Pointless argumentations

Hi, just wondering if anyone else thought this was unreasonable.  I play a paladin in a 4.0 game that someone started just to say "we tried 4.0" and one of the back stories for my paladin (I usually play a spell caster so they told me to play a paladin because no one wanted to be a cleric either) is that he wears an immense amount of armor for a few reasons.  The gm agreed with me gave me the minuses for wearing a ton of armor with all my feats in accord and I took two feats to over come the minuses.  Like 20 sessions in, one of the other players are talking about throwing me into a dragon because I can tank the teeth damage and I'm saying no.  He then talks about "Well I can do it anyways, you don't weigh a lot", so I point out that my character weighs 300 some pounds with the armor on.  He then goes on to complain throughout the whole session about how I should take minuses to perception, manual dexterity, etc, because of my armor being so clunky.  After pointing out things I do get minuses for and why I still get pluses he says it's not realistic.  I point out that it's a fantasy game and that he shouldn't be something other then a human (good lord, I forget what he was, some sort of elf off shoot) if we're playing things realistically.  The games a fantasy game.  I do not meet people that often that can throw a dragon with his faith. So I'm just wondering what peoples opinions on this are, but more importantly what are the most worthless conversations you have ever had over role playing games? I think this one is pretty worthless o3o.  Try and top me, I know it's possible.

Just remind him of this: how can ANYTHING be realistic in a game with MAGIC and DRAGONS? That might end the realism debate.  Edit: Just realized this was in the wrong forum, I have moved it to the correct forum. - Gauss

That was what I pretty much said to him, you're an elf thing, I'm a super human, that guys a rock golem, this game isn't realistic. But I still wanna know what is the most outlandish argument made about this game that you've experienced o3o

I guess the worst was when A DM tried to TPK us but kept making excuses as to why we had not actually killed his monsters (this was AD&D).  For example we took out his Red Dragon with 250hp (usually less than 100) etc.

if anyone argues realism playing DnD they should punch their character in the face. BTW i've seen how fast a well trained man in plate moves and flourishes his weapon. Plate was some high tech crap back then. it was made to move as well protect your ass.

Worst argument so far was probably when a player I had in a WoD game argued about why he should be allowed to have a six-point tome. I pointed out that he didn't have enough merit points for it, and even if he did it would not be approved. His responses were, in order. "But I inherited it from my father, I didn't waste time looking for it." and "It's in the published books, why wouldn't you allow it? All the other core stuff has been approved so far." ("core" in this case being published books, the "styff" being the three other mortals, one of which had Unseen Sense). When it, slowly, dawned on him that he wouldn't get his way (after having insulted another player for agreeing with me, and a few other tantrum-like behaviours) he finally screamed, threw stuff off of the table and stormed out. It was generally agreed by all that his choice not to take part in the gaming group was for the best.

Michael B. said: I guess the worst was when A DM tried to TPK us but kept making excuses as to why we had not actually killed his monsters (this was AD&D).  For example we took out his Red Dragon with 250hp (usually less than 100) etc. DnD.  The sport of men giving up being the boss of other men.  Whenever anyone tries to invoke a TPK is when they want to stop playing that game/plot. William P. said: if anyone argues realism playing DnD they should punch their character in the face. BTW i've seen how fast a well trained man in plate moves and flourishes his weapon. Plate was some high tech crap back then. it was made to move as well protect your ass. The argument was asinine as we have a gnome who is half demon.  Why not complain about how the hell that happened o3o.  Though really, if you're playing a gnome, being half demon is only helping the group. Asaram said: Worst argument so far was probably when a player I had in a WoD game argued about why he should be allowed to have a six-point tome. I pointed out that he didn't have enough merit points for it, and even if he did it would not be approved. His responses were, in order. "But I inherited it from my father, I didn't waste time looking for it." and "It's in the published books, why wouldn't you allow it? All the other core stuff has been approved so far." ("core" in this case being published books, the "styff" being the three other mortals, one of which had Unseen Sense). When it, slowly, dawned on him that he wouldn't get his way (after having insulted another player for agreeing with me, and a few other tantrum-like behaviours) he finally screamed, threw stuff off of the table and stormed out. It was generally agreed by all that his choice not to take part in the gaming group was for the best. Rule Zero of role playing.  The Game Master has the final word.

I wouldn't say that fiction = unrealistic. Just because the setting is a fantasy setting that doesn't mean that it can't be very realistic one. Some game mechanics are a lot more realistic that other and D&D has never really even tried (ok I'm only talking about 3.0 -> editions) to be a realistic one. It has always been 100 % game. This is one of the reasons I don't like it very much. This is what you David should have said to this other player. It's a game with rules and according to the rules X. Don't hate the players hate the game. The "problem" you encountered had nothing to do with fantasy, realism, fiction, etc.

I am with Maetco. In regards to the original argument, I think it was a case of a player being a dick because he couldn't get his way. But even if I am moving in a fantasy world, I need some sense of realism to provide coherence to the world. Yes elves, magic and rock golems exist. But ordinary people cannot survive getting a sword through their neck, gravity doesn't suddenly work different unless there is an explanation within the setting (a wizard did it). People should still have understandable motives (unless a wizard changed them). The laws of physics still apply (unless a wizard changed them). In other words, if there is a detour from our experienced reality, it should have a specific reason (the existence of magic, and other races is a given for accepting it). But for the original question for me the answer is that D&D, nor any other system, is ultra realistic. We accept that there are some minor inconsistencies to keep the pace up. We don't roleplay going to the bathroom. Armour and weapons are of the a few-sizes-fit-all (unless we're talking giant to human). We don't have magic boots that are a number too small. I hope it made sense.

Possible house rule when you have this sort of issue...(Page 32 of 4th dmg has some info)... Skills and checks are for using on NPCs, not screwing over your party. In the same way that you shouldn't dictate what a player does on thier turn (can suggest a strategy to take on monster, but is up to them), you shouldn't be trying to trick, steal, or harm other party members.  Really, the DM is arbitrator of the rules and between players. You'll always have those players that try to argue there's shadows everywhere so they can use an ability that does tons of damage that isn't meant to be done all the time for balance reasons. 

Personally, I think you should never have tried to gain an advantage with "immense amount of armor" and stuck with the rules as is, using plate mail and just calling it an "immense amount of armor". Especially since you guys were playing 4e for the first time.

I claimed no higher AC on the armor then it usually is.  Of all the armor I was wearing I only got 3 AC for it.  I wanted it to weigh a lot because it's part of the characters backstory/ fluff and I like to role play.  It was just really big war plate armor and the fact that it was thick did nothing more then being paper mache metal.  Either that or everything finds chinks in my armor, but all the same... What are the ridiconkulos things you had to deal with though.   --- As for the realism part, duh, I get that, but saying I can't wear armor and run (because feats let my speed go to 7 with the armor on) seems unfair really.  Why should I have to move at glacial speed to make it more realistic?  My character can lift heavy objects with one hand that we could never lift in real life.  How often does someone chuck a boulder at something and then punch them with a hammer of faith.  The crusades maybe, but still a much different thing.

You can stick the rules and just add descriptors for roleplay, like saying armor is 'clunky'

I mean the GM already said this was okay, it's just this one player wouldn't stop focusing on me wearing that much armor.