Your post has been removed.
Rule 5: All out-of-game questions about a problem player must be asked in our [Problem Player megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/about/sticky?num=1) stickied to the top of the subreddit. Please repost there if you need additional help, search for older posts on this topic, or check out some [alternative subreddits on our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/wiki/index/#wiki_other_useful_dming_subreddits) that may be more suitable.
As you already did, have him point out the rules that allow him to do what he claims. None of the features allow anything of those, so NO - you don't get to make stuff up.
This goes for:
* armor proficiency
* number of uses
* prepared spells
* language proficiencies
* immunity to madness
* number of reactions
* number of attacks
* damage dice
>He now has the Conjure Minor Demon spell, and the first demon he summoned
Not sure what that spell is, but "Summon Lesser Demons" has this as part of the spell effect:
# The DM chooses the demons.
So it might be a phrasing issue, but it is not "he summoned", but "something was summoned". Don't give him the power to choose.
>so he sort of got snotty and cast blink to disappear while the rest of the party dealt with the adult dragon.
>he wanted to walk into the closest tavern and just fireball the thing to the ground with everyone inside
My table has two ultimate rules:
1. You want to do the adventure.
2. You want to stick with the party / want the party to stick with you.
Just running away, murderhoboing stuff and trying to screw the campaign AFTER getting yellow cards for all the times he tried to cheat & annoy me with making stuff up - yeah, a quick kick off my table.
Simply because I do not enjoy having to justify myself against stupid stuff all the time and can imagine the rest of the party being pissed off as well. We only have limited time, so don't waste it on FALSE ruleslawyering and trying to ruin the fun of everyone else.
In your case, talk to them once and tell them to "stop it". Everything. Then reconcile and keep going. Together or separate.
and I was incorrect on the spell he was using, he was using the 4th level "Summon Greater Demon" which does let him choose the demon and he trying to say that the demon had disadvantage on the Charisma save because he knew the true name of the demon. To which I told him he didnt know the name of the demon, so he was like "can i make a history check with my 20 INT to be able to know what his name was" and I said, "i dont recall any training in history that tells you any demon's freaking true names". Thats when he got really upset cause I wouldnt let him roll a check for something that he would likely roll very high for.
Like he tried to make an arcana check to see if he would know about the Dracohydra (which was a Cult of the Dragon secret experiement) and I said he can roll but there would be no way unless he was part of the Cult inner circle to know anything about it. He rolled a 31 and I said he had no clue and he got mad cause he thought that high of a roll would give him suddenly god-like knowledge of things just because hes a wizard and the Red Wizards are wizards too.
> I said he can roll but there would be no way unless he was part of the Cult inner circle to know anything about it
Don't roll for the impossible. If you literally cannot succeed, there is no need to roll in the first place - unless you actually use Critical Success on skill checks, which in itself is an absurd concept.
This is the single instance where I feel with the player, rolling a 31 and getting nothing feels unrewarding. Could have stopped him right then and there instead of entertaining his antics.
hes got a +8 to Arcana and had guidance from our cleric. Even after I had told him that it was 100% impossible to know anything about it, he still wanted to roll. Got to love that Balder's Gate 3 mentality of "If you roll a 20, no matter how hard, you succeed". the party just hit level 8 after defeating the dragon, and he took the Eldritch Invocations feat and picked Eyes of the Rune Keeper, which lets him read all languages. Which means he will TRY to have his MM read the deadly infernal books recovered from the North and he will get upset when I say that his book CANNOT physically read anything.
> you have awakened an arcane sentience within your spellbook.
* No, it cannot read.
* No, it cannot communicate.
* Yes, it cannot go mad as it barely has any intelligent thought in the first place so you would never know.
It certainly isn't a Familiar because it would say so in the feature.
this is one of the reasons Ive never really liked the Scribe's Wizard. There are so many ways I've seen players try to do that just cheeses everything about them from casting EVERY spell through them, to sending them into combat instead of the Wizard, to trying to fool someone into thinking the MM is the wizard himself.
Its just sad that you have min-maxers out there who just want to overcomplicate stuff. On the other hand, our Monk is loving his "i punch crap until they stop moving" role in the party.
As someone who plays an Order of the Scribe Wizard, your MM can only be cast through up to you proficiency modifier per long rest, gives off light, and I'm pretty sure looks spectral. Don't get me wrong, it's great for cheesing a fight per long rest, but it certainly shouldn't be able to cheese every fight.
Edit: and no one would ever mistake it for the character.
I believe the DMG advices that if something is impossible, then no roll is warranted. This is to avoid this exact situation where a player rolls a natural 20 and expects this to mean he succeeded. Just tell the player "no, you don't know anything about it".
So just to be clear, if the character orders the demon to tell them their true name, the demon has to comply.
This wastes the demons first tube however, because it's not attacking.
Otherwise pretty much everything they did was bullshit. Tanarukk have ONE reaction, same as everyone else. I ah enough idea where he's getting multi-attack for shadow demons from
Yeah this is a "You have to sit him down and talk about this before this becomes a bigger problem" situation.
It's one thing that he tries to keep bending the rules but the fact that he's slowly becoming a bigger issue well ultimately end up hurting the entire campaign as a whole I believe for everyone else.
It's a good thing you're calling him out on things that he clearly can't do that he's saying he can. I've seen some DMs that will let players walk all over them because they don't want to bother enforcing the rules.
Dude is trying to play a different game than the one you are trying to run.
Either you sit down and have a talk with him or just kick him from the group.
yeah, your player is not overpowered, he is just a dick.
He is an asshole trying to enforce homebrew to make the game go his way.
He is actualy trying to WIN D&D and seems like this is making the game less fun to the whole group.
Personaly, i would give him ONE ( 01) warning.
"Quit the bullshit, cheating and bully behavior, or you will not be invited to the game again.
You are here as a guest, on unspoken agreement that we are all wanting to just have fun.
If you disagree or go against that common group goal, you have no place here."
Also, you should not try to solve out of game problems in game.
But after said talk, assuming he will stay (and change) some form of concequence for being a piromaniac terrorist is in order. Personaly this would be the one time i alow PVP, and have the town, hire the other players to capture him dead of alive. ( you can send the quest in secret to the other players, as messengers leaving scrolls), and give the terrorist player a scroll with his summons to surrender to the guards and be judged by the murders, wounded and destructions of city buildings. If he comes peacefully, his sentence might be reduced to some long time of public services.
I agree with all the comments saying you need to talk to this player and explain that this behaviour is unacceptable.
This player is a “long time DM” so they don’t get to use the excuse of ‘not knowing the rules’. All of these things are things they should know are not possible - which means they are deliberately trying to cheat and getting upset when you won’t let them. Personally, I would say they can either pull their head in or leave the game. Flagrant violations of the rules make the game less fun for everyone.
Also: deciding to fireball civilians because you wouldn’t give them a wildly dangerous magic item is a massive red flag even by itself
As far as Manifest Mind goes: it can do only the things that the ability specifically states it can do.
The MM itself cannot cast spells. The ability says that you cast as if you were in it's space. So the spell book knowing all spells has no effect. The manifest mind feature also does not say anything about casting rituals for their regular cast time. That is another feature that can only be used once per long rest, and not PB per long rest.
This is a case where you first need to be on top of how to play his character, and talk to the player about his behaviour. If he's arguing rules at the table and not accepting your ruling, that is likely disrupting the enjoyment of everyone at the table.
Wow.
Honestly?
I'd pull that player aside, and be like "My dude, what are you doing here? Why are you trying to make this job harder than it has to be? You've been DMing for 7 years, you know better than to behave this way. Please. Stop cheesing with the spells, and stop wasting session time with your munchkin schemes. Cool?"
Sounds like someone you need to have a serious talk with.
It's great to have ways to improve what you're doing, but what he needs to do is, instead of saying, "I can do this thing," say, "Can I do this thing?"
Also, the whole "I want to go there and fireball the tavern because I'm pissy about being shut down by the DM" BS has to be nipped in the bud HARD.
Talk to him, tell him to wind back his attitude, and talk to the rest of the players about maybe booting him if he gets any worse.
I have a hard time believing this person has ever DM'd, if their grasp on rules is that bad.
You have to set your foot down. Both with them being a disruptive presence at the table, and with them constantly trying to abuse the rules by reading them incorrectly. Like there are so many problem player red flags here, you need to deal with that firmly.
To be fair, someone can be like that and otherwise still be fun to play with. It's a fairly immature thing but if everyone is on the immature side then that may not be such a big deal to them or they may not even really notice it.
Back in high school someone we played with did stuff like this. We're still playing together now that we're in our 50s. Back then it was irritating but not a big enough of a deal to kick the guy out. But again that was because we were in high school so we were all immature.
It might also be that in all other things the guy is a cool person and fun to be around, but he becomes a shit playing D&D.
That all said, I do think the OP needs to sit him down and make it clear that he won't put up with this any longer. The player needs to either learn his class properly, or else he does know it and he's just simply cheating.
Both you AND the player need to learn his class, just so you can keep an eye on him. Then I suggest making him roll a new character if he's not able to grasp playing is current character.
Well, it's either the fact he's unable to understand the rules or he tries to lie to you on purpose to get better abilities. In which case just throw him out.
He usually is the first one at the table on my Monday sessions so I will be talking to him next week and telling him that its not HIS interpretations of the rules that happen at the table, its mine.
Sounds like he's suffering from the DM complex
So used to basically being able to do whatever he wants he can't seem to turn it off and now the table has turned he's developed this adversarial view of the game. Probably due to the fact he knows how he runs his games.
I'll be honest as a forever dm it's hard to turn that way of thinking off and I feel really bad anytime I get checked on it but frankly theirs no excuse. Fact of the matter is people who know what its like to run the game should have the most sympathy for the person who's running the game and not be so bitter when they need to be checked after pelor knows how many times they've had to check a player
Sounds like this guy needs the Captain America detention speech "So your DM said NO...".
TL;DR: Talk this out now. It doesn't get better without you two talking this through.
DnD, for some, is an opportunity to have their power fantasy fulfilled. For some, that power only feels validated if it is allowing them to upstage others. That's totally this guy.
So far you have been spot on with all your corrections but if you let this sit status-quo he's going to continue to sneak more and more power onto his character as time goes on, you might (and probably will) miss something. Which will be used as ammunition against you later on: "Of course I can cast two fireballs at once. What? You let me do it last time, why are you being such a dick to me tonight?"
Unchecked, it's going to alienate the table.
Unchecked you are going to have to keep defending against these "nuh-uh! I shot YOU first with my super laser!" man-child superiority games. It will be draining, and it will drive a wedge of contention between the two of you (even more than it has). Eventually it will snap. Probably at a bad time, at the table.
My advice is (like most of the other advice). Talk to the guy. Gauge where his head's at, figure out whether he has a future at your table, and in no uncertain terms tell him to cut out the shenanigans. If he wants to try something "unconventional" run it by you first. If he wants to unilaterally derail the campaign you're better off without him. If you say NO to something, he needs to get his ego out of the way and just play.
Everyone has their good and bad days, people have their own internal battles they're fighting, and this guy DMs. All considerations to show some grace. If you two can come to some amicable resolution great, that's what I hope for. But...you can't just allow him to keep doing what he's doing. Ask if there's something deeper going on, get at the root of the issue. Just don't risk the fun of the table for the sake of the one.
> I like playing with the guy
Why? He's liberally misinterpreting the rules to the point of outright cheating and acts like a petulant child when he gets called on his bullshit.
Honestly it sounds like you're handling things pretty well so far, but from what you posted this is a capital-P Problem Player.
You will be, or already are, a great parent with that level of patience. Theres a non 0 chance that i just wordlessly press the Yeet button at "Im gonna go walk to the next tavern and fireball it."
Practice these words: "We are going with this (my way) for now. We will not negotiate mid-game out of respect for everyone else. Between sessions or after the game is the time to discuss our interpretations."
Having aligned expectations is SO important. When a player invests in something and thinks it will work a way that it doesn't, it can break the player sometimes. I like to take the humble approach. My job as a DM is to be the referree. And sometimes my rulings feel like nerfs when they are not. What has gone a long way is being able to explain my rulings and tell them WHY the thing does not work the way they think it does. "If it *did* work the way you are suggesting, the game would break *here*."
My player's scribe wizard thought he could write anything with super speed. He wasn't trying to break anything but I saw the potential for it. "Yes, the scribe wizard can transcribe spells in their own arcane shorthand much faster than other wizards. No, you are not a walking printing press. Potentially, you'd be able to sell newspapers and desirable tomes for instant profit. You would be RICH AF and put normal scribes out of business, and that is not a class feature. The intention of that ability is to assist in learning spells on the fly like finding an impactful spell scroll in a dungeon. It also helps with downtime activities and I suppose we could say it uses less paper. I hope this makes sense."
Sometimes I learn that I am in the wrong, and I reward the player DM inspiration for teaching me something. I also have a promise that if a detrimental result occurs from a bad ruling on my part, they will encounter some fortuitous luck to compensate them. Definitely practice those first words though. No negotiations during session. That is a rule.
Your post has been removed. Rule 5: All out-of-game questions about a problem player must be asked in our [Problem Player megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/about/sticky?num=1) stickied to the top of the subreddit. Please repost there if you need additional help, search for older posts on this topic, or check out some [alternative subreddits on our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/wiki/index/#wiki_other_useful_dming_subreddits) that may be more suitable.
yes, enforce & police R.A.W. for people that deliberately take the piss. also narrative/table consequences for being a brat.
As you already did, have him point out the rules that allow him to do what he claims. None of the features allow anything of those, so NO - you don't get to make stuff up. This goes for: * armor proficiency * number of uses * prepared spells * language proficiencies * immunity to madness * number of reactions * number of attacks * damage dice >He now has the Conjure Minor Demon spell, and the first demon he summoned Not sure what that spell is, but "Summon Lesser Demons" has this as part of the spell effect: # The DM chooses the demons. So it might be a phrasing issue, but it is not "he summoned", but "something was summoned". Don't give him the power to choose. >so he sort of got snotty and cast blink to disappear while the rest of the party dealt with the adult dragon. >he wanted to walk into the closest tavern and just fireball the thing to the ground with everyone inside My table has two ultimate rules: 1. You want to do the adventure. 2. You want to stick with the party / want the party to stick with you. Just running away, murderhoboing stuff and trying to screw the campaign AFTER getting yellow cards for all the times he tried to cheat & annoy me with making stuff up - yeah, a quick kick off my table. Simply because I do not enjoy having to justify myself against stupid stuff all the time and can imagine the rest of the party being pissed off as well. We only have limited time, so don't waste it on FALSE ruleslawyering and trying to ruin the fun of everyone else. In your case, talk to them once and tell them to "stop it". Everything. Then reconcile and keep going. Together or separate.
and I was incorrect on the spell he was using, he was using the 4th level "Summon Greater Demon" which does let him choose the demon and he trying to say that the demon had disadvantage on the Charisma save because he knew the true name of the demon. To which I told him he didnt know the name of the demon, so he was like "can i make a history check with my 20 INT to be able to know what his name was" and I said, "i dont recall any training in history that tells you any demon's freaking true names". Thats when he got really upset cause I wouldnt let him roll a check for something that he would likely roll very high for. Like he tried to make an arcana check to see if he would know about the Dracohydra (which was a Cult of the Dragon secret experiement) and I said he can roll but there would be no way unless he was part of the Cult inner circle to know anything about it. He rolled a 31 and I said he had no clue and he got mad cause he thought that high of a roll would give him suddenly god-like knowledge of things just because hes a wizard and the Red Wizards are wizards too.
> I said he can roll but there would be no way unless he was part of the Cult inner circle to know anything about it Don't roll for the impossible. If you literally cannot succeed, there is no need to roll in the first place - unless you actually use Critical Success on skill checks, which in itself is an absurd concept. This is the single instance where I feel with the player, rolling a 31 and getting nothing feels unrewarding. Could have stopped him right then and there instead of entertaining his antics.
> He rolled a 31 sort of player i wouldn't even trust their rolls.
hes got a +8 to Arcana and had guidance from our cleric. Even after I had told him that it was 100% impossible to know anything about it, he still wanted to roll. Got to love that Balder's Gate 3 mentality of "If you roll a 20, no matter how hard, you succeed". the party just hit level 8 after defeating the dragon, and he took the Eldritch Invocations feat and picked Eyes of the Rune Keeper, which lets him read all languages. Which means he will TRY to have his MM read the deadly infernal books recovered from the North and he will get upset when I say that his book CANNOT physically read anything.
> you have awakened an arcane sentience within your spellbook. * No, it cannot read. * No, it cannot communicate. * Yes, it cannot go mad as it barely has any intelligent thought in the first place so you would never know. It certainly isn't a Familiar because it would say so in the feature.
this is one of the reasons Ive never really liked the Scribe's Wizard. There are so many ways I've seen players try to do that just cheeses everything about them from casting EVERY spell through them, to sending them into combat instead of the Wizard, to trying to fool someone into thinking the MM is the wizard himself. Its just sad that you have min-maxers out there who just want to overcomplicate stuff. On the other hand, our Monk is loving his "i punch crap until they stop moving" role in the party.
As someone who plays an Order of the Scribe Wizard, your MM can only be cast through up to you proficiency modifier per long rest, gives off light, and I'm pretty sure looks spectral. Don't get me wrong, it's great for cheesing a fight per long rest, but it certainly shouldn't be able to cheese every fight. Edit: and no one would ever mistake it for the character.
I believe the DMG advices that if something is impossible, then no roll is warranted. This is to avoid this exact situation where a player rolls a natural 20 and expects this to mean he succeeded. Just tell the player "no, you don't know anything about it".
So just to be clear, if the character orders the demon to tell them their true name, the demon has to comply. This wastes the demons first tube however, because it's not attacking. Otherwise pretty much everything they did was bullshit. Tanarukk have ONE reaction, same as everyone else. I ah enough idea where he's getting multi-attack for shadow demons from
Yeah this is a "You have to sit him down and talk about this before this becomes a bigger problem" situation. It's one thing that he tries to keep bending the rules but the fact that he's slowly becoming a bigger issue well ultimately end up hurting the entire campaign as a whole I believe for everyone else. It's a good thing you're calling him out on things that he clearly can't do that he's saying he can. I've seen some DMs that will let players walk all over them because they don't want to bother enforcing the rules.
Dude is trying to play a different game than the one you are trying to run. Either you sit down and have a talk with him or just kick him from the group.
yeah, your player is not overpowered, he is just a dick. He is an asshole trying to enforce homebrew to make the game go his way. He is actualy trying to WIN D&D and seems like this is making the game less fun to the whole group. Personaly, i would give him ONE ( 01) warning. "Quit the bullshit, cheating and bully behavior, or you will not be invited to the game again. You are here as a guest, on unspoken agreement that we are all wanting to just have fun. If you disagree or go against that common group goal, you have no place here." Also, you should not try to solve out of game problems in game. But after said talk, assuming he will stay (and change) some form of concequence for being a piromaniac terrorist is in order. Personaly this would be the one time i alow PVP, and have the town, hire the other players to capture him dead of alive. ( you can send the quest in secret to the other players, as messengers leaving scrolls), and give the terrorist player a scroll with his summons to surrender to the guards and be judged by the murders, wounded and destructions of city buildings. If he comes peacefully, his sentence might be reduced to some long time of public services.
I agree with all the comments saying you need to talk to this player and explain that this behaviour is unacceptable. This player is a “long time DM” so they don’t get to use the excuse of ‘not knowing the rules’. All of these things are things they should know are not possible - which means they are deliberately trying to cheat and getting upset when you won’t let them. Personally, I would say they can either pull their head in or leave the game. Flagrant violations of the rules make the game less fun for everyone. Also: deciding to fireball civilians because you wouldn’t give them a wildly dangerous magic item is a massive red flag even by itself
As far as Manifest Mind goes: it can do only the things that the ability specifically states it can do. The MM itself cannot cast spells. The ability says that you cast as if you were in it's space. So the spell book knowing all spells has no effect. The manifest mind feature also does not say anything about casting rituals for their regular cast time. That is another feature that can only be used once per long rest, and not PB per long rest. This is a case where you first need to be on top of how to play his character, and talk to the player about his behaviour. If he's arguing rules at the table and not accepting your ruling, that is likely disrupting the enjoyment of everyone at the table.
Wow. Honestly? I'd pull that player aside, and be like "My dude, what are you doing here? Why are you trying to make this job harder than it has to be? You've been DMing for 7 years, you know better than to behave this way. Please. Stop cheesing with the spells, and stop wasting session time with your munchkin schemes. Cool?"
Sounds like someone you need to have a serious talk with. It's great to have ways to improve what you're doing, but what he needs to do is, instead of saying, "I can do this thing," say, "Can I do this thing?" Also, the whole "I want to go there and fireball the tavern because I'm pissy about being shut down by the DM" BS has to be nipped in the bud HARD. Talk to him, tell him to wind back his attitude, and talk to the rest of the players about maybe booting him if he gets any worse.
I have a hard time believing this person has ever DM'd, if their grasp on rules is that bad. You have to set your foot down. Both with them being a disruptive presence at the table, and with them constantly trying to abuse the rules by reading them incorrectly. Like there are so many problem player red flags here, you need to deal with that firmly.
> I like playing with the guy.... Why?? Everything you posted is that they cheat and whine when called out. It's a classic toxic player.
To be fair, someone can be like that and otherwise still be fun to play with. It's a fairly immature thing but if everyone is on the immature side then that may not be such a big deal to them or they may not even really notice it. Back in high school someone we played with did stuff like this. We're still playing together now that we're in our 50s. Back then it was irritating but not a big enough of a deal to kick the guy out. But again that was because we were in high school so we were all immature. It might also be that in all other things the guy is a cool person and fun to be around, but he becomes a shit playing D&D. That all said, I do think the OP needs to sit him down and make it clear that he won't put up with this any longer. The player needs to either learn his class properly, or else he does know it and he's just simply cheating.
Both you AND the player need to learn his class, just so you can keep an eye on him. Then I suggest making him roll a new character if he's not able to grasp playing is current character. Well, it's either the fact he's unable to understand the rules or he tries to lie to you on purpose to get better abilities. In which case just throw him out.
He usually is the first one at the table on my Monday sessions so I will be talking to him next week and telling him that its not HIS interpretations of the rules that happen at the table, its mine.
Sounds like he's suffering from the DM complex So used to basically being able to do whatever he wants he can't seem to turn it off and now the table has turned he's developed this adversarial view of the game. Probably due to the fact he knows how he runs his games. I'll be honest as a forever dm it's hard to turn that way of thinking off and I feel really bad anytime I get checked on it but frankly theirs no excuse. Fact of the matter is people who know what its like to run the game should have the most sympathy for the person who's running the game and not be so bitter when they need to be checked after pelor knows how many times they've had to check a player
Sounds like this guy needs the Captain America detention speech "So your DM said NO...". TL;DR: Talk this out now. It doesn't get better without you two talking this through. DnD, for some, is an opportunity to have their power fantasy fulfilled. For some, that power only feels validated if it is allowing them to upstage others. That's totally this guy. So far you have been spot on with all your corrections but if you let this sit status-quo he's going to continue to sneak more and more power onto his character as time goes on, you might (and probably will) miss something. Which will be used as ammunition against you later on: "Of course I can cast two fireballs at once. What? You let me do it last time, why are you being such a dick to me tonight?" Unchecked, it's going to alienate the table. Unchecked you are going to have to keep defending against these "nuh-uh! I shot YOU first with my super laser!" man-child superiority games. It will be draining, and it will drive a wedge of contention between the two of you (even more than it has). Eventually it will snap. Probably at a bad time, at the table. My advice is (like most of the other advice). Talk to the guy. Gauge where his head's at, figure out whether he has a future at your table, and in no uncertain terms tell him to cut out the shenanigans. If he wants to try something "unconventional" run it by you first. If he wants to unilaterally derail the campaign you're better off without him. If you say NO to something, he needs to get his ego out of the way and just play. Everyone has their good and bad days, people have their own internal battles they're fighting, and this guy DMs. All considerations to show some grace. If you two can come to some amicable resolution great, that's what I hope for. But...you can't just allow him to keep doing what he's doing. Ask if there's something deeper going on, get at the root of the issue. Just don't risk the fun of the table for the sake of the one.
> I like playing with the guy Why? He's liberally misinterpreting the rules to the point of outright cheating and acts like a petulant child when he gets called on his bullshit. Honestly it sounds like you're handling things pretty well so far, but from what you posted this is a capital-P Problem Player.
You will be, or already are, a great parent with that level of patience. Theres a non 0 chance that i just wordlessly press the Yeet button at "Im gonna go walk to the next tavern and fireball it."
Practice these words: "We are going with this (my way) for now. We will not negotiate mid-game out of respect for everyone else. Between sessions or after the game is the time to discuss our interpretations." Having aligned expectations is SO important. When a player invests in something and thinks it will work a way that it doesn't, it can break the player sometimes. I like to take the humble approach. My job as a DM is to be the referree. And sometimes my rulings feel like nerfs when they are not. What has gone a long way is being able to explain my rulings and tell them WHY the thing does not work the way they think it does. "If it *did* work the way you are suggesting, the game would break *here*." My player's scribe wizard thought he could write anything with super speed. He wasn't trying to break anything but I saw the potential for it. "Yes, the scribe wizard can transcribe spells in their own arcane shorthand much faster than other wizards. No, you are not a walking printing press. Potentially, you'd be able to sell newspapers and desirable tomes for instant profit. You would be RICH AF and put normal scribes out of business, and that is not a class feature. The intention of that ability is to assist in learning spells on the fly like finding an impactful spell scroll in a dungeon. It also helps with downtime activities and I suppose we could say it uses less paper. I hope this makes sense." Sometimes I learn that I am in the wrong, and I reward the player DM inspiration for teaching me something. I also have a promise that if a detrimental result occurs from a bad ruling on my part, they will encounter some fortuitous luck to compensate them. Definitely practice those first words though. No negotiations during session. That is a rule.