Did I overstep what I can/can't define? (psionics "mental contact")

[kkplx]

Disclaimer: This is my own viewpoint of the matter and as anything anyone writes purely a subjective perspective on the issue at hand - for the unadulterated picture I've linked the Video of the session in my post.

Hey there, sort of at a loss right now regarding one of my players - the guy had some bad experiences with another DM that basically handwaved a LOT of stuff mechanically, and because of that he's extremely touchy on anything that seems to take control from him. I allowed him to play a StP Erudite after discussing the class with him and so far he's been doing well.

Last Session though was the first time he ever tried to make mental contact with a possibly hostile being, an aboleth that had dried up and was now in its long dreaming. (Here's the Sequence live, as it happened (http://www.twitch.tv/chrisguru/b/535353495?t=23m50s)) Creature failed its will save and he made his checks to learn of the powers it knows.
Here's where the problem started. Since he was making contact with an extremely alien and old mind, I described the mental contact as a sort of dive into a vast ocean of salty, dark blue water and a sensation of drowning, while he was searching for the powers. He then immediately stopped my talking to state that the contact takes 1 round and kept interrupting to insist on it even while I was trying to explain that it feels longer mentally while only a round passes outside. There were no ill effects to him due to the form the mind of the aboleth took, only fluff/flavor. He then kept a negative attitude for a long time (visible shortly after (http://www.twitch.tv/chrisguru/b/535353495?t=31m30s), for example: He wrote an Emote that his character was washing his hands, I started to elaborate and he agressively interrupted again with "you gonna tell me what i'm doing?" - during the session I was oblivious to his drastically changed attitude since I was busy DMing - watchign the VoD you can see a lot more by watching his camera.) and is now discussing with me on skype about the issue:
"I disagree with the fluff you gave. I'm not temporarily transported into their mind and time doesn't slow."
"nor do I feel in a different world"
"the fluff is that it takes 6 seconds to make mental contact."

I checked the psionics books just to make sure. There didn't seem to be any fluff defined whatsoever for "mental contact". The mechanics are "1 round, provokes AoO, Will save, willing only unless unconscious", the fluff is "mental contact". I therefore came up with a description of the contact and its success/failure that was related to the creature, an aboleth. Yet this player is currently very aggressively arguing against any such fluffing of game mechanics.

To me his reaction seems entirely unreasonable and actually insulting to me, since we both played in the game where the DM was making up actual mechanics to fit his encounters and deny the use of abilities like divination and the two of us actually discussed it multiple times. It is something I actively avoid or thought I was avoiding, yet he actually said "you're turning into that guy".

I guess what it comes down to is that I'm looking for a third party opinion on our issue and the fluffing I did in that specific case. I thought fluff like that is both okay and expected from a DM, to give life to the dice rolled and the time spent, but apparently the player is under the strong impression that I overstepped my boundaries as a DM.

[John Longarrow]

While I can't access the links (work restrictions), it sounds like he's not interested in fluff in game.
Best case, talk to him about what he is looking for in a game. Come right out and ask if he is interested in any of the fluff/descriptions or just game facts.

There are player who want to hear the whole "You enter the dimly lit room. As the scent of mold assails your nostrils, you feel a chill run up your spine. The clawing feeling of the grave chills your heart". Others want to hear 'Its a dark 10x10 room. Give me a survival check". See which he wants. If he doesn't like the immersive experience but the rest of the group does, he is kinda out of luck and may need to find another group. If no one is into the immersive stuff, you may want to change how you present details or find another group.

This doesn't sound like you railroading or playing his character. It sounds like your trying to give an emotive description.

[Alex12]

Your actions seem pretty reasonable to me. You preserved the mechanics, you were just trying to add some flavor. You weren't describing what his character was doing in the mental contact, you were describing how it feels. It's no different from describing getting hit by a fireball as "a searing heat flashes across you, and you feel your nerves scream in agony."

[Summerstorm]

I agree with the other posters: You did exactly what i (and most) players would expect from a gm.

If you just need someone judging your rolls and creating encounters, i would build myself a programm for that.

You should ask him exactly why he did mind you providing him with roleplaying possibilities and immersion into his world - or if he didn't mind that, what differences in style you two seem to have and find some common ground (if possible).

[Muggins]

As the DM, I feel that you're fully within your rights to give an emotive description of the game world. You know, that thing which you're hosting and presenting to players. That's your role in the game.

Your player, however, feels differently. As John has already said, your player seems more inclined towards the crunch than the fluff, and that's alright. If he doesn't want to experience a story by your side, then he doesn't have to. Instead, you can focus your narrative efforts on your other players while providing the StP Erudite player what little he wants. He might like being tailored to, or he might later ask to receive some evocative power descriptions again. I can only see it becoming a problem if he later starts butting in and complaining when you provide the narrative that your other players want.

[Thrudd]

You didn't overstep your bounds as a DM, giving descriptions is what your job is.
It sounds like the player is not accustomed to the game mechanics being translated into descriptive prose. If talking to him does not bring him to any understanding or acceptance of your style, I suppose you shouldn't waste time on him in the future. So long as his wishes don't interfere with your interaction with the other players or how you want to run your game as a whole, you can just brush over his characters' actions. However, you shouldn't accept that if you feel it detracts from the experience for yourself or everyone else. It is your game, he'll just have to learn to deal with your style. Explain to him that it you aren't changing anything mechanically, it is only meant to make the world and the story more vivid.

[Psyren]

I thought what you did was a nice touch - making mental contact with an Aboleth should feel alien (and "wet"), and you didn't attach any mechanical penalties. That was cool overall and your player doesn't seem to realize what a treat it is to have a creative DM.

Maybe he thought you were setting up something sinister for later like a mental trap or something. Some players are just paranoid/distrustful like that. Explain you like to add flavor and you weren't deviating from the mechanics and that he shouldn't feel upset over nothing.

[Segev]

I agree overall. I would like to focus briefly on what might be a touchy point for your player regarding the hand-washing, though: it is something some DMs like to do which is...iffy to me...when the player says "I do this" and the DM starts to elaborate, specifying what precisely he's doing to achieve that. It can help if the player doesn't know how he envisions the activity happening, but it can be irksome if "I wash my hands" turns into "Okay, you scrub them in the river, making sure to get under your fingernails..." when the player didn't, in fact, think his character would, for instance, go so thorough as to scrub under his nails.

That may seem a minor thing, and this example is, but you should be conscious of the possibility that such a pattern of description might upset some players at times. I'd talk to them OOC about it, just to see what their issue in particular is, and make sure that you come to an understanding about where he feels the line should be drawn on DM elaboration.


You were, as others have said, doing nothing wrong with the mental contact thing.

[shadow_archmagi]

Start your next stream by executing that player. Make an example of him- None may question the DM.