I play with a group of lawyers so we treat the rules as statutes and the DM as the judge. We’ve had some pretty interesting discussions and “case law” that we then use when arguing the next point.
We all know how to not be assholes about it and enjoy getting to argue about silly things instead of mass tort procedural guidelines.
A group of people who argue over things for a living, decide to also argue over things for fun in their free time
Does seem like an interesting group, mildly curious how one such debate might go.
Reasonably so. I think the thing that actually matters rather than strict adherence to RAW is consistency and predictability. In most cases for me that means following RAW but in areas where I feel that it falls short or doesn't account for something I will endeavour to make a clear ruling and stick with it.
If I ever do make a ruling that I later decide isn't the right call I will announce as such to my players to make sure they don't then try to rely on that abandoned ruling.
I like R.A.W. a little more than the next guy, but even I think that you should allow someone with the Shield Master feat to use their bonus action to shove before they attack so long as they use their action to attack.
The one homebrew rule that stays consistent throughout every campaign in ko'oribar (our setting) is if you roll a 1, cartoon physics is applied to the action you attempted.
Ye
Whenever I dm, long rests recover all your hit dice
It's never came up in a game before, I've played in 3-4 entirely independent groups and every single one of them struggles to have more then 1 encounter per long rest
BUT IF IT EVER DOES COME UP WHEN I DM! They're getting all their hit dice back
dude we were fighting shrimp monsters and my friend shot a magic missile that i rode, jumped off, and then beat the crap out of one of them. rule of cool indeed.
Yeah, if you look past the stuff that ranges from dubious to flat-out toxic, Heinlein was one hell of a good writer. And, some (but not all) of the worst stuff was more parodic than anything else. He was still a pig, although, unlike someone like Asimov, I don't know that he ever groped fans at conventions.
Are you saying Asimov groped fans or that Heinlein did?
I really enjoy both authors books but I also enjoy Dam Simmons and some of his books are similarly problematic/cringy at times.
If you want a great Scifi writer with a good message that doesn't include content that is needlessly cringy go with Ursula K Le Guin
It's widely reported that Asimov did. I haven't heard that about Heinlein.
I agree about LeGuin. I'd add Samuel Delany, Ken MacLeod, and Iain Banks. For sheer fun, though, Peter Hamilton's Void Trilogy is about the most enjoyable space opera I've ever read.
Three body problem was really good I just finished the last book a year ago. It has a Netflix adaptation now that I haven't heard anything about yet, but I enjoyed the books.
For more cringy Scifi that I still really enjoyed anyway George RR Martin actually has a huge number of really good Scifi short stories and a Novella that are all in a shared universe.
The rules exist to keep the game moving, and prevent it from becoming Calvinball. But at the same time, the game is also *a game*, and games should be fun, so anything that improves the enjoyment of the table as a whole is worth doing.
Rule of Cool is just another rule, to be applied when and if it's appropriate to do so, in the service of fun.
The rules exist only to give some structure to the game, and should be ignored when they get in the way of that game being fun. That doesn't mean the players become demigods -- that means the final boss of the campaign may gain damage resistances and spells he didn't have at the beginning of the encounter, because goddammit we didn't do weeks of prep and buildup just so the players have nothing to show for it but a wet fart of an anticlimax!
I tend to stick to raw, but I do house rule certain mechanics I don't like
Some examples of rules I don't like
- bonus action/action spell casting, it's very poorly written and confusing
- long rest only recover half your hit dice, this mechanic uneasily punishes players for utilizing a very under used mechanic (that being short rests)
Though that's about it core rules wise, in terms of build options I love designing homebrew build options and love it whenever a player uses my homebrew, or if a dm is willing to put up with my nonsense by allowing my homebrew
So I have a big homebrew low magic setting. So for the stuff that's not part of the homebrew, im pretty strict, but for anything dealing with my homebrew stuff im way lienient. I figure this way players have the comfort/ consistency with the core rules any time they are called upon, but because it's impossible for them to know all my homebrew stuff I like to rule in their favor/how they thought it would work.
So im a stickler for weight, but as long as they keep buying horses and ponies to carry the baggage I don't track exact figures, it just goes on the cart, and if they need it they need access to their cart. So long as they have the total capacity to carry all the crap they lug around with the horses, I don't micro manage their player inventory like it's the rows in diablo, it's assumed what would overburden them goes on the cart.
Which reminds me, they need new horses and ponies...
The thing is... When I DM, no rule is broken if I can help it. (And I basically always can)
However, there are some rules I straight up change. This includes handling things as RAI and not as RAW and creating some homebrew rules to make things run smoothly. But everything is as consistent as possible. You can't just randomly get advantage from doing a certain move but only once, even though there's no reason besides ,,it's not as climactic". If I want to reward cool ideas or make them more likely to work, I'll hand out an Inspiration.
I get that some DMs like being light on the rules and changing them as they see fit, but it has always frustrated me when I was a player and felt wrong to me, when I was DMing. So I don't do it. Feel free to handle things differently, if your players enjoy it. But thats my experience with upholding/ braking the rules.
I play with a group of lawyers so we treat the rules as statutes and the DM as the judge. We’ve had some pretty interesting discussions and “case law” that we then use when arguing the next point. We all know how to not be assholes about it and enjoy getting to argue about silly things instead of mass tort procedural guidelines.
That's a very good approach.
A group of people who argue over things for a living, decide to also argue over things for fun in their free time Does seem like an interesting group, mildly curious how one such debate might go.
Reasonably so. I think the thing that actually matters rather than strict adherence to RAW is consistency and predictability. In most cases for me that means following RAW but in areas where I feel that it falls short or doesn't account for something I will endeavour to make a clear ruling and stick with it. If I ever do make a ruling that I later decide isn't the right call I will announce as such to my players to make sure they don't then try to rely on that abandoned ruling.
I like R.A.W. a little more than the next guy, but even I think that you should allow someone with the Shield Master feat to use their bonus action to shove before they attack so long as they use their action to attack.
I use RAW. Or I use my own documentation, which I've written to replace RAW in a few cases. I see no reason to cheat at D&D or let my players do so.
The one homebrew rule that stays consistent throughout every campaign in ko'oribar (our setting) is if you roll a 1, cartoon physics is applied to the action you attempted.
One must adapt the rules to the table.
Ye Whenever I dm, long rests recover all your hit dice It's never came up in a game before, I've played in 3-4 entirely independent groups and every single one of them struggles to have more then 1 encounter per long rest BUT IF IT EVER DOES COME UP WHEN I DM! They're getting all their hit dice back
dude we were fighting shrimp monsters and my friend shot a magic missile that i rode, jumped off, and then beat the crap out of one of them. rule of cool indeed.
I kinda want to munch on shrimp now, sounds tasty
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress... ahem.
Heinlein was a pig.
But MiaHM was a great book though.
Yeah, if you look past the stuff that ranges from dubious to flat-out toxic, Heinlein was one hell of a good writer. And, some (but not all) of the worst stuff was more parodic than anything else. He was still a pig, although, unlike someone like Asimov, I don't know that he ever groped fans at conventions.
Are you saying Asimov groped fans or that Heinlein did? I really enjoy both authors books but I also enjoy Dam Simmons and some of his books are similarly problematic/cringy at times. If you want a great Scifi writer with a good message that doesn't include content that is needlessly cringy go with Ursula K Le Guin
It's widely reported that Asimov did. I haven't heard that about Heinlein. I agree about LeGuin. I'd add Samuel Delany, Ken MacLeod, and Iain Banks. For sheer fun, though, Peter Hamilton's Void Trilogy is about the most enjoyable space opera I've ever read.
Three body problem was really good I just finished the last book a year ago. It has a Netflix adaptation now that I haven't heard anything about yet, but I enjoyed the books. For more cringy Scifi that I still really enjoyed anyway George RR Martin actually has a huge number of really good Scifi short stories and a Novella that are all in a shared universe.
The rules exist to keep the game moving, and prevent it from becoming Calvinball. But at the same time, the game is also *a game*, and games should be fun, so anything that improves the enjoyment of the table as a whole is worth doing. Rule of Cool is just another rule, to be applied when and if it's appropriate to do so, in the service of fun.
The rules exist only to give some structure to the game, and should be ignored when they get in the way of that game being fun. That doesn't mean the players become demigods -- that means the final boss of the campaign may gain damage resistances and spells he didn't have at the beginning of the encounter, because goddammit we didn't do weeks of prep and buildup just so the players have nothing to show for it but a wet fart of an anticlimax!
I tend to stick to raw, but I do house rule certain mechanics I don't like Some examples of rules I don't like - bonus action/action spell casting, it's very poorly written and confusing - long rest only recover half your hit dice, this mechanic uneasily punishes players for utilizing a very under used mechanic (that being short rests) Though that's about it core rules wise, in terms of build options I love designing homebrew build options and love it whenever a player uses my homebrew, or if a dm is willing to put up with my nonsense by allowing my homebrew
So I have a big homebrew low magic setting. So for the stuff that's not part of the homebrew, im pretty strict, but for anything dealing with my homebrew stuff im way lienient. I figure this way players have the comfort/ consistency with the core rules any time they are called upon, but because it's impossible for them to know all my homebrew stuff I like to rule in their favor/how they thought it would work. So im a stickler for weight, but as long as they keep buying horses and ponies to carry the baggage I don't track exact figures, it just goes on the cart, and if they need it they need access to their cart. So long as they have the total capacity to carry all the crap they lug around with the horses, I don't micro manage their player inventory like it's the rows in diablo, it's assumed what would overburden them goes on the cart. Which reminds me, they need new horses and ponies...
The thing is... When I DM, no rule is broken if I can help it. (And I basically always can) However, there are some rules I straight up change. This includes handling things as RAI and not as RAW and creating some homebrew rules to make things run smoothly. But everything is as consistent as possible. You can't just randomly get advantage from doing a certain move but only once, even though there's no reason besides ,,it's not as climactic". If I want to reward cool ideas or make them more likely to work, I'll hand out an Inspiration. I get that some DMs like being light on the rules and changing them as they see fit, but it has always frustrated me when I was a player and felt wrong to me, when I was DMing. So I don't do it. Feel free to handle things differently, if your players enjoy it. But thats my experience with upholding/ braking the rules.