D&D General When do you overrule RAW?

[Mort]

WotC apparently believes this is a very powerful ability- see the capstone of the Cavalier.

WotC often overvalues abilities when it comes to fighters. I mean it COULD be extremely powerful, especially when combined with other things through multi-classing. But in my group, I wouldn't worry about it being abused.

 

[Reynard]

Well when Gary described hit points, he said they included various factors that an experienced warrior would use to mitigate damage- so I've always assumed that the 200 hit point character is, in fact, treating goblin arrows as dangerous, but they're so skilled that their efforts to protect themselves don't even require actions.

Like I said, i think it is more effort than it is worth to try and pretend the game doesn't work the way it does. I prefer to lean into the PC superiority. I mean, we are emulating myths, legends and literature here. It isn't like Beowulf didn't rip a monster's arm off barehanded.

 

[billd91]

Like I said, i think it is more effort than it is worth to try and pretend the game doesn't work the way it does. I prefer to lean into the PC superiority. I mean, we are emulating myths, legends and literature here. It isn't like Beowulf didn't rip a monster's arm off barehanded.

Did he? Did he really? Or did he just have a good publicist?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's not the designer of the caltrop's fault, either.

It can be multiple people's fault. Asmodeous or the tarrasque shouldn't be slowed by caltrops. A simple, inexpensive item shouldn't be broadly applicable to nearly all foes, and the designer no doubt knows that. I imagine (not having been around for D&D Next) that this was something tossed in at the last minute without testing, because it was "clearly" fine.

 

[James Gasik]

Like I said, i think it is more effort than it is worth to try and pretend the game doesn't work the way it does. I prefer to lean into the PC superiority. I mean, we are emulating myths, legends and literature here. It isn't like Beowulf didn't rip a monster's arm off barehanded.

And that's fine, because that's what's fun for you (and presumably your group). There is no one true way- anything goes as long as everyone is having a good time.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's certainly true that everything in the game is negotiable by the DM- you are not bound by any rule or line of text in the game. What I find objectionable is the arbitrary nature of such rulings- the player is told what resources they can use to make a character. They select options based on what the mechanical text of those options says that they do.

Then the DM comes in and says after the fact, "oh but that doesn't make any sense to me, you know? And since I decide what makes sense in the game, it doesn't work now."

This is punitive to the player. If there was a time to ask "hey does this make sense to you?", that discussion should have come up long before the player attempts to use the tactic in a life or death battle at the table!

Now could Kaiju monsters have a trait that says "immune to effects that reduce their speed"? Certainly. And players should have a chance to know such things in advance. Certainly, their characters should know if Sentinel won't work on Kaiju, right?

This is a game philosophy issue.

Do we want the rules to be more proscriptive, like they were in 3E, Pathfinder and 4E? Certainly some folks, including it sounds like you, would prefer things that way.

Or do we want the DM to have broad latitude, which is more likely to enable moments of Rule of Cool, but also opens the door for rulings a player doesn't like?

There's no right answer, just what works for each group.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Of course what annoyed me more about that than the incident itself, was the internet reaction. There were a lot of "LOL Marisha so dumb" comments, even though her intuition of the rules governing the situation was perfectly correct, Matt just pulled the rug from under her. Smelled like misogyny.

Maybe, but there's also a big thread of "Matt Mercer is god" that runs through much of CR fandom. (Not in everyone, to be clear.) If Matt said the sky was actually green, there would be people trying to argue that it's technically a very bluish shade of it.

 

[James Gasik]

It can be multiple people's fault. Asmodeous or the tarrasque shouldn't be slowed by caltrops. A simple, inexpensive item shouldn't be broadly applicable to nearly all foes, and the designer no doubt knows that. I imagine (not having been around for D&D Next) that this was something tossed in at the last minute without testing, because it was "clearly" fine.

And that makes a lot of sense, but then we get tables who would let spike growth fly without batting an eyelash. Now you would be right in saying buying and carrying and deploying a bunch of caltrops is a lower opportunity cost than being a Druid and casting a spell, naturally.

I don't know though. When you punish a player trying to be clever because of "logic" in your fantasy make pretend game of action heroes fighting mythical monsters out of the blue, it doesn't sit right with me.

Surely there's a better solution to this sort of thing.

Some months back someone (I can't remember who) was expounding on the wonders of the "improvise action" action in the 5e rules, and how it brought parity between spellcasters and noncasters, and my immediate response was "not really, because most DM's are going to be very conservative about what you can do with it, because it's not magic".

 

[James Gasik]

This is a game philosophy issue.

Do we want the rules to be more proscriptive, like they were in 3E, Pathfinder and 4E? Certainly some folks, including it sounds like you, would prefer things that way.

Or do we want the DM to have broad latitude, which is more likely to enable moments of Rule of Cool, but also opens the door for rulings a player doesn't like?

There's no right answer, just what works for each group.

Indeed. I know what I prefer, and that's giving players a fair shake. To be honest, I don't think Sentinel should work on Godzilla either, but as I pointed out in my first post, that line of thinking is dangerous, because it's not far from there to get to "nothing should work on Godzilla", lol, and D&D is explicitly a game where players do impossible things on the regular.

Indeed, if you're running a grounded game where verisimilitude is king, why on earth are you presenting a kaiju as something for your player characters to fight without an artifact or three?!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It can be multiple people's fault. Asmodeous or the tarrasque shouldn't be slowed by caltrops. A simple, inexpensive item shouldn't be broadly applicable to nearly all foes, and the designer no doubt knows that. I imagine (not having been around for D&D Next) that this was something tossed in at the last minute without testing, because it was "clearly" fine.

I'm also way more fine with overriding rules of a 1gp mundane item than a feat or a class feature.

And the caltrop rules are definitely absurd. I need to come up with some housrules if the characters ever decide to get some in my campaign.