM uses rule 0. Diverging from the rules should only be done with good reason. Without divulging those reasons a price change does seem arbitrary and punishing. The characters should be able to find out why the price for longswords is increased.

Without knowing more details of the game, there are many reasons that basic longswords might be overpriced.


D&D simply does not work as a economy simulation, and I'm not only talking about ladders and 10 ft poles.

A wizard does not need a teacher to get new spells. He gets any two spells (of a level he can cast) he wishes to learn each level (after the first). For additional spells he just needs to find a scroll or a spellbook with the appropriate spell.

It doesn't simply work as an economy simulation, but many players do incorporate economics into their game - it's not wrong or right, just another option.

I'm not arguing that there's a Right Way to d&d, but there isn't a Wrong Way either. In my experience, the only way a game works is when all he players and the DM communicate with each other about their expectations for the game. Anything else leads to passive-aggressive **** and disappointment.

[(Un)Inspired]

If the world is not entertaining to at least two players, is the DM doing his job? Also thankfulness does not preclude a desire to encourage the DM to improve.

More on topic, let's wait till the OP provides more details.

I think what she was trying to say is that they're giving us a chance to play an amazingly fun game. We should try to support their efforts rather than hang them with their failing.

[Andezzar]

Even to this day her words ring true.


I think what she was trying to say is that they're giving us a chance to play an amazingly fun game. We should try to support their efforts rather than hang them with their failing.Asking for an explanation or constructive criticism is not "hanging them with their failing". I'm all for thanking the DM for doing this job, but any participant in the game should be allowed to voice what is not fun for him and how to improve the game.

[Sir Chuckles]

You seem to not be reading posts. Come to think of it, I think I remember you. Were you trying to defend Fighter in the thread all about how Fighter sucked?

I very clearly explained that we need more details, however from personal experience and the general newbie-DM mindset I said I was willing to bet on what this Jeremy was actually doing. You still have yet to dispute any of those clearly-legitimate points, and you keep running back to rule 0, just like a newbie DM with power issues.

Thinly veiled insults are poor form.
And no, I was not the one defending the Fighter in that thread. I was actually on the opposite side, which was not that the Fighter sucks. I know who you're talking about, though.

You want me to dispute those "clearly-legitimate" points?
Well, we do need more details, but you've already made a judgment without that additional information, meaning the results are biased and invalid. At least when they would come from you.
And I went back to Rule 0 because it needed to be clarified as to what it actually was. Writing up a map is not Rule 0. That's improvising on the spot.

[(Un)Inspired]

Asking for an explanation or constructive criticism is not "hanging them with their failing". I'm all for thanking the DM for doing this job, but any participant in the game should be allowed to voice what is not fun for him and how to improve the game.

I think calling Pearl Jam a bad DM at this point is hasty. This is his first time trying to run something for his friends. These friends have never run a game themselves and are telling someone whose running for them commands about how to do it. That strikes me as ungrateful.

[rexx1888]

lets all go easy on the bad dm stuff an chill for a moment good friends. let us bask in each others good will an so on.

anyway, seems to me the OP has decided that the Joes are being pains, and is asking how to help out the dm. I can get behind that, it tells me the OP cares about the game. Having said that, this may not be a problem you can fix mr OP.

Dms walk a fine line. a very very fine line. Obviously, they want to make an interesting game, with interesting things. Inevitably though, those things need to have the ability to cost players, and the risk of failure in that makes for some tension. Thats why we have rules, so that when we give our players a chance to fail, they know the score. Thats also why dm fiat is a tool that should be used carefully, generally being aware that you may piss off players because they felt like they didnt know the risks about their choices because you were hiding the rules or changed them mid use(whether this is true or not depends entirely on specific scenarios, its just a thing that may or may not be true at any one time).

Having said that, getting pissy about store prices is daft. You dont need rules to justify that. You say "the shopkeep has set the price, make of that what you will. Maybe you can talk him down with <check> but if you fail then he will increase the price". Yes, there are rules for prices. There are rules in the real world too. Doesnt stop the butcher from putting a twenty percent markup on his meat couse he knows the local supermarket is terrible. Character choices(the shop keeps price) are not subject to RAW because they are choices made by characters that the PC's can judge and react to. They dont have to buy that sword, and if they do(its magical) then its now a problem they can solve. pointing at the book an saying "WAHH theres rules for this" is not a solution to their problem.

the solution for Jeremy, and the reason you probably cant help too much, is he needs to learn to own his game. He has to walk that fine line about dm fiat and player choices and player feelings and all of that stuff. Arguably thats more important than any other skill he'll learn. Basically he needs to learn to say "yes, thats how it works there, this is how it works here, its a thing, theres a reason". If on the other hand he does things like change a monsters AC mid fight, or misplays abilities and tries to cover it up or pretend thats ok, then you have a problem. Thats not about his world any more, thats about system mastery, and you need the rules so that players feel like things are consistent. Consistency is key. it spares feelings. Its important. If the joes are complaining because of a price hike on goods, they probably shouldnt. Their characters should do that. If on the other hand they are complaining that enemies seem to become freakishly powerful in the middle of a fight for no reason, then they may be on to something. Its all about balance and consistency.

good luck communicating that to Jeremy. :)

[Killer Angel]

Set the bar kinda high don'tcha?:smallbiggrin:

Ummm....

Jedi Abilities, Force skills and a lightsaber from Star Wars revised edition!


AH! Psionics gestalt, it's too easy this way... :smalltongue:

[Tohsaka Rin]

AH! Psionics gestalt, it's too easy this way... :smalltongue:

Gestalt is taking the easy way out.

Psion/Swordsage with a wondrous item of Energy Substitution, Energy Admixture (Sonic/Acid) Flame Blade.

[Killer Angel]

Gestalt is taking the easy way out.

Psion/Swordsage with a wondrous item of Energy Substitution, Energy Admixture (Sonic/Acid) Flame Blade.

this is not the build you're looking for. (waves hand)

[hemming]

I'm willing to put my chips down on the fact that, just concerning the longsword price example, Jeremy is trying to overprice a magical sword in a core-only game where a Barbarian at max optimization would lose in every way to the Druid in the same books, and the Joes are trying to prevent such a problem from becoming ingrained into a fresh DMs mind.

Most new players don't really understand that the game is imbalanced

If the DM is ruling off-book, the player should be able to point it out and ask why.

The DM should then be able to give them his reasoning - if there are good in-game reasons for the change, the player should accept it.

If the DM misunderstood or didn't know the rules, he can admit it and we move on.

If the player is constantly searching for rules simply to second guess the DM and make it hard for him to keep the game moving, then nobody is going to have fun --- Likewise for the DM who, when confronted with the list price, over-rules because "I said so"

There needs to be some basic good faith that the DM is not "trying to screw us over" and the player aren't just trying to beat the DM over the head with citations ---- That sounds no fun for anyone

[Belial_the_Leveler]

1) There is no excuse for arbitrarily changing a rule when the rule covers you already - it's either inexperience or bad DMing because you didn't check to see if the rules covered you before changing them. You want a blacksmith to sell high-priced weapons without baggage? Have him be a master blacksmith selling only masterwork weapons.
1b) NPC actions are controlled by the DM. An NPC charging a different price than the real price is not actually a rule change - it is an NPC action. In comparison, changing the base, real price would be the aforementioned rules change. Actions can have consequences however - in this case it could be cheating or steep prices in general resulting in angry adventurers.


2) Medieval economy is mercantilism, NOT capitalism. It was based upon cutthroat exclusivity deals between merchants and local nobility and the existence of guilds that specifically worked against supply and demand. The result were stable prices that were already hugely inflated and controlled by central authorities and major guilds. DnD reflects that.
Case in point; 4-pound longsword = 15 gp. 4 pounds of iron = 4 sp. The final good costs forty times as much as the material, making any fluctuations in the price of iron practically irrelevant.


3) Keep in mind that player knowledge does not equal character knowledge. The merchant might be charging 50 gp for a longsword instead of 15 in the interest of profit. While the player who has read the book knows the price is not right, his character does not. Unless he has ranks in Appraise or a related Craft. While the price might be wrong, the players don't get to complain because their characters won't know the price is wrong.

[Iwasforger03]

Theomniadept, I am concerned by the fact you are so absolutely positive about this DM based on almost no evidence. WE have only and exactly what the original poster said in the very first post (he has yet to post a reply) to go on, and that's hardly evidence for what you are saying.

It doesn't mean you are, in fact wrong, but there is no evidence to support you, and so if you haven't already, please realize it makes you sound incredibly biased and almost no one is going to take your opinion seriously.

Speaking from a DM's perspective, I can see many in game reasons for price hikes and even price decreases. This is a new DM. These are all new players. Mistakes happen. You plan, you learn, you improve. If nothing else, cut him some slack and make a few constructive player management suggestions. Maybe that's all he needs.

And it does, incidentally, sound like the DM has reasons for price hikes. The OP stated that the DM does try to explain his changes, but the players, Joe 1 and 2, don't listen or allow him, they simply insist these are the rules.

Rule 0 can be abused, but that doesn't mean it IS being abused. It exists because it is needed, despite the fact it can be abused. If it wasn't needed, it wouldn't exist, it couldn't be abused.

Have you tried DMing a game, Theomniadept? It can change your whole perspective, and if you can't find a DM you like or feel is competent, maybe it is because you should be DMing. It isn't the same as being a player, but it is still a lot of fun, and maybe you'll find a new DM in the meanwhile, one you can be a player under than you like.

[turbo164]

I gotta disagree with most of the other people here.

What is Jeremy doing changing the prices? Does he know about the economics and exactly why prices would go up (they're not going down. DMs never lower prices and we all know it). What exactly is the DM adding to the game by changing the rules?

I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs who think the rules should change every single time something comes up that has already been ruled on. Sounds to me like Jeremy is someone who thinks that, despite a decade of entire communities debating, analyzing, and cross-examining the system, he is smart enough and experienced enough to make a ruling to change the system and affect the already lopsided balance?

And let's face it, you're not giving us enough examples, but given the one you gave us; a longsword costs more (I'm making this guess at above 90% chance of being correct). What kind of DM makes a martial character pay more? What in the actual hell is he thinking? The balance already says spellcasters pay 5 gold and get access to over 95% of all their godlike power. Something tells me this DM also has a knack for not following Wealth By Level rules, which only reinforces magic supremacy over every aspect of the game.

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

My advice: explain to him exactly why the rules need to be kept in tact for the most part, and that when you make rulings to cut content or make things difficult for players to do, you're doing exactly what every bad RPG video game maker does, and there are reasons why those games get bashed *coughdragonage2cough*.

And if you have any questions as to why he should reverse his rulings, post what they are here and we can review them. Seriously, before anyone DMs they need to know the system and to do that they need to havee their bad ideas shot down. Either they accept that all they are doing is widening the power gap between casters and noncasters or they go on DMing the game where noncasters die and players eventually all convert to the Church of Magic Supremacy. Heil Polymorph.

Since casters only need 5gp, it sounds like the noncasters are the ones getting a bit of a boost when they sell those 2d6+5 longswords they looted from the bandit clan in the woods. Or clear the Xorns out of an iron mine. Or they break the blockade that was causing the high prices and are rewarded by the duke.

But if you want to make the game more balanced by ignoring rule 0, see how that works out:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214988
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267923
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283778
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304817
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=333789

Now the fighters can just go break ladders until they have enough for a Longsword (or Infinite Damage Shuriken!), a Bucket of Drown Healing, a Candle of Invocation, etc. Too bad the Monk can't buy proficiency with his own fists, and those Gloves Of Hulk Smash that were custom-designed by the DM for the Barbarian don't actually do anything because they aren't in THE BOOK. Heil non-improv rules!

Snarking aside, yes maybe the DM doesn't know what he's doing. Maybe he does. You immediately comparing him to a "bad video game maker" who favors casters seems like a bit of a jump. Maybe he plans for the fighter to find a Starmetal sword at the bottom of the next dungeon. Maybe in the next town Scrolls or Metamagic Rods will be rare. Maybe Shivering Touch and DMM:Persist don't exist.

It's fine to tell the OP "Is the DM aware of how this affects game balance?" but that valid concern is being overshadowed by the "ALL OF MY PAST DMS WERE POWERTRIPPING DOUCHEBAGS SO I ASSUME YOURS IS TOO GRAWRAWR" tone from the rest of your posts :smallfrown:

@OP: Assuming the DM does have a plan to balance out the prices, just have him try to reassure them with something like "Don't worry guys, you'll have kick-arse gear soon, just not from this particular shop. Trust me!" If they still insist on "BUT TEH BOOK SEZ" nonsense...not saying this is the *correct* way to handle it, but I would probably have some bad guys break ladders, buy Candles, Handle some That Damn Crabs and Battletitans etc (and if the party tries the same, Pun Pun turns them into Toads or something), and see what they think of their books then.

[Shinken]

Please improvise base CW Samurai to Tier 4 please.

It gains martial maneuvers using the Crusader progression. Done.

[jjcrpntr]

My group did a campaign a few months ago that was incredibly frustrating. We got transported to a small peninsula that was having all kinds of problems. We started working our way north completing tasks as we could and along the way we amassed a LOT of stuff to sell (we had like 25 +1glaives, 20 war horses, bunch of armor not to mention other random stuff). Every single fricking city we went to was either "too small to buy all this stuff" which made sense, or if it was big enough would buy our stuff but wouldn't sell us anything unless we paid double for it. Our wizard tried to buy a headband of intellect, normally 4000g and they demanded 8000g. The reasoning was, we are foreigners.

This got really annoying for us as we argued with the dm that we just killed an army of bandits that were harassing these people, we killed the demon that was killing their loggers, we had investigated the undead island that was spooking them, we were better armed then their soldiers and could likely slaughter the entire city if we wanted, yet they wont sell to us at fair prices because we look different?

It was incredibly frustrating and ended up with us being, I think, really under geared for the final boss fight of the campaign (a dragon).

So I can see both sides of this. It's important to let your PC's build up their character, but at the same time I don't have a problem with a dm saying "Oh you want a MW glaive, well that's going to be 500g instead of 308 because the blacksmith here also owns the mines and is the only blacksmith within a hundred miles that has the skill to make these kind of weapons". Then again I'm really against the whole "everything is for sale in every city" type of markets.

[ZamielVanWeber]

This got really annoying for us as we argued with the dm that we just killed an army of bandits that were harassing these people, we killed the demon that was killing their loggers, we had investigated the undead island that was spooking them, we were better armed then their soldiers and could likely slaughter the entire city if we wanted, yet they wont sell to us at fair prices because we look different?

To be fair, people are that unspeakably dumb in real life. Not a good idea for the DM to inflict it on you though. Feels less heroic.

On the price thing: I will happily flux prices around the central price. I find it adds an element of immersion, since why would prices be standardized between countries, or even continents? And it makes sense that someone who hates you, and sets their own prices, might tack some on just as someone who loves you might take some off the top.

[Krazzman]

Maybe tell your players that there are things called taxes.

A Longsword costs 15 gold in Cormyr alright but in Thay? 23 Gold at least due to taxes!

[Nishant]

I think Rule Zero can be used in both good and evil, though I've only played so much, and haven't seen the evil side yet. My favorite, and fairly recent example, is as follows;

Player Party Level 10

Rogue, diplomacy, stealth, and device skillset(me)
Wizard, doing it's wizardy thing.
Cleric, Buff focus

So we are trying to find magical artifact x after routing some vampires under the city, and find ourselves traveling long and far to a thought-abandoned castle. I fail a disable trap when when we enter the building (Which was GIGANTIC, by the way. Need to emphasize that for what I am about to say.)

The large doors slam behind us, and a magical field bars our exit as a Huge Golem appears, armed to the teeth and laced with some powerful magic. While we may be able to kill it with or magic on hand, the amount of resources to do so might have ruined us for later. So we come up with an interesting plan, in my opinion; We ask the DM if the wizard could use spellcraft and knowledge arcana to analyze the Golem before it attacked, then impart that knowledge to the rogue who would use various checks to scale the creature, while being buffed by the Cleric to improve his endurance and otherwise, to disable the golem.

After a moment of thought, the DM agreed, and with a bit of luck, we actually succeeded. Now, I'm not a DM, but I doubt that was in the rules. Our DM rewarded creative thinking.

Further, latching on to what others have said, given on what we're told and what's implied, the sword probably wasn't magical. This was <Jeremy> just trying to add a splash of realism. I mean, seriously. Got to a convenience store or a CVS. The prices are different. granted, this is capitalism, not mercantilism, but still. You could even use that as an advantage; Ore is rare? then what about those gems you got from the last dungeon crawl? You'll probably get more for them here since they are a rarer commodity. I for one applaud his attempt of adding more flavor and life to the world.

[xroads]

...I've explained to them that you can never argue with a decision made by the DM, but they've still done it. I have pretty large amounts of influence on the DM, as he often comes to me for help with rules or some basic adventure ideas, but I really want to help him become the best DM he can be. Any ideas?

Perhaps you can offer to GM in your friend's place for a bit. Same campaign. Same players. And let your friend run your character for a bit.

Then you can show Jeremy how to handle pushy players. And you can also remind the Joes how to keep the game fun and not always be pushy rules lawyers (as a GM who hates reading the rulebook, I actually find rules lawyers are often useful).

[Honest Tiefling]

Perhaps you can offer to GM in your friend's place for a bit. Same campaign. Same players. And let your friend run your character for a bit.

I agree with this advice, except for one bit: Don't replace the guy. He's excited to run something, so don't make him feel like his story is rubbish. Run something different, even if its just a one-shot. Also, make it VERY clear to Jeremy that you like Jeremy's story and campaign style.

In fact, a one-shot comedy or nostalgia trip might be perfect for this.


Okay, is anyone else not really sure if Theomniadept is being serious or ironic?

I'm starting to see your point (but I think that is the wrong usage of ironic). Seriously, has anyone ever played in a serious game with NO deviation from the rules? I certainly don't care if I break them as a DM. I think I've had one complaint so far.

[Theomniadept]

-snop-
When you see the 99th lemming dive ungracefully into the ocean, one must wonder what goes through the mind of lemming number 100.

The Joes are assumed to be rational people. They're rational, and bringing up the rules to the DM. This must mean there are grave infractions of the rules, not just minor ones. If the longsword example is to be used, they would not really care if one player spent an extra 2 gp on a sword. Thus, logically, the sword must have magic or a special material that is altering the price to a very sizable amount. Given only the longsword deal, this means two possibilities:

1. The longsword in question is being sold cheaper than the required money to craft it. Not very likely, IMHO, because DMs usually try to limit what players can have, and having a weapon that trivializes combat many levels too early would upset many a DM. If this is the issue, the Joes are probably bringing it up on the fact that the DM is selling a weapon for less than it costs to create the weapon, which the DM should learn is silly.

2. The longsword is being grossly overpriced. This is the more likely scenario because the Joes, knowing the rules, would know that overcharging for weapons makes martial characters even weaker than casters. This is a legitimate complaint. Overcharging for such a weapon means that it is infinitely better for the players to take Leadership and have a Cleric with max ranks in craft skills make all their stuff. It shoe-horns players into operating in different ways, one of which is that the casters must carry the party and the martial lumps must remain alive.

You can bring up gross abuse of what is allowed in the rules, but at the end of the day your examples are very terrible. Pun Pun is a terrible example because nobody would ever willingly play Pun Pun because he just has no challenges, even when faced against gods. Metamind + Schism + Timeless Body manifestation = invincible permanently. Ruby Knight Vindicator + Nightsticks = infinite actions. See a theme here? These examples where the DM must forbid something all fall under casters. This in no way reinforces Rule 0 in every area of the game. It is basic common sense that a DM needs to forbid Player Invincibility.

I have read the RAW failures threads, and I have contributed to them as well. It is all the more reason why I think DMs need to stick as close to the rules as possible, because the Rules As Intended very clearly override most of those problems.

We are following some very basic logic trails, and the OP did post a very one-sided argument without any evidence. I've seen this happen enough times to know basic human patterns, and they all point to the DM not understanding exactly what Rule 0 was invented for.

I've provided some very basic examples I've encountered of bad DMing. Nobody here has actually said those were examples of good DMing and they don't reinforce Rule 0 in the least. This is about Jeremy, the DM, being redirected to some simple rules for good reasons, instead of the DM being taught he can do anything to anyone at anytime, which makes for a bad game. I never said Jeremy was a bad DM, I was simply justifying the Joes actions when they are most likely in the right. But please, provide me with reason to believe you are one of those DMs that understands the rules to such a small extent that they like to make lasting decisions that harm the game and add exactly no depth or flavor.

[Z3ro]

The Joes are assumed to be rational people. They're rational, and bringing up the rules to the DM. This must mean there are grave infractions of the rules, not just minor ones.

If you've never met a person who brought up rules violations for no better reason than they wanted to be a jerk or feel superior, then you have had a blessed gaming career so far.

[Theomniadept]

If you've never met a person who brought up rules violations for no better reason than they wanted to be a jerk or feel superior, then you have had a blessed gaming career so far.

Given the DMs I've had up till now I'd prefer someone who actually understood the rules.

[Kazudo]

This is when we have to laugh, back off, bring up the fact that it's a game, and move on in my experience.

Some groups, DMs, and players are going to follow the books and rules set down ad infinitum. These are the players who may or may not have ever said "Well, the rules of Monopoly don't SAY I can't rob the bank", and in some groups that flies.

Some groups, DMs, and players are going to use the books and rules set down as guidelines that can be manipulated and altered within reason. These are the players who may or may not have ever said "Well, the rules of Monopoly say you have to pay me rent, but because the game's no fun when you're out of money I'll say you don't have to this one time if you give me your Get Out of Jail Free card."

And some groups, DMs, and players are going to completely ignore the books and rules set down and call the rules guidelines, then completely forget they exist. I don't know what they do, because I've only ever witnessed the stories of those games. And they're usually either amazing or horrible.

To be blunt, don't tell people how to have fun in what is supposed to be a game, and if someone isn't having fun, then it's not a game and shouldn't be played by those people in that circumstance.

Rule 0 SHOULD BE "We're all here to have fun, so let's do that". If that means the DM has to fiat a few things in order to smooth the game over, add realism (because that's what HE finds fun), or anything else, then so be it.

[turbo164]

See a theme here? These examples where the DM must forbid something all fall under casters.

Hey, Barbarians are more likely to pass the Strength check to break a ladder than a pre-Polymorph Wizard! :smallwink: That was sarcasm.



I have read the RAW failures threads, and I have contributed to them as well. It is all the more reason why I think DMs need to stick as close to the rules as possible, because the Rules As Intended very clearly override most of those problems.

And the Rules as Intended allow the DM to create a village where metal (or Diamond Dust) is scarce.



We are following some very basic logic trails, and the OP did post a very one-sided argument without any evidence. I've seen this happen enough times to know basic human patterns, and they all point to the DM not understanding exactly what Rule 0 was invented for.

Yep, we don't know who's right. Maybe the DM is a wizard-loving control freak who lost his beloved Murlin the Third to an orcish axe and seeks to punish all metal-users! Maybe the players are impatient whiners who expect to deal 18d8+136 damage at level 5 because they saw it on the CharOp boards and it was totally legal and everything! Just try not to be so harsh on the side you think is wrong; focus on the "Does Jeremy have a plan for helping the non-casters?" and less on the "I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs, what the actual hell is he thinking, bad dms love to flex their power muscles, lemmings, dragon age 2" etc.


But please, provide me with reason to believe you are one of those DMs that understands the rules to such a small extent that they like to make lasting decisions that harm the game and add exactly no depth or flavor.

Um, I let a Goblin choose Ranger for his favored class and take a Monstrous Spider for his animal companion since it was part of his backtory. I think it added depth and flavor, but if your opinion is that I was harming the game by allowing that, I can't stop you.

What's your opinion on Nishant's story? If there was a 4th player there that said "BUT PAGE 87 SAYS YOU CAN ONLY USE DISABLE DEVICE ON X", would you consider that player to be "rational" for arguing "grave infractions of the rules?" (and would it matter if that player was a Barbarian or Archivist?) Would you consider Jeremy a bad DM if he's planning for the Fighter's grandfather's ghost to lead his descendant to their ancestral blade, putting him over WBL?

I assume we both want to help this group have fun; offering advice to avoid problems you've seen in the past is helpful, but your posts might have come across more...acidic than you intended. :smallredface:

[Theomniadept]

-snup-

Forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but we're talking about a newbie DM here. I'm a little doubtful he's planning on coming up with some incredible story about a long-lost ancestral blade to be completely honest. Also, being a newbie DM I'm pretty sure he hasn't had the chance to lose a Wizard to an unexpected Chargebarian.

My problem with DMs altering the rules, as was stated with the Dragon Age 2 reference, is cutting content. You added to a ranger, a tier 5 class. Nothing bad there because comparatively you could give him fifteen spiders and he'd still fall to an average wizard. Rule 0 should be used when needed, not when a DM feels like it.

All my examples were of bad DMs cutting possibilities from players, especially from classes that needed every bit of help they could get. Nobody here has been able to dispute that, instead they run to Rule 0 like it's a schoolteacher about to scold me for telling the other kids the chess pieces go on the board, not in their mouths. The example, as was shown with basic logic, is either a DM nerfing a core-only martial class (which needs to happen like a nerf to CW Samurai) or a DM creating a world where swords are as cheap as the listed prices for food.

I gave examples from my personal experience because DMs are human and if this Jeremy is allowed to do whatever he wants he will fall into that same egotistical mindset that he is DM and thus his decisions are better than those of an entire community that has been cross-examining and analyzing a game that's been out for a decade. This change is pretty much irreversible, and Jeremy is being corrected by the Joes for very good reasons, not just that the Joes are trying to control the game.

Also, I'm pretty sure the OP either got the info he needed or forgot he posted this.

[Aolbain]

Forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but we're talking about a newbie DM here. I'm a little doubtful he's planning on coming up with some incredible story about a long-lost ancestral blade to be completely honest.


He's new, not an incompetent idiot who don't know any basic fantasy tropes, at least we have no reason to believe so.

[Squark]

As a counter example, these are new players here, so they might well not even know the item creation rules, or have considered buying a longsword made out of a special material. It is quite possible these guys, especially considering the OP's description of their personality, are just quibbling about 5-8 gp and insisting every rule be enforced exactly as the PHB says.

[hemming]

The one example we have is completely innocuous - its doesn't really sound like Jeremy is trying to 'nerf' anything to me

We don't have any information on why Jeremy made the decision - just that the Joes will instantly argue with it because they can

The Joes "the book is god" attitude per the OP is extremely unhealthy for new players to adopt - they are the ones limiting themselves if this is so

My perspective as either a player or a DM

[Darkweave31]

Have we considered that this DM may possibly have just increased the price to encourage bartering roleplay among the PCs to bring it back down to the printed value?

This does not sound like a viscous attempt to nerf martial characters by forcing them to pay more gold. It is a challenge to the players, and a small one at that. One that can be easily overcome with a little good roleplay rather than ruleslawyering.

Not every challenge or obstacle the DM presents is a monster or a trap. D&D is a roleplaying game. The DM can present players with roleplaying challenges and the only time a player should wave a book at a roleplaying challenge is if they are playing a librarian and doing it in character...

Now as to the OP's question and how to handle the players, this is a rough situation because friends are involved. I'm not a fan of the whole DM's word is law philosophy because I think there should be communication between DM and players to create a fun and exciting game for everyone. That said, players shouldn't be trying to push around the DM with rulebooks.

The biggest thing is communication. Be honest and open. Confront them about their behavior in a non-hostile way. Call them on it, then try to work out a way to keep gaming so that everyone can enjoy it.

[Kazudo]

Page 112 in the Player's Handbook has a lot to say about the flexiblity a DM has in determining what's available and how much, if I'm not mistaken. Though the flexibility of prices isn't RAW, it's heavily implied.

[Iwasforger03]

90% of what we're seeing is that A) Rule 0, and B) we don't know why the dm changed the price of longswords and C) we don't know what the DM's plans are and D) we don't know much of anything because the original poster has yet to reply again to this thread.

Please post again Mr(s). Ansull if you have not already found the help you are looking for, and please do not be scared off by anything in this thread. I believe if you feel intimidated you should remember that A) this is an online discussion board, no one can actually hurt you and B) Mods are here to stop everything when it goes to far. It hasn't yet, clearly, or this thread would be closed.

I'm certain the vast majority of everyone is only here to help you in whatever way we can. perhaps you could get jeremy to step in himself, he could gain a lot from the collective experience here.

[Atsull]

I gotta disagree with most of the other people here.

What is Jeremy doing changing the prices? Does he know about the economics and exactly why prices would go up (they're not going down. DMs never lower prices and we all know it). What exactly is the DM adding to the game by changing the rules?

I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs who think the rules should change every single time something comes up that has already been ruled on. Sounds to me like Jeremy is someone who thinks that, despite a decade of entire communities debating, analyzing, and cross-examining the system, he is smart enough and experienced enough to make a ruling to change the system and affect the already lopsided balance?

And let's face it, you're not giving us enough examples, but given the one you gave us; a longsword costs more (I'm making this guess at above 90% chance of being correct). What kind of DM makes a martial character pay more? What in the actual hell is he thinking? The balance already says spellcasters pay 5 gold and get access to over 95% of all their godlike power. Something tells me this DM also has a knack for not following Wealth By Level rules, which only reinforces magic supremacy over every aspect of the game.

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

My advice: explain to him exactly why the rules need to be kept in tact for the most part, and that when you make rulings to cut content or make things difficult for players to do, you're doing exactly what every bad RPG video game maker does, and there are reasons why those games get bashed *coughdragonage2cough*.

And if you have any questions as to why he should reverse his rulings, post what they are here and we can review them. Seriously, before anyone DMs they need to know the system and to do that they need to havee their bad ideas shot down. Either they accept that all they are doing is widening the power gap between casters and noncasters or they go on DMing the game where noncasters die and players eventually all convert to the Church of Magic Supremacy. Heil Polymorph.

Jeremy gave specific rules for why the item was overpriced. the most recent incident I can think of is that our group's wizard, one of the Joes, attempted to buy a Thunderstone. When the shopkeeper stated it was 45 gp, the wizard was very upset, and demanded he explain. Jeremy explained that this city
was in the middle of the plains, and is very small. there's nobody to enchant the stones, and no readily available stone. Thus they had to import them from Cylon, a far off mountain metropolis. Joe got quite upset, and they had a pretty large debate about whether or not this was far.

Jeremy did, however, hold his ground, and Joe ended up leaving the shop.

[Atsull]

I gotta disagree with most of the other people here.

What is Jeremy doing changing the prices? Does he know about the economics and exactly why prices would go up (they're not going down. DMs never lower prices and we all know it). What exactly is the DM adding to the game by changing the rules?

I have personally played with nothing but bad DMs who think the rules should change every single time something comes up that has already been ruled on. Sounds to me like Jeremy is someone who thinks that, despite a decade of entire communities debating, analyzing, and cross-examining the system, he is smart enough and experienced enough to make a ruling to change the system and affect the already lopsided balance?

And let's face it, you're not giving us enough examples, but given the one you gave us; a longsword costs more (I'm making this guess at above 90% chance of being correct). What kind of DM makes a martial character pay more? What in the actual hell is he thinking? The balance already says spellcasters pay 5 gold and get access to over 95% of all their godlike power. Something tells me this DM also has a knack for not following Wealth By Level rules, which only reinforces magic supremacy over every aspect of the game.

Your DM Jeremy (boy is this weird, I already know a Jeremy and two Joes and they are not like this so their names coming to mind as I type this is weird for me) needs to remember that you are playing by a prewritten ruleset because this is D&D, not some glorified improv system.

My advice: explain to him exactly why the rules need to be kept in tact for the most part, and that when you make rulings to cut content or make things difficult for players to do, you're doing exactly what every bad RPG video game maker does, and there are reasons why those games get bashed *coughdragonage2cough*.

And if you have any questions as to why he should reverse his rulings, post what they are here and we can review them. Seriously, before anyone DMs they need to know the system and to do that they need to havee their bad ideas shot down. Either they accept that all they are doing is widening the power gap between casters and noncasters or they go on DMing the game where noncasters die and players eventually all convert to the Church of Magic Supremacy. Heil Polymorph.

This was a request for help with the players, not a chance to complain about Jeremy.

[gadren]

Jeremy did, however, hold his ground, and Joe ended up leaving the shop.
One of those guys, eh? I've had more than a few of those in my 20+ years of DMing, and I find the group is better off if they are not allowed to return.

Anyways, this scenario is actually specifically backed up in the core books. It suggest that prices increase based on supply and demand, and that small towns might not have what you are looking for, and if they do, it'll cost more.

[Atsull]

I'd just like to thank everyone for providing such a great amount of help on my question. This community is fantastic.

Several people have instead, however, said that Jeremy is incorrect. I understand he's newbie, but he's learning. May I remind you that this was a request for help about pushy players, not new DMs.

[Boci]

This was a request for help with the players, not a chance to complain about Jeremy.

You cannot dictate the line of discussion for posters to follow. If, based on the scenario you have given them, they feel the problem is with jeremony and not the joes, they are perfectly entitled to voice that opinion. Its just how the forums work.

[The Trickster]

You cannot dictate the line of discussion for posters to follow. If, based on the scenario you have given them, they feel the problem is with jeremony and not the joes, they are perfectly entitled to voice that opinion. Its just how the forums work.

+1 to this, pretty much.

I will say, however, that the Joe's in this situation need to get over it. He wasn't targeting them in any way specifically, he gave a good roleplay reason, and it doesn't really hurt that much anyway.

[Andezzar]

I will say, however, that the Joe's in this situation need to get over it. He wasn't targeting them in any way specifically, he gave a good roleplay reason, and it doesn't really hurt that much anyway.We do not know how much resources they have, how those resources compare to WBL or whether the DM plans a big payout soon.

If prices are particularly high in certain parts, they could be particularly low in other parts. This might prompt the PCs to become merchants instead of adventurers.

The few haggling rules that do exist (CAdv p. 98-99) only allow you to adjust the price of goods you buy by 10%, so I doubt a 50% markup was ever intended. Also a DC 30+ diplomacy check is hardly trivial at low levels. Note that, at least to my knowledge, there is no way to increase the selling price of loot. So whether people are starving or not they will never pay more then 2s 5c for trail rations.

[Theomniadept]

This was a request for help with the players, not a chance to complain about Jeremy.

Also, small note, there is an edit button and unlike some other web forums I don't believe there's a time limit on how long after posting you can add to a previous post.

From the initial post it seemed like it was incredibly urgent that some players be put in their place, as if they were committing some hate crime upon a DMs unfettered dream world but if the only thing is slight overpricing of things that aren't readily available in the area then it seems like they just needed an explanation as to why that happened, which I assume Jeremy would give. Only thing I could suggest is that when the party goes to the mountainous dwarven town or the poncy elven forest they be given discounts on the respective products in respect to the listed prices, giving the players reason to travel and sell wares they find at higher prices in different areas.

Aside from "X costs more because of Y" I'm guessing there may be more than one problem at the table, at least more than enough to give cause to seek aid, but that's just the cynic side talking.

[hemming]

Jeremy gave specific rules for why the item was overpriced. the most recent incident I can think of is that our group's wizard, one of the Joes, attempted to buy a Thunderstone. When the shopkeeper stated it was 45 gp, the wizard was very upset, and demanded he explain. Jeremy explained that this city
was in the middle of the plains, and is very small. there's nobody to enchant the stones, and no readily available stone. Thus they had to import them from Cylon, a far off mountain metropolis. Joe got quite upset, and they had a pretty large debate about whether or not this was far.

Jeremy did, however, hold his ground, and Joe ended up leaving the shop.

Maybe you can jump in at times and explain how the rules in the DMG give the DM a lot of leeway in creating the world, and that there are rules for a lot of things (like changing the prices to items) that they themselves don't know yet - and that a world that is drawn only along the narrowest lines of the PHB is much more boring to play in