So I need to vent more than anything - this isn't so much a question, but I'll be curious to hear from other DM's if they've encountered similar issues. The issue being the title. I was running a PBP campaign with 6 strangers I never met IRL. Not so uncommon these days. It had been awhile since I'd DMed, but I used to a lot and it was always very satisfying in the past. In the past, however, I always played with friends. Or at least acquaintances. It of course crossed my mind that one or more of the people recruited would be a problem - I set up some pretty easy to understand rules. But what I didn't expect to happen, and didn't write a rule against, was to get MASSIVE criticism from a player all of a sudden after we were almost 40 pages deep into the thread of the campaign (about 2 weeks) because I dared move his character for him - once. He wasn't responding, and he had only ONE option - none of the other players minded when I moved their characters. In PBP things can stall for an entire day in the middle of combat sometimes if you steadfastly refuse to ever act on behalf of a player.
Now - I was shouldering the costs for everyone, I had all the source material needed, I had the Master tier subscription, all that - and I'd spent dozens of hours working on the campaign just to provide an enjoyable experience for 6 strangers. I was so put off by his little entitled rant that implied I don't know how to DM, saying that 'the other pcs know I'm RIGHT' etc, he wouldn't drop it. It was ONE move. I didn't like to do it, I rarely did, but several players would give me advanced permission if they were going out for awhile, especially if a fight was already in progress. He was one of the only ones who hadn't done that, or in some way stated something to imply that he wouldn't be bothered. 2 weeks in, almost 40 pages of posts, and I move him for the first time, and he just LOSES it. It was so stupid and infuriating, his arguments. All of the time I'd spent on it, and the money - those points I made didn't phase him at all - he acted like he was OWED that much. As if he was paying me to be his DM. He just kept coming back with "a GOOD DM would've taken more time to help me resolve my action" and "you didn't let me play my character the way I would've wanted". It was ONE action. He had ONE option in his deck of cards in the context of the fight, so I did it for him after there was a delay in his response - he'd been quick to reply the first round, but it was dragging on, and it was the last enemy, they were almost done with the fight, so I didn't want to stall everything on his decision. The other players were waiting on him too, it wasn't just for my benefit, whenever I moved a character it was in consideration to the group at large. For the 'greater good' dare I say lol. This point was also completely lost on him - it was his RIGHT to stall everyone for as long as he waned, to his mind.
I mean - I'd never had that problem as a DM before. I took it on assumption that the players might be rude to each other, but it didn't occur to me that they'd be entitled and rude to ME - the one going out of my way to provide them with a good time, free of cost. I was so put out, I couldn't get the feeling of being used and unappreciated out of my mind even after booting him, so I closed the campaign and walked away. It wasn't fun anymore. It was literally stressing me out far more than it was rewarding me.
I guess if there's a question in all this - it's how common is this? I don't know that I want to continue DMing for strangers if this is a commonplace thing. To get all kinds of hostility from a player over an extremely trivial thing. There aren't any real life groups near me, so I don't have a lot of options if I want to continue DMing again. It's either PBP or live stream. I haven't done the latter. Maybe there's less attitude from players when you do it that way? What has been your experience with this, other PBP DMs? And live streaming DMs? I'm asking specifically DMs who DM for strangers. It's obviously different when they're you're friends.
Hello - said "entitled" player here. Before I respond I'd like to say if I was in the "wrong" then I apologize. I apologize to the other players. Except for a for few instances, the game really seemed interesting and fun, if not predictable. Since this has been brought to the form of public opinion I thought I'd add my two cents.
In the DM's recruitment notice he had written,
Ground Rules
I’m not a rule monger but there are 3 basic, easy to follow rules that really shouldn’t be too hard to understand:
(1) No bullying, harassing, or otherwise humiliating other players, or myself. I’ll give everyone one warning if they’ve crossed the line into something I consider to be too far – after that there’s no excuses, you knew where the lines were, so you’ll just get the boot.
A good house rule and one everyone should be able to adhere to. We start the campaign at 2nd level and very quickly rise to 3rd level. "Entitled" player is playing a wizard and would like to multiclass into rogue for his new level, no rules or request not to multiclass had been discussed or set. The quest is a scouting quest, PC thinks it would good to have another sneaky character in the party, we have a rogue in the group. DM bully's and humiliates PC into not taking the multiclass and just leveling to 3rd level wizard. Ok, PC says, not how I wanted to play the character but to move the game along fine.
In regards to said "entitled" player "dragging the game on" and "not responding", no requirements had been set on how often a PC had to post in game. The handful of other PBP games I'm in asks that you post at least once every 24 hrs. I assumed that would have been the case here and that's my fault for not checking up front. However, I did make the attempt, as reflected in the game thread, to stay up on the game, post more than once per day as needed to move the game along. This day, the fight was taking place midday on a work day, according to the thread log, I had posted four times within a two hour period and didn't consider that I was dragging the game on or holding it up in any way.
Above the DM states that he "moved" the character, just to clarify, he didn't move the position of the character. He decided what action the character would take for the PC.
This is why I was upset. There was no discussion about why I couldn't take the action, no dialogue about not being able to see the foe or anything. Just a "no you can't do that so your PC is doing this instead".
I would have liked to have played through the resolution of my characters action and would like to have had some input into how my character was to be played. I did explain that I thought I had other options, a cantrip that would have accomplished the same effect and really wanted to manage my spell slots for the fight with the spell casting shaman and whatever else may jump out at us, or, since the party wasn't in melee range, just held my action.
I'd like to apologize to the rest of the party. It wasn't my intention to disrupt the game to the point that the DM would just pull the plug on the whole campaign. I'd never dreamed that he'd do that. Maybe kick me from the game, as he threatened to do or, at the least, allow my character to leave the many magic items he'd given the 3rd level party with the group and wander off into the marsh to be eaten by lizardmen. With the 8th level and 5th level decked out NPC's still with the group they would have been fine to finish the game.
Interesting situation. It is also interesting to hear both sides.
In my opinion, this seems like a combination of misunderstanding and miscommunication combined with a bit of over-reaction on the part of the player.
1) Play by Post is SLOW. It involves the responses of multiple players posting their actions in response to varying situations. However, Play by Post encounters the very real constraints of real life. Sometimes a person may be able to respond several times in a period of a few hours. Other times, they may have other commitments - work, studies, etc - that WILL prevent a prompt reply. Typically, it could be 24 hours before they respond (occasionally more if something important comes up).
The DM should not expect it to move quickly or maintain a specific pace unless they have intentionally recruited players that feel that they can make that commitment (which in many cases, is likely not possible - many players can't keep checking a game forum thread for updates during the work day if they are supposed to be working - it both takes time and is a distraction from what they are supposed to be doing).
2) There were no ground rules set about what the DM could or could not do on behalf of characters to move the game along. Ideally, the DM does nothing and avoids making decisions for the characters. On the other hand, with expectations being set up better then arguments/interactions like this can be avoided. In addition, there was no time limit set for when such actions would be appropriate. As the player mentioned above, many games only require a post every 24 hours as a minimum. This does mean that some scenes may drag but when you are playing with a bunch of folks with real life commitments they have to deal with, then a DM needs to expect that the pace of play will be very uneven.
In addition, guidance like the following would be useful to set expectations: "If in a combat, if a player can't respond within 4 hours then the DM will have the character make an attack that uses no resources or dodge."
The problem with the action chosen by the DM in this case is that it may not have been the only choice available and it used resources. It used a level 1 spell slot which isn't that big a deal but without knowing the situation or character - it could well be that the player would want to conserve spell slots and not use one to finish off an opponent that was nearly dead already since they might need it later. If a cantrip like firebolt (or another cantrip) was an option, it would have been a much better choice for the DM to make since it used no resources. The DM could have also had the character dodge which uses no resources and makes them more difficult to hit. Even when playing in person, some DMs set a table rule that if the player can't decide what they want to do then the character will dodge if the player takes too long (though this is usually quite a long time).
3) The player telling the DM that "a good DM would wait for the player to tell them what their character would do" is both insulting and a massive over-reaction. Does making a decision for a character in a PBP game make the DM BAD? Absolutely not. Was it a minor infringement of player decision making - yes - one spell used in one encounter. This should never have devolved into the player criticizing the DM to such an extent that the DM decides the game just isn't worth running for these folks. The DM puts in far more effort in a PBP than the players do. They respond to every post and consider every player's decisions. The DM is investing their time developing a plot line, adjudicating the interactions, describing the scene, running NPCs. All the players do is a bit of reading and decide how their character wants to respond.
Yes, it is ok for the player to object to the DM deciding what the character would do but the conversation could have gone like ...
Player: "Hi! I'm sorry to mention this but I'd prefer my character to make their own decisions, especially when character resources are involved."
DM: "Oh ok. I just wanted the combat to be over so that everyone could move on to the next scene. Sorry about that. Maybe you can send me some default actions your character would take if the party is in a combat and you can't get back to me within 4 hours or so?"
Player: "Sure ... just shoot a firebolt or other cantrip if it makes sense and if that doesn't work then maybe dodge. I'll try to get back to the posts when I can but work can get busy sometimes".
DM: "No problem. I know what real life is like and PBP D&D isn't really a priority in comparison."
---------------
In this case, it seems to me that the conversation was nothing like the above. It is likely that the anonymity of the internet and the corresponding reduction in politeness may have been a contributing factor ... but if the player and DM both keep in mind that they are all acting in good faith, that no one was trying to upset the other, that it isn't a personal insult, that they had neglected to set ground rules for this sort of situation ... then some polite discussion might have been able to resolve the situation with a lot less angst. It can often be a good idea to re-read a post before hitting send if you are feeling a bit upset about something as you are writing it. Text has none of the non-verbal cues that in person interactions have.
---------------
In my opinion, the DM is a good DM, they cared about the game and players, they were a bit impatient and decided what the character should do when the player didn't respond quickly. The DM also didn't set any ground rules or ask the players for default actions that their characters would take if the player couldn't reply reasonably quickly. It can be frustrating to the DM and other players when a combat stretches over several days as players take up to 24 hours to reply (or whatever minimum response time was set for the game) but that is the nature of PBP. However ... the player involved should not have started lecturing the DM about what "a good DM would do" or complaining that they should not make any decisions for their character when the ground rules hadn't even been discussed. This is just ONE spell, in ONE situation, in ONE combat in a trivial game of D&D that really doesn't have any great meaning or significance - we play for fun. Reacting so negatively to such a minor provocation just makes the game not fun for everyone and results in the game ending - especially since the situation could have likely been resolved amicably with a bit of friendly discussion and clearer communication.
Hello - said "entitled" player here. Before I respond I'd like to say if I was in the "wrong" then I apologize. I apologize to the other players. Except for a for few instances, the game really seemed interesting and fun, if not predictable. Since this has been brought to the form of public opinion I thought I'd add my two cents.
In the DM's recruitment notice he had written,
Ground Rules
I’m not a rule monger but there are 3 basic, easy to follow rules that really shouldn’t be too hard to understand:
(1) No bullying, harassing, or otherwise humiliating other players, or myself. I’ll give everyone one warning if they’ve crossed the line into something I consider to be too far – after that there’s no excuses, you knew where the lines were, so you’ll just get the boot.
A good house rule and one everyone should be able to adhere to. We start the campaign at 2nd level and very quickly rise to 3rd level. "Entitled" player is playing a wizard and would like to multiclass into rogue for his new level, no rules or request not to multiclass had been discussed or set. The quest is a scouting quest, PC thinks it would good to have another sneaky character in the party, we have a rogue in the group. DM bully's and humiliates PC into not taking the multiclass and just leveling to 3rd level wizard. Ok, PC says, not how I wanted to play the character but to move the game along fine.
In regards to said "entitled" player "dragging the game on" and "not responding", no requirements had been set on how often a PC had to post in game. The handful of other PBP games I'm in asks that you post at least once every 24 hrs. I assumed that would have been the case here and that's my fault for not checking up front. However, I did make the attempt, as reflected in the game thread, to stay up on the game, post more than once per day as needed to move the game along. This day, the fight was taking place midday on a work day, according to the thread log, I had posted four times within a two hour period and didn't consider that I was dragging the game on or holding it up in any way.
Above the DM states that he "moved" the character, just to clarify, he didn't move the position of the character. He decided what action the character would take for the PC.
This is why I was upset. There was no discussion about why I couldn't take the action, no dialogue about not being able to see the foe or anything. Just a "no you can't do that so your PC is doing this instead".
I would have liked to have played through the resolution of my characters action and would like to have had some input into how my character was to be played. I did explain that I thought I had other options, a cantrip that would have accomplished the same effect and really wanted to manage my spell slots for the fight with the spell casting shaman and whatever else may jump out at us, or, since the party wasn't in melee range, just held my action.
I'd like to apologize to the rest of the party. It wasn't my intention to disrupt the game to the point that the DM would just pull the plug on the whole campaign. I'd never dreamed that he'd do that. Maybe kick me from the game, as he threatened to do or, at the least, allow my character to leave the many magic items he'd given the 3rd level party with the group and wander off into the marsh to be eaten by lizardmen. With the 8th level and 5th level decked out NPC's still with the group they would have been fine to finish the game.
Really? I mean. REALLY? There was an extremely long discussion about why all those things were true. You just couldn't be bothered to read it. I described at length why I was not going to allow anyone beyond the 4th position to perform an attack roll. Then you come on and post that you fire your crossbow - only after we all were waiting for you. And now you're what, stalking me? I didn't post your name. What is your problem? When I say I moved you, it is implied that I took your action. I think that's clear. There was a LONG discussion of why your actions were limited to just the one thing. But you just couldn't let it go. Finally, after I politely and repeatedly explained why your arguments as to why a fire bolt would still work etc, you resorted to being mad just because I took your action. I think you were just embarrassed because you didn't understand the concept of having to make an attack roll meaning you have to be able to SEE the target and have a clear shot. Your first arguments were all basically 'well since it doesn't say anything about a target in sight' then that must mean I should be able to cast a fire bolt at a creature I can't even see.' Only AFTER I politely repeated why that doesn't make sense, and again repeated the reasoning for why your options were limited to magic missile or nothing, THEN you decided to make your anger about my audacity for having moved/acted for you. Then you resorted to ad hominem statements, saying I was clearly an inexperienced DM, and that I should have spent more time helping you to resolve your action. I took a crap ton of time helping you to understand why you had no options. What else would you call that entire discussion up until the point that you said you were 'pissed' because I wouldn't let you play your character the way you wanted. The one time. In a context where your only options were to pass or magic missile. I had been letting you do whatever you wanted for TWO WEEKS prior to that - but all that counted for didly squat becuase I took your ONE action, where you had no choices.
This is EXACTLY the entitled behavior I am referring to. Thank you for demonstrating it so clearly.
BTW: I'm new to the site, sure. That doesn't mean I'm an inexperienced DM. ALSO BTW - the other players did NOT agree with you. We're continuing the campaign, elsewhere. ALL FOUR of the other players agreed that you were acting out of line.
Thanks for you're very constructive feedback regarding the campaign I spent hours and hours and hours on. And I am so very sorry that you were not satisfied with my 100% free adventure. Now, if you'll please stop staking me, I'd appreciate it.
What would you call all of my attempts to explain things if not 'helping you resolve your action'? If you'd been correct, I would've reversed the turn and let you go. You can do that in PBP. We were splicing in corrections all the time. No one had a problem with it. Just like no one else had a problem with me taking their action if they were going to be away. Just like no one else in the party agreed with you.
EDIT: Look at the time stamps. Look how much time he had to read what I should have decided right off the bat. That was my bad - that I let him use his crossbow (as a wizard) for some reason in the first round was a mistake. It occurred to me on the second round that you would not have a shot. And I made it VERY clear.
2nd EDIT: AND btw - I NEVER SAID YOU COULDN'T MULTICLASS. I recommended against it. So did other players. There were 2 rogues in the party already. By taking a level of rogue for level 3 you were delaying your subclass, and delaying a feat, and missing out on level 2 spells. I did so politely. That's not the same thing as DISALLOWING IT. If you insisted on it, I of course would have let you. That you took my advice as commands is on you. I couldn't have been more clear that it was advice. You want me to drag up screen shots of that convo? I'd be happy to.
I don't believe it will be a good idea to air dirty laundry on the forums.
Yes I agree. I didn't do so. I didn't name him. I NEVER WOULD HAVE NAMED HIM. HE is the one that came on here to insist on duking it out this way. I felt I had to respond in kind so that the world could decide for themselves who was acting more unreasonable.
Frankly, I'm offended that he posted our private discussion into this thread - meant for DMs only. But how could I not respond with evidence that countered his remarks? This whole thing is just ridiculous and I wash my hands of it.
Maybe don't vent on forums and say stuff like this because people will want to defend themselves. I'm not saying either side is right, but this isn't the best place to "air dirty laundry" as Erik_Soong put it. Also just cause the thread says DM's only doesn't mean that non-DMs are banned from posting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In the words of the great philosopher, Unicorse, "Aaaannnnd why should I care??"
Best quote from a book ever: "If you love with your eyes, death is forever. If you love with your heart, there is no such thing as parting."- Jonah Cook, Ascendant, Songs of Chaos by Michael R. Miller. Highly recommend
Here's a general tip just for everyone: If your hobby, that you are doing for fun, is making you so angry you feel like you need to vent to random strangers on the internet. Maybe you should stop.
I think the upsetness cones from a love and respect for the game. But that’s just my opinion at a glance. I’m not really involved with this issue and don’t really want to be.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I need to vent more than anything - this isn't so much a question, but I'll be curious to hear from other DM's if they've encountered similar issues. The issue being the title. I was running a PBP campaign with 6 strangers I never met IRL. Not so uncommon these days. It had been awhile since I'd DMed, but I used to a lot and it was always very satisfying in the past. In the past, however, I always played with friends. Or at least acquaintances. It of course crossed my mind that one or more of the people recruited would be a problem - I set up some pretty easy to understand rules. But what I didn't expect to happen, and didn't write a rule against, was to get MASSIVE criticism from a player all of a sudden after we were almost 40 pages deep into the thread of the campaign (about 2 weeks) because I dared move his character for him - once. He wasn't responding, and he had only ONE option - none of the other players minded when I moved their characters. In PBP things can stall for an entire day in the middle of combat sometimes if you steadfastly refuse to ever act on behalf of a player.
Now - I was shouldering the costs for everyone, I had all the source material needed, I had the Master tier subscription, all that - and I'd spent dozens of hours working on the campaign just to provide an enjoyable experience for 6 strangers. I was so put off by his little entitled rant that implied I don't know how to DM, saying that 'the other pcs know I'm RIGHT' etc, he wouldn't drop it. It was ONE move. I didn't like to do it, I rarely did, but several players would give me advanced permission if they were going out for awhile, especially if a fight was already in progress. He was one of the only ones who hadn't done that, or in some way stated something to imply that he wouldn't be bothered. 2 weeks in, almost 40 pages of posts, and I move him for the first time, and he just LOSES it. It was so stupid and infuriating, his arguments. All of the time I'd spent on it, and the money - those points I made didn't phase him at all - he acted like he was OWED that much. As if he was paying me to be his DM. He just kept coming back with "a GOOD DM would've taken more time to help me resolve my action" and "you didn't let me play my character the way I would've wanted". It was ONE action. He had ONE option in his deck of cards in the context of the fight, so I did it for him after there was a delay in his response - he'd been quick to reply the first round, but it was dragging on, and it was the last enemy, they were almost done with the fight, so I didn't want to stall everything on his decision. The other players were waiting on him too, it wasn't just for my benefit, whenever I moved a character it was in consideration to the group at large. For the 'greater good' dare I say lol. This point was also completely lost on him - it was his RIGHT to stall everyone for as long as he waned, to his mind.
I mean - I'd never had that problem as a DM before. I took it on assumption that the players might be rude to each other, but it didn't occur to me that they'd be entitled and rude to ME - the one going out of my way to provide them with a good time, free of cost. I was so put out, I couldn't get the feeling of being used and unappreciated out of my mind even after booting him, so I closed the campaign and walked away. It wasn't fun anymore. It was literally stressing me out far more than it was rewarding me.
I guess if there's a question in all this - it's how common is this? I don't know that I want to continue DMing for strangers if this is a commonplace thing. To get all kinds of hostility from a player over an extremely trivial thing. There aren't any real life groups near me, so I don't have a lot of options if I want to continue DMing again. It's either PBP or live stream. I haven't done the latter. Maybe there's less attitude from players when you do it that way? What has been your experience with this, other PBP DMs? And live streaming DMs? I'm asking specifically DMs who DM for strangers. It's obviously different when they're you're friends.
Hello - said "entitled" player here. Before I respond I'd like to say if I was in the "wrong" then I apologize. I apologize to the other players. Except for a for few instances, the game really seemed interesting and fun, if not predictable. Since this has been brought to the form of public opinion I thought I'd add my two cents.
In the DM's recruitment notice he had written,
Ground Rules
I’m not a rule monger but there are 3 basic, easy to follow rules that really shouldn’t be too hard to understand:
(1) No bullying, harassing, or otherwise humiliating other players, or myself. I’ll give everyone one warning if they’ve crossed the line into something I consider to be too far – after that there’s no excuses, you knew where the lines were, so you’ll just get the boot.
A good house rule and one everyone should be able to adhere to. We start the campaign at 2nd level and very quickly rise to 3rd level. "Entitled" player is playing a wizard and would like to multiclass into rogue for his new level, no rules or request not to multiclass had been discussed or set. The quest is a scouting quest, PC thinks it would good to have another sneaky character in the party, we have a rogue in the group. DM bully's and humiliates PC into not taking the multiclass and just leveling to 3rd level wizard. Ok, PC says, not how I wanted to play the character but to move the game along fine.
In regards to said "entitled" player "dragging the game on" and "not responding", no requirements had been set on how often a PC had to post in game. The handful of other PBP games I'm in asks that you post at least once every 24 hrs. I assumed that would have been the case here and that's my fault for not checking up front. However, I did make the attempt, as reflected in the game thread, to stay up on the game, post more than once per day as needed to move the game along. This day, the fight was taking place midday on a work day, according to the thread log, I had posted four times within a two hour period and didn't consider that I was dragging the game on or holding it up in any way.
Above the DM states that he "moved" the character, just to clarify, he didn't move the position of the character. He decided what action the character would take for the PC.
This is why I was upset. There was no discussion about why I couldn't take the action, no dialogue about not being able to see the foe or anything. Just a "no you can't do that so your PC is doing this instead".
I would have liked to have played through the resolution of my characters action and would like to have had some input into how my character was to be played. I did explain that I thought I had other options, a cantrip that would have accomplished the same effect and really wanted to manage my spell slots for the fight with the spell casting shaman and whatever else may jump out at us, or, since the party wasn't in melee range, just held my action.
I'd like to apologize to the rest of the party. It wasn't my intention to disrupt the game to the point that the DM would just pull the plug on the whole campaign. I'd never dreamed that he'd do that. Maybe kick me from the game, as he threatened to do or, at the least, allow my character to leave the many magic items he'd given the 3rd level party with the group and wander off into the marsh to be eaten by lizardmen. With the 8th level and 5th level decked out NPC's still with the group they would have been fine to finish the game.
Interesting situation. It is also interesting to hear both sides.
In my opinion, this seems like a combination of misunderstanding and miscommunication combined with a bit of over-reaction on the part of the player.
1) Play by Post is SLOW. It involves the responses of multiple players posting their actions in response to varying situations. However, Play by Post encounters the very real constraints of real life. Sometimes a person may be able to respond several times in a period of a few hours. Other times, they may have other commitments - work, studies, etc - that WILL prevent a prompt reply. Typically, it could be 24 hours before they respond (occasionally more if something important comes up).
The DM should not expect it to move quickly or maintain a specific pace unless they have intentionally recruited players that feel that they can make that commitment (which in many cases, is likely not possible - many players can't keep checking a game forum thread for updates during the work day if they are supposed to be working - it both takes time and is a distraction from what they are supposed to be doing).
2) There were no ground rules set about what the DM could or could not do on behalf of characters to move the game along. Ideally, the DM does nothing and avoids making decisions for the characters. On the other hand, with expectations being set up better then arguments/interactions like this can be avoided. In addition, there was no time limit set for when such actions would be appropriate. As the player mentioned above, many games only require a post every 24 hours as a minimum. This does mean that some scenes may drag but when you are playing with a bunch of folks with real life commitments they have to deal with, then a DM needs to expect that the pace of play will be very uneven.
In addition, guidance like the following would be useful to set expectations: "If in a combat, if a player can't respond within 4 hours then the DM will have the character make an attack that uses no resources or dodge."
The problem with the action chosen by the DM in this case is that it may not have been the only choice available and it used resources. It used a level 1 spell slot which isn't that big a deal but without knowing the situation or character - it could well be that the player would want to conserve spell slots and not use one to finish off an opponent that was nearly dead already since they might need it later. If a cantrip like firebolt (or another cantrip) was an option, it would have been a much better choice for the DM to make since it used no resources. The DM could have also had the character dodge which uses no resources and makes them more difficult to hit. Even when playing in person, some DMs set a table rule that if the player can't decide what they want to do then the character will dodge if the player takes too long (though this is usually quite a long time).
3) The player telling the DM that "a good DM would wait for the player to tell them what their character would do" is both insulting and a massive over-reaction. Does making a decision for a character in a PBP game make the DM BAD? Absolutely not. Was it a minor infringement of player decision making - yes - one spell used in one encounter. This should never have devolved into the player criticizing the DM to such an extent that the DM decides the game just isn't worth running for these folks. The DM puts in far more effort in a PBP than the players do. They respond to every post and consider every player's decisions. The DM is investing their time developing a plot line, adjudicating the interactions, describing the scene, running NPCs. All the players do is a bit of reading and decide how their character wants to respond.
Yes, it is ok for the player to object to the DM deciding what the character would do but the conversation could have gone like ...
Player: "Hi! I'm sorry to mention this but I'd prefer my character to make their own decisions, especially when character resources are involved."
DM: "Oh ok. I just wanted the combat to be over so that everyone could move on to the next scene. Sorry about that. Maybe you can send me some default actions your character would take if the party is in a combat and you can't get back to me within 4 hours or so?"
Player: "Sure ... just shoot a firebolt or other cantrip if it makes sense and if that doesn't work then maybe dodge. I'll try to get back to the posts when I can but work can get busy sometimes".
DM: "No problem. I know what real life is like and PBP D&D isn't really a priority in comparison."
---------------
In this case, it seems to me that the conversation was nothing like the above. It is likely that the anonymity of the internet and the corresponding reduction in politeness may have been a contributing factor ... but if the player and DM both keep in mind that they are all acting in good faith, that no one was trying to upset the other, that it isn't a personal insult, that they had neglected to set ground rules for this sort of situation ... then some polite discussion might have been able to resolve the situation with a lot less angst. It can often be a good idea to re-read a post before hitting send if you are feeling a bit upset about something as you are writing it. Text has none of the non-verbal cues that in person interactions have.
---------------
In my opinion, the DM is a good DM, they cared about the game and players, they were a bit impatient and decided what the character should do when the player didn't respond quickly. The DM also didn't set any ground rules or ask the players for default actions that their characters would take if the player couldn't reply reasonably quickly. It can be frustrating to the DM and other players when a combat stretches over several days as players take up to 24 hours to reply (or whatever minimum response time was set for the game) but that is the nature of PBP. However ... the player involved should not have started lecturing the DM about what "a good DM would do" or complaining that they should not make any decisions for their character when the ground rules hadn't even been discussed. This is just ONE spell, in ONE situation, in ONE combat in a trivial game of D&D that really doesn't have any great meaning or significance - we play for fun. Reacting so negatively to such a minor provocation just makes the game not fun for everyone and results in the game ending - especially since the situation could have likely been resolved amicably with a bit of friendly discussion and clearer communication.
Really? I mean. REALLY? There was an extremely long discussion about why all those things were true. You just couldn't be bothered to read it. I described at length why I was not going to allow anyone beyond the 4th position to perform an attack roll. Then you come on and post that you fire your crossbow - only after we all were waiting for you. And now you're what, stalking me? I didn't post your name. What is your problem? When I say I moved you, it is implied that I took your action. I think that's clear. There was a LONG discussion of why your actions were limited to just the one thing. But you just couldn't let it go. Finally, after I politely and repeatedly explained why your arguments as to why a fire bolt would still work etc, you resorted to being mad just because I took your action. I think you were just embarrassed because you didn't understand the concept of having to make an attack roll meaning you have to be able to SEE the target and have a clear shot. Your first arguments were all basically 'well since it doesn't say anything about a target in sight' then that must mean I should be able to cast a fire bolt at a creature I can't even see.' Only AFTER I politely repeated why that doesn't make sense, and again repeated the reasoning for why your options were limited to magic missile or nothing, THEN you decided to make your anger about my audacity for having moved/acted for you. Then you resorted to ad hominem statements, saying I was clearly an inexperienced DM, and that I should have spent more time helping you to resolve your action. I took a crap ton of time helping you to understand why you had no options. What else would you call that entire discussion up until the point that you said you were 'pissed' because I wouldn't let you play your character the way you wanted. The one time. In a context where your only options were to pass or magic missile. I had been letting you do whatever you wanted for TWO WEEKS prior to that - but all that counted for didly squat becuase I took your ONE action, where you had no choices.
This is EXACTLY the entitled behavior I am referring to. Thank you for demonstrating it so clearly.
BTW: I'm new to the site, sure. That doesn't mean I'm an inexperienced DM. ALSO BTW - the other players did NOT agree with you. We're continuing the campaign, elsewhere. ALL FOUR of the other players agreed that you were acting out of line.
Thanks for you're very constructive feedback regarding the campaign I spent hours and hours and hours on. And I am so very sorry that you were not satisfied with my 100% free adventure. Now, if you'll please stop staking me, I'd appreciate it.
:o
I don't believe it will be a good idea to air dirty laundry on the forums.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
What would you call all of my attempts to explain things if not 'helping you resolve your action'? If you'd been correct, I would've reversed the turn and let you go. You can do that in PBP. We were splicing in corrections all the time. No one had a problem with it. Just like no one else had a problem with me taking their action if they were going to be away. Just like no one else in the party agreed with you.
EDIT: Look at the time stamps. Look how much time he had to read what I should have decided right off the bat. That was my bad - that I let him use his crossbow (as a wizard) for some reason in the first round was a mistake. It occurred to me on the second round that you would not have a shot. And I made it VERY clear.
2nd EDIT: AND btw - I NEVER SAID YOU COULDN'T MULTICLASS. I recommended against it. So did other players. There were 2 rogues in the party already. By taking a level of rogue for level 3 you were delaying your subclass, and delaying a feat, and missing out on level 2 spells. I did so politely. That's not the same thing as DISALLOWING IT. If you insisted on it, I of course would have let you. That you took my advice as commands is on you. I couldn't have been more clear that it was advice. You want me to drag up screen shots of that convo? I'd be happy to.
Yes I agree. I didn't do so. I didn't name him. I NEVER WOULD HAVE NAMED HIM. HE is the one that came on here to insist on duking it out this way. I felt I had to respond in kind so that the world could decide for themselves who was acting more unreasonable.
Frankly, I'm offended that he posted our private discussion into this thread - meant for DMs only. But how could I not respond with evidence that countered his remarks? This whole thing is just ridiculous and I wash my hands of it.
Maybe don't vent on forums and say stuff like this because people will want to defend themselves. I'm not saying either side is right, but this isn't the best place to "air dirty laundry" as Erik_Soong put it. Also just cause the thread says DM's only doesn't mean that non-DMs are banned from posting.
In the words of the great philosopher, Unicorse, "Aaaannnnd why should I care??"
Best quote from a book ever: "If you love with your eyes, death is forever. If you love with your heart, there is no such thing as parting."- Jonah Cook, Ascendant, Songs of Chaos by Michael R. Miller. Highly recommend
Here's a general tip just for everyone: If your hobby, that you are doing for fun, is making you so angry you feel like you need to vent to random strangers on the internet. Maybe you should stop.
I think the upsetness cones from a love and respect for the game. But that’s just my opinion at a glance. I’m not really involved with this issue and don’t really want to be.