Rules, Rules, Rules (Legends & Lore)

[MatthewJHanson]

Copy and pasted from similar thread in general forum:

I do appreciate that they've moved away from the binary polls. There's even an "other" option.

I found the statement that "rule takes away the DM's ability to make a judgment call in her game" jarring. This is not at all how I think about rules when I run the game. I see them as tools that I can use to help me make judgements.

I don't make PCs roll to climb a ladder. At the same time, I've never climbed anything more difficult than the trees in my backyard when I was a kid. How am I going to judge if the halfling thief can climb the wall of the wizard's tower? I'll take a rule for that any day.

 

[Pentius]

"The rule takes away the DM's ability to make a judgment call in her game."

and

"So while the actual mechanics that we're talking about are the same, the way each version of the rule is presented will have very different effects on how the game is actually played once everyone's sitting around the table."

And I have thought RPGers are an unruly bunch of people who change the rules or let them drop in their game. But now Mr. Cook wants to tell me that the designer's authority over the way people play is much more pronounced?

Such statements actually send a cold shiver down my back.

I think you're reading too much into it. Monte isn't on a stump here trying to tell DMs to stop making judgement calls, he's just recognizing that if you write a rule, people will use it. When most people look at a rule and think "No. Not in my game. In my game, we will do this differently." it's generally for a rule they really don't like. For instance, I might well be able to make some climbing rules that work way better for me and my group than the default ones do, but I never have. Why? Not because I thought I couldn't, but because the existing climbing rules were good enough. Not great, just good enough.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

I get what he is trying to say, and for the most part I agree. Presentation will colour perceptions. Personally, I would like there to be options, right from day 1, and clearly presented as such - kind of like how things were done in the 2e PHB.

Rules were clearly marked as 'optional' or 'tournament' and right away you knew that meant if you (or your DM) didn't want to do it that way, then you (or your DM) weren't obligated to, but it was often a great place to go if you weren't sure on how to adjudicate something.

 

[IronWolf]

"The rule takes away the DM's ability to make a judgment call in her game."

and

"So while the actual mechanics that we're talking about are the same, the way each version of the rule is presented will have very different effects on how the game is actually played once everyone's sitting around the table."

And I have thought RPGers are an unruly bunch of people who change the rules or let them drop in their game. But now Mr. Cook wants to tell me that the designer's authority over the way people play is much more pronounced?

Such statements actually send a cold shiver down my back.

I think you're reading too much into it. Monte isn't on a stump here trying to tell DMs to stop making judgement calls, he's just recognizing that if you write a rule, people will use it.

Agree with Pentius. If anything it seems Monte is trying to make sure the DM isn't held back by the rules too much.

He even says as much:

"The rule takes away the DM's ability to make a judgment call in her game. It's something for a rules lawyer to point to and tell her that she's handled something incorrectly."

It isn't the game designers that are stopping DM judgment calls. It is players that take the rules as gospel and unbending that use the rules as a way to tell a DM they have done something wrong.

It really looks to me that Monte is looking to find that line where the rules are a guide for the DM, but not a leash to keep the DM from being able to make judgment calls as needed. For example, in determining how hard it should be to climb something or to jump that ditch. The balance is in providing a DM (and player) with a rough idea of how difficult the task might be, but not outright define it as that has the potential to tie the DM's hands.

 

[am181d]

I came down somewhere around Option 2.5.

In terms of the DC discussion: I think this is one of the faults of 4e vs. 3e. Someone up-thread complained that players should only get better at climbing if they expend resources on it, but of course that's what they're doing. When the skill check goes up, that's a simplification of what happens in 3e where players are placing skill points (i.e. resources) in their skills each level. In 3e, the player is choosing to make their character better at climbing instead of, say, spending some points on the swim skill. In 4e, it's assumed that you're spending the same points on every skill, but it's still assumed that you're getting better at all the things you do.

DCs for specific actions should be standards. If you want to continue to challenge characters, you need to up the challenge over time. Otherwise, what's the point?

So:

1st level: climb a rope while being chased by Kobolds
5th level: climb a rope while Orcs are firing arrows at you
10th level: climb a rope while fighting Giant Spiders
15th level: climb a rope while fighting a Dragon
20th level: climb a rope while Orcs are firing arrows and fighting Giant Spider Dragons and the rope is a fuse that's burning up from the bottom and there's an explosive device at the top of the wall
Etc.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I found the statement that "rule takes away the DM's ability to make a judgment call in her game" jarring. This is not at all how I think about rules when I run the game. I see them as tools that I can use to help me make judgements.

You're right in that I think that's how many of us perceive rules. They are a necessary part of making a game a game. Without rules, you don't have a game.

That being said... Monte does speak the truth. A rule is an actual restriction of choice (presuming you follow said rule). So rather than every option being open to a DM... having a rule restricts that choice. It does, however, create the game... as a game is an attempt to succeed within the strictures of a set of rules.

 

[LostSoul]

I think this is wrong:

The game needs rules. They form the basis of the shared reality that allows everyone to participate in the same game.​

But maybe I don't understand what he means by "shared reality".

*

As far as the poll options go, I chose Option 1. That's all you really need for climbing. Let the other rules - when to make checks, how to make checks, how to assign the DC, modifiers in and out of combat - deal with the rest of the situation.

 

[D'karr]

You're right in that I think that's how many of us perceive rules. They are a necessary part of making a game a game. Without rules, you don't have a game.

That being said... Monte does speak the truth. A rule is an actual restriction of choice (presuming you follow said rule). So rather than every option being open to a DM... having a rule restricts that choice. It does, however, create the game... as a game is an attempt to succeed within the strictures of a set of rules.

It also has to do with context of the rules.

To use the example of a skill check for climb if the rule reads:

Make a check and compare to the DC table.

or if the rule reads:

Make a check and compare to the DC table. Halflings cannot climb.

Makes a great deal of difference.

You have very different context within the "rules." Similar to how there used to be "restrictions" on alignment for paladins, druids, and monks. And some classes were not open or capped for non-humans.

What the rules "restrict" definitely sets the tone for the game.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Of course, there's a question that hasn't been asked: if we're at a level when most PCs can fly, should climbing remain a valid challenge at all? Or should it instead be assumed that a skilled PC can just succeed at anything but the toughest climbs?

Very true. My Paragon tier Dragonborn Fighter with Scion of Arkhosia for his Paragon Path had an overland flight speed of 12. I was good at climbing, but didn't really need to be anymore. I could just fly up, and then put in a piton and drop a rope to the rest of the party.

If it really is the same wall, then that is indeed stupid. And probably bad DMing/bad adventure design.

However, if the wall that the PCs have to contend with is, indeed tougher, that's a rather different matter. Which brings us to...

Indeed. The key here is that most walls shouldn't be like that, and the PCs should be able to succeed even without a roll. By and large, climbing should just cease to be a problem at those higher levels. It's only when faced with a climb that is somehow tough (no equipment, a strange construction, extreme time pressures...) that they should have to roll.

But that's a feature, not a bug.

Exactly. If you always want mundane things to be a challenge, then end your campaigns in the Heroic tier. Paragon and Epic are meant to be played as if your characters are living legends. Heck, just look at the descriptions on some of those Epic Destinies! Undying Warrior? Demi-God? These characters are beyond being simply mortal, and should routinely be crushing entire armies under their boot...but a simple oiled rope should be able to stop them?!?!

I find myself wondering if maybe it's not enough for the math to simply escalate. Perhaps, as the game moves into a new tier, we actually need an entirely different set of resolution mechanics, to freshen things up? (Of course, I have no idea how that would be done, or what it would look like!)

That might not be a bad idea. After all, we have new mechanics introduced at those tiers anyway. New feats, new items, paragon paths, epic destinies, paragon multiclassing, losing powers for higher leveled versions, etc... Maybe we also need a different sort of skill check system too? Something like Passive Insight and Perception perhaps? This would allow trained characters, or those with stat/miscellaneous bonuses, to automatically succeed at some mundane challenges, but would still require rolling for especially difficult ones.

If the players want to make such tasks increasingly easy as they level I expect them to spend some resources on it, skill focus, appropriate magic items, etc.

In many cases they do spend resources on it. A Fighter has 3 skill choices, one of which might go to Athletics if he wants to be good at climbing. He must also bump his STR score every level in order to remain good at it and keep up with the scaling. Yes, he was probably going to do that anyway since it's his primary stat, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a resource.

Even without "spending resources", and just relying on natural level scaling, characters don't get as powerful as you seem to think. A Wizard with a starting 8 in STR is going to have a -1 to climb at level 1. He'll have difficulty even climbing a simple rope (I know, we had one in our party like that once...had to use a STR check to haul him up the wall with a rope around his waist, which was not very "heroic").

At level 21, he'll have a 10 in STR, and a +10 bonus due to the half-level increase. So now, this Wizard that has been adventuring for years at this point, fighting alongside his companions and bringing nations to their knees, and is perhaps now preparing to create a dimensional gate to the Far Realm to fight the Mind Flayer scourge, can finally climb a rope pretty easily. Climbing up a rough cliff wall though? That's still moderately difficult and would be helped quite a bit by having some decent climbing gear.

How is this something that's utterly breaking the game? Sure, the Fighter can climb even sheer, smooth surfaces with ease, but that's his job! How many times have we seen the warrior in armor scaling the outside of the castle? Or climbing the cliff to surprise his enemies? Heck, how many times have you seen images of real life free climbers doing unthinkable things with their bare hands? A 21st level Fighter is so much more than these real life examples, and should be able to accomplish those tasks with ease!

 

[delericho]

Very true. My Paragon tier Dragonborn Fighter with Scion of Arkhosia for his Paragon Path had an overland flight speed of 12. I was good at climbing, but didn't really need to be anymore. I could just fly up, and then put in a piton and drop a rope to the rest of the party.

This is one of the reasons I like "Athletics" as a skill. A "Climb" skill can become obselete, as the character learns to fly, or otherwise doesn't need it. But an Athletics skill, being more general, is much less likely to become redundant.