I DM/ GM/ Keeper of Lore ect ect alot of games. But when I join a game as a player, I keep saying to myself I can do better or I get bored easily. Hence I mainly just DM nowadays vs playing in any games as a player. Does anybody else here feel the same way? Love DM'ing but can not get into being a player?
It sounds like you're either struggling to find good GMs to play with, or you're struggling to cultivate an attitude of gratitude.
Sure, some people are naturally inclined to be world builders, rather than world explorers, but more often than not, one enriches the other. Knowing how to tell a good story can also allow you to be a better, more engaged player. If you're getting bored while playing, then maybe you're just a boring player?
There is no "best" way to GM, though there are definitely "wrong" ways to lead a group. Each person who takes up the mantle is going to have a unique perspective and approach, and that represents an opportunity to learn about people and what matters to them. Rather than thinking about how you could do something better, try thinking about how you can help to enhance their story through your character's interactions within the world. Be collaborative, rather than competitive.
Tough, yes. I've been DMing for many years, but I'm fairly new to 5th edition, so I'm not all that good at it yet. I do sit there and think "I used to be better than that" but in the end, I have yet to be in a game where I couldn't find a way to have fun. All I do is offer the DM my assistance in a private message and if they ask me too, I'll tell them from time to time what a given rule might say.
Everybody has their own strengths and weaknesses, as a DM and as a player. Everybody also has their own ideas about what they like and how things should ideally be done. Maybe cultivate the idea that when you think you can do better, what you really mean is you can do better for you. Other people may have other standards, and maybe the way you'd do something would not be as good for them. And when somebody is struggling with something that comes easy to you, try to focus on the things that they are good at instead - things you maybe don't even notice or appreciate as much as you should.
If none of that works for you, remember your own early days as a DM. Nobody starts out an expert. Everybody has a learning curve. And the ones learning fastest are usually the ones who get a little help from their friends.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I play and DM and love both equally. I am not a massively experienced player in either roll but..
as a player I use the same mentality as a DM,
1 -What can I bring to the game to make it better for everyone,
2-How can i try to include all players.
3-How can I play my part in creating a deeper story world and role play for all.
Extra as a player I will try extra hard to listen to everything not just what my character is involved with and try to engage with the story. I think about the things that I like from my players as a DM and give that back to my DM.
But if you don't enjoy playing as a plyer that's fine just stick to DM role.
I was a player a bit in my teens in the 80's, but have been a forever DM by choice since.
Hatching campaign premisses and plot archs (that usually gets diverted by the players), creating challenging encounters, making and playing engaging NPCs, tightrope walk improvisation and on-the-feet unplaned change of events, orchestrating a good climate at the table and setting up as good as possible overall conditions for fun for all - that's what I enjoy about ttrpg. I'm simply not interested in playing a single character through a campaign, even though being a good player has it own set of skills to develop for the common fun.
It can be hard to get out of that DM mindset. There may be times when you have to bite your tongue -- hard -- because you strongly disagree with a ruling.
For me though, I'd so much rather play than GM, especially for D&D as a game (for reasons I won't go into here) compared to other RPGs, I'm so glad that someone else is DMing that I just roll with whatever the differences are. It's not my game; I don't need to be concerned about if X Feat is going to unbalance things or player Y is doing things that are going to unbalance the game. That is not my job. I just RP my character in response to what is going on around me and try to enjoy every minute of rules, balance, etc. being N.M.P. -- Not My Problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I find being a player to be tough, although for a different reason. As a player, I generally do not mind how other GMs interpret the rules, or even how they run the game. What I have issue with being a player is that I feel so much more limted and powerless.
It sounds like you're either struggling to find good GMs to play with, or you're struggling to cultivate an attitude of gratitude.
Sure, some people are naturally inclined to be world builders, rather than world explorers, but more often than not, one enriches the other. Knowing how to tell a good story can also allow you to be a better, more engaged player. If you're getting bored while playing, then maybe you're just a boring player?
There is no "best" way to GM, though there are definitely "wrong" ways to lead a group. Each person who takes up the mantle is going to have a unique perspective and approach, and that represents an opportunity to learn about people and what matters to them. Rather than thinking about how you could do something better, try thinking about how you can help to enhance their story through your character's interactions within the world. Be collaborative, rather than competitive.
I hate being a player, I recently took part in a cyberpunk game, a setting I love, but just got bored. It wasn’t the DM (a very good friend) or also the players (also good friends) it was just that I found being a player dull. It showed me that I don’t like being a player and probably won’t be one again, my ttrpg time is precious and so I would rather us it doing what I love. I have been a player, spent years being a player and maybe in the future my feelings will change but right now i can’t see myself wasting my time or a gm’s being a player.
As a player, I do try to indulge in a little creativity by petitioning the DM to work aspects of my character into the plot. But I also try not to hog the spotlight, and to remember that the other PCs also have interesting stories.
I have written poetry for the campaign I run and for the campaign I play in.
I DM 95% of the time, but when I am a player, I love it. Sooooooo much less pressure and stuff to do. Just relax and have fun, easy-peasy. If people argue about rules, I will offer my 2 cents but have no problem taking DM rulings.
I usually stay super-quiet if there is a rules discussion. I don't want to "back seat DM."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I KNOW I am going to see posts how none of this was my business as a player.
Maybe you will, maybe you won't. I don't have a problem with players helping out the DM myself, not as that DM nor as another player. I draw the line at players usurping the DM's mastery of how the game is played at their table, but reminders are fine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I KNOW I am going to see posts how none of this was my business as a player
It's not "none of your business" as a player, how rules are interpreted. It just isn't your place to make rulings. I think it is acceptable to call an interpretation into question ("Is that really how it's supposed to be played?" etc.). I think it is not acceptable to argue with the GM in the middle of the session. Those are 2 different things.
You seem to have an encyclopedic knowledge offhand and without looking at the books, of how many of the spells and feats work. So you are more likely to catch a mistake or mis-read of the rules than other people. I don't have that encyclopedic knowledge so something like the Tasha thing would completely blow by me and I would not have caught it either.
By my lights, D&D is a huge massive array of rules, many of them over-complicated and poorly written. As a DM, I constantly have to deal with those rules. As a player, it isn't my job to do so, and I gladly relinquish those duties.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'd say not speaking up about the Elemental stone and the Cleric during divvying it up and then "intervening" once in play is poor or spoil sport bordering on sabotage. I mean you do you, but anyone at the table would probably wonder why you repressed the information when dividing loot and presumption of utility (sort of a planning stage) and then "speaking" out during combat resolution. In some circles, that's called Blue Falcon. There's even a special badge you can be awarded for such conduct.
I now want to create a "That Guy" feat or background with a Blue Falcon feature.
Spoiler for The Suicide Squad
I mean I thought Pete Davidson's character had a great moment too, but I don't know if I'd use that character as a party member role model.
I'd say not speaking up about the Elemental stone and the Cleric during divvying it up and then "intervening" once in play is poor or spoil sport bordering on sabotage.
Going to disagree here. The cleric player claimed to know how the spell works, and if you're still in the stage of getting to know the group you probably shouldn't be second-guessing everyone. Wait for a track record of claims that couldn't be backed up first. ;-) The player using that (metagame) knowledge is a bit iffy, but not to the point that I'd make a problem of it as the DM (I tend to be loose with item and monster info, not so much with campaign info). It's a rather powerful item with a definite drawback, that concentration requirement should (again, if I were the DM) be in play.
edit: if anything I would have spoken up as soon as the cleric cast Fairy Fire, and hoped that if it was a mistake the DM would have allowed a mulligan
I'd say not speaking up about the Elemental stone and the Cleric during divvying it up and then "intervening" once in play is poor or spoil sport bordering on sabotage.
Going to disagree here. The cleric player claimed to know how the spell works, and if you're still in the stage of getting to know the group you probably shouldn't be second-guessing everyone. Wait for a track record of claims that couldn't be backed up first. ;-) The player using that (metagame) knowledge is a bit iffy, but not to the point that I'd make a problem of it as the DM (I tend to be loose with item and monster info, not so much with campaign info). It's a rather powerful item with a definite drawback, that concentration requirement should (again, if I were the DM) be in play.
edit: if anything I would have spoken up as soon as the cleric cast Fairy Fire, and hoped that if it was a mistake the DM would have allowed a mulligan
I cast COUNTERDISAGREE. I run my tables pro-collaborative. Folks who say "BUT THAT'S META" I shut down with "Do you all want to have a good game, with the best ideas, or do we want to play a game of 'gotcha' with the rules?" When loot is being divided up, it's a part IC part OOC moment. If a character makes a declaration overstating their capacity on an item, it's perfectly aboveboard for a player to say as a player, "are you sure, I don't think that's how that works." The group is trying to accomplish a common goal, so if there's something that may complicate game integrity (as Denis seems to value), you speak up at the first instance (this is sort of team ethics 101, see something say something). Waiting till you've grown tired, exasperated or contemptuous of what the party has been doing whole session to then launch into a "well, actually, this player is doing it wrong" might as well be intentional sabotage / blue falconry.
I think whistleblowing is a good analogy here. Say someone has been aware of some sort of practice that goes against policy or rules at their work, and lets it go. Things continue till they become precarious (in our context we're talking arguably game integrity), and the whistle gets blown. The driving question in a lot of follow up inquiries starts with the whistle blower, basically an iteration of "what did you know, and when did you know it?" If I was at some sort of D&D Inspector Generals Office (maybe for the RAW Bar Association) my findings would be prefaced by the fact that the predicament the whistle blower created in their rules intervention would never had happened had the complainant reported the problem in a more timely manner. So yeah, knowledge here is a card played when personal impatience was triggered. They're not "wrong" but the credibility of the report gets problematic and may expose the complainant to their own integrity audit.
As is, a DM could say, well, this doesn't sound like something that you just remembers, but something you've been sitting on. I was content with the loot allotment and don't play "gotcha" so I'm fine with waiving the class / rules restrictions to this item/practice. In the future if you find something problematic at table, speak up at the opportune time. Here's a Blue Falcon token, which at my table works a meditation ... instead of inspiration, you use this token on how to better play as a team player in the future. Cash it in when you're a good sport and you'll lose my suspicion condition currently cast on you."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I know Dennis off-line, so I know he will not be offended by this. Hopefully no one else will be.
I wish I could go into "player mode", and that is easy enough when the DM says "these are my house rules". But when a DM sets no such rules (like the DM I spoke of), and when the DM is clearly trying to play certain aspects of the game by RAW (stopping the game to look up rules), the DM portion kicks in, to move the game along.
At its heart, this is a you problem.
You know the D&D 5e rules better than that DM. From our off-line conversations, I'm well aware that you know them a darn sight better than I do. You are at heart, frustrated that this DM who is, by your description, trying to follow the rules, doesn't know them as well as you do, and is not as good at applying them as you (think you) are.
Well, that is how gaming works. People have different facility, experience, knowledge, familiarity, etc., with the rules. The most familiar one is not always the DM. In my group, I am arguably the 3rd most knowledgeable, maybe 4th most, out of 5 or 6 people. Several times I've asked the guy who has years of AL experience, 'How does this work?' and let him explain the RAW interpretation. There are times when I may say, "Well, OK, that's not how it worked in AD&D, and I like the way AD&D did it better so we're house-ruling that." But most of the time I just go with whatever he says. After a year-plus of DMing I am closing the gap and probably equal or nearly so to most of them now, especially about "DMy" things (but definitely not about PC abilities). I wouldn't be shocked if there were times the others ground their teeth in frustration of me not really knowing how a rule works and my ruling conflicted with RAW (and I didn't realize it).
To some degree, that comes with the territory. Unless you are going to step up and be a Forever DM and never, ever play, you have to accept when you play that not everyone is going to know the rules as well as you, not all DMs will be the most rules-savvy person at the table, and if you can't accept it, you are going to be in for a long series of frustrating evenings.
I have suggested this to Dennis off-line, as we have spoken about this issue at length elsewhere, but I will post it here because I think it is helpful RE: the original topic. One really good way to turn off "DM brain" is to get into a group that is playing a different RPG when you are the player. That is, you DM 5e, but you play Call of Cthulhu, or Savage Worlds, or something. I know, I know, "But I want to play D&D." Yeah, but if you can't turn off DM-brain, and you are not having fun because you keep second-guessing the rules, maybe it's better to pick an RPG whose rules are less innately familiar to you, better yet one wildly foreign to you. Then you cant' have "GM brain" because you don't know how the game works as well as the GM does, and you'll have less of a struggle.
I have a lot of trouble playing Champions because I ran it so long and know it so well, that I have a super hard time turning off GM brain for Champions. So when I was GMing Champions, I had more fun playing Rolemaster with another guy GMing, than playing Champions. It was easy to turn of GM brain for Rolemaster, because I didn't know it that well.
I suggest some of you who have trouble turning off DM-brain, maybe try this... try a different game that you are less familiar with, and you may be able to get back to just RPing and enjoying yourselves instead of constantly back-seat DMing.
I cast COUNTERDISAGREE. I run my tables pro-collaborative. Folks who say "BUT THAT'S META" I shut down with "Do you all want to have a good game, with the best ideas, or do we want to play a game of 'gotcha' with the rules?" When loot is being divided up, it's a part IC part OOC moment. If a character makes a declaration overstating their capacity on an item, it's perfectly aboveboard for a player to say as a player, "are you sure, I don't think that's how that works." The group is trying to accomplish a common goal, so if there's something that may complicate game integrity (as Denis seems to value), you speak up at the first instance (this is sort of team ethics 101, see something say something). Waiting till you've grown tired, exasperated or contemptuous of what the party has been doing whole session to then launch into a "well, actually, this player is doing it wrong" might as well be intentional sabotage / blue falconry.
Cast away! I'll use my Ultimate Artifact of Nu-Uh! to make my save against COUNTERDISAGREE and bite my thumb at thee.
My point though is that it was impossible to know the cleric player was overstating their capacity. You're not going to say you don't think that's how it works if the other player didn't say how it works in the first place. You might ask if they're sure they know what they're talking about, but if they haven't given you cause to think they don't know what they're talking about I don't think you should be questioning their knowledge at the first opportunity.
Again, I'd have spoken up sooner than Dennis did - just not before I had any reason to assume they were wrong.
First off, you consider it poor play or sabotage, for me, as a player, to let slide when some other player, whose CHAR can clearly not have the in-char knowledge of a spell, and then call him on it when the PLAYER proves later he does not have the knowledge, or is holding back that knowledge from a DM who is clearly juggling a ton of balls in the air. Remember, the PLAYER had already read off another section of that spell to the DM earlier.
The DM initially, tacitly agreed that the PLAYER's CHAR had the requisite knowledge to operate the Elemental Gem (any char in the game can), and the PLAYER announced his CHAR knew that spell. If I, the PLAYER, had said right then and there "Um...no, your char can't possibly know how that spell works", I would be clearly infringing on the DM's turf at that point. The DM gave the group that item and had to know it triggered a 5th level Druid/ Wizard spell the 6th level Cleric had no business knowing. Now, me, as a PLAYER, knows what that item is (actually, as a DM I do, but I am not DM'ing that game, so my rulings are null and void.), but my 6th level Rogue would not have a clue, and would take that Cleric at face value. The DM made an implicit ruling, and it is his table, so I kept my mouth shut.
Later, when the PLAYER rhymed off a section of the spell to the DM, that signifies two things:
1. The DM acknowledges the PLAYER and his CHAR know the spell, and the DM is relying on the PLAYER to play by its rules, not some subset of them.
2. It means that I the PLAYER have no business getting involved at this point, because as far as I the PLAYER know the other PLAYER does know the entire spell because he JUST READ A CHUNK OF IT TO THE DM.
So when the PLAYER then neglects to tell the DM of a key portion of that spell at a later time (about 30 minutes later in real time), I am damn well going to say something. Especially after all the other stuff that has happened earlier in the session. That player just broke a key compact of the game. You talk about a collaborative set up. When another player withholds information from the DM, that is either cheating or bad gameplay. It is anything but collaborative.
It feels like you got or are getting worked up over this. Honestly, not worth it. I respectfully suggest not getting emotionally invested to this point.
Also, remember, I am the PLAYER that walked his CHAR into a potentially lethal kill zone (cold damage from that Wall of Ice) because my CHAR would not have that information, while the PLAYER knew full well what was about to happen. That is called Role Playing, which so many talk about here.
This is largely irrelevant. Your roleplaying has no bearing on whether or when you should correct mistakes that get made. It doesn't bestow authority.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Howdy-
I DM/ GM/ Keeper of Lore ect ect alot of games. But when I join a game as a player, I keep saying to myself I can do better or I get bored easily. Hence I mainly just DM nowadays vs playing in any games as a player. Does anybody else here feel the same way? Love DM'ing but can not get into being a player?
It sounds like you're either struggling to find good GMs to play with, or you're struggling to cultivate an attitude of gratitude.
Sure, some people are naturally inclined to be world builders, rather than world explorers, but more often than not, one enriches the other. Knowing how to tell a good story can also allow you to be a better, more engaged player. If you're getting bored while playing, then maybe you're just a boring player?
There is no "best" way to GM, though there are definitely "wrong" ways to lead a group. Each person who takes up the mantle is going to have a unique perspective and approach, and that represents an opportunity to learn about people and what matters to them. Rather than thinking about how you could do something better, try thinking about how you can help to enhance their story through your character's interactions within the world. Be collaborative, rather than competitive.
Tough, yes. I've been DMing for many years, but I'm fairly new to 5th edition, so I'm not all that good at it yet. I do sit there and think "I used to be better than that" but in the end, I have yet to be in a game where I couldn't find a way to have fun. All I do is offer the DM my assistance in a private message and if they ask me too, I'll tell them from time to time what a given rule might say.
<Insert clever signature here>
Everybody has their own strengths and weaknesses, as a DM and as a player. Everybody also has their own ideas about what they like and how things should ideally be done. Maybe cultivate the idea that when you think you can do better, what you really mean is you can do better for you. Other people may have other standards, and maybe the way you'd do something would not be as good for them. And when somebody is struggling with something that comes easy to you, try to focus on the things that they are good at instead - things you maybe don't even notice or appreciate as much as you should.
If none of that works for you, remember your own early days as a DM. Nobody starts out an expert. Everybody has a learning curve. And the ones learning fastest are usually the ones who get a little help from their friends.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I play and DM and love both equally. I am not a massively experienced player in either roll but..
as a player I use the same mentality as a DM,
1 -What can I bring to the game to make it better for everyone,
2-How can i try to include all players.
3-How can I play my part in creating a deeper story world and role play for all.
Extra as a player I will try extra hard to listen to everything not just what my character is involved with and try to engage with the story. I think about the things that I like from my players as a DM and give that back to my DM.
But if you don't enjoy playing as a plyer that's fine just stick to DM role.
I was a player a bit in my teens in the 80's, but have been a forever DM by choice since.
Hatching campaign premisses and plot archs (that usually gets diverted by the players), creating challenging encounters, making and playing engaging NPCs, tightrope walk improvisation and on-the-feet unplaned change of events, orchestrating a good climate at the table and setting up as good as possible overall conditions for fun for all - that's what I enjoy about ttrpg. I'm simply not interested in playing a single character through a campaign, even though being a good player has it own set of skills to develop for the common fun.
So if DM:ing is what you enjoy, just go for it.
It can be hard to get out of that DM mindset. There may be times when you have to bite your tongue -- hard -- because you strongly disagree with a ruling.
For me though, I'd so much rather play than GM, especially for D&D as a game (for reasons I won't go into here) compared to other RPGs, I'm so glad that someone else is DMing that I just roll with whatever the differences are. It's not my game; I don't need to be concerned about if X Feat is going to unbalance things or player Y is doing things that are going to unbalance the game. That is not my job. I just RP my character in response to what is going on around me and try to enjoy every minute of rules, balance, etc. being N.M.P. -- Not My Problem.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I find being a player to be tough, although for a different reason. As a player, I generally do not mind how other GMs interpret the rules, or even how they run the game. What I have issue with being a player is that I feel so much more limted and powerless.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
I hate being a player
I hate being a player, I recently took part in a cyberpunk game, a setting I love, but just got bored. It wasn’t the DM (a very good friend) or also the players (also good friends) it was just that I found being a player dull. It showed me that I don’t like being a player and probably won’t be one again, my ttrpg time is precious and so I would rather us it doing what I love. I have been a player, spent years being a player and maybe in the future my feelings will change but right now i can’t see myself wasting my time or a gm’s being a player.
I like both.
As a player, I do try to indulge in a little creativity by petitioning the DM to work aspects of my character into the plot. But I also try not to hog the spotlight, and to remember that the other PCs also have interesting stories.
I have written poetry for the campaign I run and for the campaign I play in.
I like making puzzles and solving them.
Nope.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I usually stay super-quiet if there is a rules discussion. I don't want to "back seat DM."
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Maybe you will, maybe you won't. I don't have a problem with players helping out the DM myself, not as that DM nor as another player. I draw the line at players usurping the DM's mastery of how the game is played at their table, but reminders are fine.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It's not "none of your business" as a player, how rules are interpreted. It just isn't your place to make rulings. I think it is acceptable to call an interpretation into question ("Is that really how it's supposed to be played?" etc.). I think it is not acceptable to argue with the GM in the middle of the session. Those are 2 different things.
You seem to have an encyclopedic knowledge offhand and without looking at the books, of how many of the spells and feats work. So you are more likely to catch a mistake or mis-read of the rules than other people. I don't have that encyclopedic knowledge so something like the Tasha thing would completely blow by me and I would not have caught it either.
By my lights, D&D is a huge massive array of rules, many of them over-complicated and poorly written. As a DM, I constantly have to deal with those rules. As a player, it isn't my job to do so, and I gladly relinquish those duties.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'd say not speaking up about the Elemental stone and the Cleric during divvying it up and then "intervening" once in play is poor or spoil sport bordering on sabotage. I mean you do you, but anyone at the table would probably wonder why you repressed the information when dividing loot and presumption of utility (sort of a planning stage) and then "speaking" out during combat resolution. In some circles, that's called Blue Falcon. There's even a special badge you can be awarded for such conduct.
I now want to create a "That Guy" feat or background with a Blue Falcon feature.
Spoiler for The Suicide Squad
I mean I thought Pete Davidson's character had a great moment too, but I don't know if I'd use that character as a party member role model.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Going to disagree here. The cleric player claimed to know how the spell works, and if you're still in the stage of getting to know the group you probably shouldn't be second-guessing everyone. Wait for a track record of claims that couldn't be backed up first. ;-) The player using that (metagame) knowledge is a bit iffy, but not to the point that I'd make a problem of it as the DM (I tend to be loose with item and monster info, not so much with campaign info). It's a rather powerful item with a definite drawback, that concentration requirement should (again, if I were the DM) be in play.
edit: if anything I would have spoken up as soon as the cleric cast Fairy Fire, and hoped that if it was a mistake the DM would have allowed a mulligan
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I cast COUNTERDISAGREE. I run my tables pro-collaborative. Folks who say "BUT THAT'S META" I shut down with "Do you all want to have a good game, with the best ideas, or do we want to play a game of 'gotcha' with the rules?" When loot is being divided up, it's a part IC part OOC moment. If a character makes a declaration overstating their capacity on an item, it's perfectly aboveboard for a player to say as a player, "are you sure, I don't think that's how that works." The group is trying to accomplish a common goal, so if there's something that may complicate game integrity (as Denis seems to value), you speak up at the first instance (this is sort of team ethics 101, see something say something). Waiting till you've grown tired, exasperated or contemptuous of what the party has been doing whole session to then launch into a "well, actually, this player is doing it wrong" might as well be intentional sabotage / blue falconry.
I think whistleblowing is a good analogy here. Say someone has been aware of some sort of practice that goes against policy or rules at their work, and lets it go. Things continue till they become precarious (in our context we're talking arguably game integrity), and the whistle gets blown. The driving question in a lot of follow up inquiries starts with the whistle blower, basically an iteration of "what did you know, and when did you know it?" If I was at some sort of D&D Inspector Generals Office (maybe for the RAW Bar Association) my findings would be prefaced by the fact that the predicament the whistle blower created in their rules intervention would never had happened had the complainant reported the problem in a more timely manner. So yeah, knowledge here is a card played when personal impatience was triggered. They're not "wrong" but the credibility of the report gets problematic and may expose the complainant to their own integrity audit.
As is, a DM could say, well, this doesn't sound like something that you just remembers, but something you've been sitting on. I was content with the loot allotment and don't play "gotcha" so I'm fine with waiving the class / rules restrictions to this item/practice. In the future if you find something problematic at table, speak up at the opportune time. Here's a Blue Falcon token, which at my table works a meditation ... instead of inspiration, you use this token on how to better play as a team player in the future. Cash it in when you're a good sport and you'll lose my suspicion condition currently cast on you."
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I know Dennis off-line, so I know he will not be offended by this. Hopefully no one else will be.
At its heart, this is a you problem.
You know the D&D 5e rules better than that DM. From our off-line conversations, I'm well aware that you know them a darn sight better than I do. You are at heart, frustrated that this DM who is, by your description, trying to follow the rules, doesn't know them as well as you do, and is not as good at applying them as you (think you) are.
Well, that is how gaming works. People have different facility, experience, knowledge, familiarity, etc., with the rules. The most familiar one is not always the DM. In my group, I am arguably the 3rd most knowledgeable, maybe 4th most, out of 5 or 6 people. Several times I've asked the guy who has years of AL experience, 'How does this work?' and let him explain the RAW interpretation. There are times when I may say, "Well, OK, that's not how it worked in AD&D, and I like the way AD&D did it better so we're house-ruling that." But most of the time I just go with whatever he says. After a year-plus of DMing I am closing the gap and probably equal or nearly so to most of them now, especially about "DMy" things (but definitely not about PC abilities). I wouldn't be shocked if there were times the others ground their teeth in frustration of me not really knowing how a rule works and my ruling conflicted with RAW (and I didn't realize it).
To some degree, that comes with the territory. Unless you are going to step up and be a Forever DM and never, ever play, you have to accept when you play that not everyone is going to know the rules as well as you, not all DMs will be the most rules-savvy person at the table, and if you can't accept it, you are going to be in for a long series of frustrating evenings.
I have suggested this to Dennis off-line, as we have spoken about this issue at length elsewhere, but I will post it here because I think it is helpful RE: the original topic. One really good way to turn off "DM brain" is to get into a group that is playing a different RPG when you are the player. That is, you DM 5e, but you play Call of Cthulhu, or Savage Worlds, or something. I know, I know, "But I want to play D&D." Yeah, but if you can't turn off DM-brain, and you are not having fun because you keep second-guessing the rules, maybe it's better to pick an RPG whose rules are less innately familiar to you, better yet one wildly foreign to you. Then you cant' have "GM brain" because you don't know how the game works as well as the GM does, and you'll have less of a struggle.
I have a lot of trouble playing Champions because I ran it so long and know it so well, that I have a super hard time turning off GM brain for Champions. So when I was GMing Champions, I had more fun playing Rolemaster with another guy GMing, than playing Champions. It was easy to turn of GM brain for Rolemaster, because I didn't know it that well.
I suggest some of you who have trouble turning off DM-brain, maybe try this... try a different game that you are less familiar with, and you may be able to get back to just RPing and enjoying yourselves instead of constantly back-seat DMing.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Cast away! I'll use my Ultimate Artifact of Nu-Uh! to make my save against COUNTERDISAGREE and bite my thumb at thee.
My point though is that it was impossible to know the cleric player was overstating their capacity. You're not going to say you don't think that's how it works if the other player didn't say how it works in the first place. You might ask if they're sure they know what they're talking about, but if they haven't given you cause to think they don't know what they're talking about I don't think you should be questioning their knowledge at the first opportunity.
Again, I'd have spoken up sooner than Dennis did - just not before I had any reason to assume they were wrong.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
It feels like you got or are getting worked up over this. Honestly, not worth it. I respectfully suggest not getting emotionally invested to this point.
This is largely irrelevant. Your roleplaying has no bearing on whether or when you should correct mistakes that get made. It doesn't bestow authority.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].