When is it appropriate to contest a DM? [closed]

Question

Ι am struggling to find helpful information about when it is appropriate for a player to challenge a DM's decision.

There was a recent question which triggered this "old chestnut" for me: Does a Swarmkeeper lose their swarm if they die?

If a DM decides that a Swarmkeeper Ranger permanently loses his/her swarm when they die for the first time and there is not a way to recover the swarm, then -in my books- the DM has gone too far with their "it's my way or the highway" attitude. And, this is not in the spirit of the game.

I've had other experiences similar to this, where the DM removed the soul of my PC -because he didn't like it- and, when my PC "died", he said "sorry unresurrectable" by any means. Yet, everyone else's characters were resurrected many, many times.

On another occasion a DM specifically targeted one of the other player's PC by a mob with CR that was enough to wipeout a five-person L15 party, yet the player's PC was only one level 10 character. The reasoning: the mindless mobs had a thing for Gnomes! The player was really upset and it ruined the session.

I have been myself a DM for donkeys' years... and I allow my players to contest certain things. ...I may even backtrack at times if what they explained makes good sense or there is not a RAW/RAI rule to fall back on. It might even become a house rule after that at the table.

It would help to have some guidance on this. D&D is a game that is meant to be fun for the DM and players alike. Yes, with fun dramatic moments, but these examples are not in the spirit of "fun". In none of the examples I gave did any of the other players think those rulings were fair.

So, is there any guidance in the D&D literature about how to resolve these sort of disputes, other than "The DM always has the final say!"?

I would appreciate answers from any of the D&D editions and/or concrete examples from experienced DMs.

Answer 1

Never

The GM is the final arbiter of the rules. It is never appropriate to contest them, and you cannot really win such a contest. What is often called Rule 0, that the GM makes the final call, is in the rulebook, at least in some editions and it is basically understood in the others. There is no way to trump that and trying is confrontational and almost never productive. As discussed more in the linked question and its answers, the only real constraint on Rule 0 is what players are willing to tolerate as a group, and the only way to enforce that constraint is to leave en masse.

The one possible exception is organized play if the GM does something that might affect you in later sessions. But I assume this is not organized play and even in organized play the times it is appropriate are few and far between.

BUT....there are ways to politely request they reconsider

While I explicitly say you should never contest a GMs ruling, that doesn't mean you cannot persuade them to reconsider.

But that is just it, you are persuading them to reconsider. How to go about that depends on the GM in question. That is a separate question and would likely get answers similar to this one: How do you handle a difficult DM in D&D?

But the very short version is, politely and in the spirit of making sure everyone has fun. If you approach it that way and make your best argument, you may well get the GM to reconsider. If they don't reconsider or if they are not polite about it, then you may want to decide whether it is worth accepting it or looking for a different table. No RP is generally better than "bad" RP, and for purposes of that sentence "bad" RP can mean bad for you and not necessarily objectively bad in any way. Some people just have incompatible play styles.