Last session I noticed that my DM wasn't aware of a few rules. It made me wonder if he uses the monster from the Bestiarys the right way. When I looked them up (it was Faceless Stalker) I noticed that he had done several things wrong.
Ex. He had told me, when I rolled my knowledge check, that they are resistant to piercing and slashing damage. It's the other way around, they have DR5/piercing or slashing.
There were also several other things that he hadn't taken into account and it became obvious to me that he didn't know how to interpret the Bestiary entries.
He also made sneak attacks against our characters when we were grappled (which isn't "allowed" if I'm not missing something?) It doesn't make you flat-footed or denies you your Dex to AC (only lowers your Dex by 4).
Now to the question: How do I tell him that he's doing it wrong?
Of course this is going to make it seem like I'm trying to cheat my way around and look up his monsters to gain advantage in combat, but I only did it because I noticed him, not, doing things right.
I didn't want to stop the session to ask. Everyone at the table just gets angry when I tell them what they can and can't do with and without certain feats (I'm getting really tired of being my groups rule-lawyer).
So I figured that trying to tell the DM mid-session "I suspect that you're doing something wrong" would be much harder than to just look it up after and tell him later...
It seems as though the rest of the group doesn't have a problem with it. I would suggest just rolling with it and try not to let it bother you.
If, however, the GM seems like they may be open to feedback of that nature, I would just tell them. Don't dance around it, just say "the grappled condition doesn't meet the qualifications for sneak attack, they need to be standing in that square so they flank with the grappler."
Firstly, many GMs make changes to Bestiary entries specifically to prevent players using knowledge gained from the reading the entries themselves.
That said, from the rest of your post it feels it's more than that.
Here's how I would handle it: Say you want to run a game (with relatives or something, if they get upset about not being invited) but are trying to understand some rules, and can they explain them to you, please.
Then when their explanation is contrary to what the rulebook says, turn to that page and say "but it says here...."
Bear in mind throughout all of this, however, that not following the rulebook isn't intrinsically "wrong". If it doesn't matter that much within your group and they'd rather play fast and loose with the rules, they're perfectly within their rights to prefer to play that way (many of us have played RPGs like that for decades, using the rulebook as a set of suggestions and letting the GM's call on the spot be the final decision maker rather than stopping to look something up, so we can focus on getting on with the story.) If you prefer to play exactly as the rulebook says, you may just have a playstyle difference with the rest of the group. Sit down with them and talk about that.
As a GM, I'd say just bring up your concerns politely. Mention that you think he misplayed some rules, and why. If he's like me or any of the GMs I've played with, he'll be happy to learn more about the game and fix the problem.
@BigDTBone That wouldn't qualify for sneak attack. Grappled creatures can't make attacks of opportunity, so they don't threaten an area and can't flank.
We mash monsters up all the time, we have been playing for over 30 years so we need to spice things up. That being said you have to be consistent with the rules if you are going to change monsters. Don't break the rules unless you can use the "rule of cool" to justify it.
One of our group writes for Raging Swan he likes to test monsters and evil ideas on us.
As for the other stuff talk in a friendly way post game - "hey mate I think you made a bit of a ruling that I don't think matched the rules in the book, can we talk about it?" After your chat if it goes well say "how do you want me to approach you if I disagree with a ruling next game - let you know straight away, pass you a note, wait until the session is over?"
Of course you should establish a procedure for rules disputes before you begin a campaign.
Ours is we role with it and discuss it at the end of the session, unless the character or party is endangered by the ruling... We have 5 mins to find the rule read it and come to a consensus so it doesn't bog the game down.
You should be careful; you seem to want a more strict (rules-wise) game, the others do not. If they are having fun and not you, you are the odd man out, and it's probably better to find another game OR start your own. In any case, it seems like you dont trust your GM, so it might be better to leave than to tell him "you're doing it wrong". I've seen it done a couple of times, and it does piss GMs off.
In the end, rule 0 means that you can never really tell the gm "you're doing it wrong". Personally, I pretty much ALWAYS change monster statblocks. I tend to stick close to the "rules", and any houserules I keep in a large document available to all online.
Contrary to what these fine gentlemen have said, get up in his face about it. He may thank you later. My first DM had been playing since the early 80's and he wasn't to sharp with some of the new rules. If you politely phrase things like the grapple sneak with " Oh does this monster have a special attack that allows a sneak attack here? Because normally being grappled isn't enough" he might learn some things off of you, or he just might be forgetting. I find when I am behind the screen you're so caught up in the story sometimes you aren't as sharp on the rules as you would be when you're running a character you're more familiar with and who is more important to you. The DM I passive-aggressively led those years ago has since gotten much better with the Pathfinder rules system, and often asks me if I can remember certain things if he gets flumoxed. Don't let rule 0 cover up mistakes, or he'll just keep on making them. I know I don't want to make mistakes and accidentally kill people with a botched ruling on the other side of the screen, I feel terrible after.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Privately would be my suggestion. Also (and this is based purely on your comment that you need to work on being diplomatic) I'd approach it from a "that's not how I'd do it" rather than "did you know you're doing it wrong?" perspective.
The reason I'd do that is that it's possible you and he are at different ends of the spectrum when it comes to the book being rules or being guidelines. I've seen someone say "I want to play this game exactly by the rules" but then rely heavily on the 'rule' that says the DM is the arbiter of the rules - it may be that he and/or the rest of the group dont really care about following RAW so much as RAIbytheDM.
(because Slumber needs a buff).
Wait... What?
|
A lot GM's Home rule/Tweek the standard SOP (standard operating Proceedures) STATS in order to keep players on the back foot as they assume most players have the details from the various creature books. I would mention it but I wouldn't like get all union meeting on the said issue. Ask him/her about what the Home rules are on this or in gereral, this may cover a lot more info and you may find out more. If the group is happy with and not overally bothered by...then just roll with it.
(because Slumber needs a buff).Wait... What?
I went with "that must be sarcasm" when I read it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The damage reduction thing seems like a simple misunderstanding of how it works. If you approach him (preferably before or after a session, rather than during it) with something like "you know, I thought DR worked like <this>", he'd probably appreciate the correction.
He had told me, when I rolled my knowledge check, that they are resistant to piercing and slashing damage. It's the other way around, they have DR5/piercing or slashing.
This is a pretty common mistake, turns out. I've had to correct several new DMs regarding this. I doubt he did this on purpose to "spice up" the encounter, and it's only going to get silly when you fight a skeleton who's hurt worse by bullets and rapiers because he's only resistent to bludgeoning.
The grapple thing might be intentional, a sort of ad hoc houserule because it makes sense in the moment.
|
How about try the adult approach and simply ask him after the game or by email: Are you tweaking the monsters and the rules for fun or were you unaware this is how DR works. Here's a link to page X to show you. If he wants to do it by the book then you can set up somethign where you tell him mistakes after the game or how to do it in game. If he just goes with whatever then find a new game if you don't like the changes.
I agree with this. The DR thing seems like an honest mistake. It's easy to get DR right with skeletons, because the reason for the DR is obvious. The faceless stalker is a somewhat less known critter so the reason and intent of the DR might not have been immediately apparent.
As for the grappling thing: grappling confuses many people. Example: grappling characters cannot make AoOs, but they do threaten and therefore provide flanking.
And honestly, I can see a case for allowing SA against grappled people. Not RAW, but it might allow some interesting monk/rogue teamwork rather than always doing the same boring flanking routine.
---
When questioning the GM on rules, try to pick your battles. Don't argue over everything, decide what's really important. People get irrirated if you argue everything, even if you're right. So space it out, and let things lie if they're not really important.
In the case of grappling here, see how it goes, then afterwards tell the GM you thought it was interesting, maybe opening up new opportunities for the rogue. Did he intend it as a houserule? Maybe he wants to try it out now?
On the other hand, sometimes it really does matter. A while back I joined a group that had enemies make AoOs against PCs that charged the monsters, for ENTERING a threatened square. This was really a problem for the PCs' chances to survive the dungeon so I brought it up. (Especially since the idea of NOT charging didnt' seem to occur to the players.)
I often notice it if some GM uses rules different to how they are written.
My usual reaction is to ask them whether they changed it deliberately or by mistake. If they say it was by choice I nod and continue the game. If they say it was a mistake we (the group) decide if we ret-con the wrong use or let it slip and use the right rule next time. If the GM doesn't believe he went against the rules I again nod and continue the game but show him the rule at another time. No help disrupting the game, unless a pc's life depends on it or something.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some very simple things to remember when confronting a DM, player, or just about anyone.
Use the term "I", instead of "You" as often as possible.
Maintain eye contact, but be sure to occasionally look away(as if in thought works).
Try not to furrow your brow.
Be aware of the tone of your voice. This can be key to not giving the impression that you are not "attacking" the listener, and creating a defensive response.
If the listener disagrees, phrases like "You might be right, but let's double-check, just to be sure" can allow you to provide evidence, without seeming to "attack" their stance.
Speaking with the individual in private, will usually produce more favorable results.
Accept the possibility that you could be wrong. This will make it easier to keep a cool head during the confrontation.
Of course, the number one thing you should remember, is don't be a jerk.
Came to an agreement with the GM before starting that I would point out errors for both him and the rest of the players. If it was just a minor thing we just let it go at the time and follow up after in an email explaining why and the correction. Only if a PC is going to die or the encounter made trivial is the interruption made midflow.
Just try and be grown up about it and non-confrontational. As a "sweetener" tell the GM that you'll so the same for him if the players get something wrong too.
I see a lot of advice that amounts to: use proper etiquette. I agree with that but proper etiquette varies from group to group. I have been in some groups where the rules matter and any time anyone questions how anything works someone or several people look it up. I have been in other groups where the story matters and and interruptions about the rules are very bad form even when death is on the line. Most groups fall somewhere between the two. I find the most tension in groups where both the rules and the story matter, that is, games where it it considered bad form to be wrong about the rules or talk about them more than absolutely necessary. You know your group better than strangers on the internet, you have to use your own judgement here. Good luck, remember to have fun is the goal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Worst thing you can do is not bring it up at all. Trust me; it will drive you crazy.
I joined a 3.5 group at a local game store when I was in grad school. I showed up to the first session with my level 8 wizard all ready to go. To my surprise, I found out that everyone in the group had multi-classed... Into Ninja. Everyone. Cleric/ninja, fighter/ninja, Druid/ninja, you-name-it/ninja. Seven people sitting around me at the table, all of them MC'd ninja. I thought, "man, that's pretty weird, but okay." So we get to the first encounter against a nasty giant spell caster and then a funny thing happened. The ENTIRE party vanished. Turns out, the GM didn't use the sniping penalty to stealth, and with hide-in-plain-sight, why couldn't the fighter hit the mob in the face with a greatsword while remaining completely concealed in the Giant's own shadow?( /sarcasm)
So yeah, giant spell caster versus a squishy wizard. I barely got fly off to hover out of reach while my party sniped down the giant.
Next encounter? A bunch of mobs who also sniped from the shadows without penalty. So there I am, surrounded by unseen death, who this time can snipe me as I try desperately to get away, pleading with the fighter to tank. Cleric even got mad at mad at me for tanking too much damage.
I didn't say anything because, hey I'm the new guy. I'm just grateful for a seat at the table. But after a while, I had to quit the group. That and other things were just too much to handle.
Talk about it, get it in the open or get another group.
I still tell horror stories from that group. Don't be like me.
Excellent post by Blackbloodtroll.
Being assertive without being confrontational is a real skill. It takes practice.