In praise of the rules lawyer

[DM Howard]

As it was said earlier in the thread, the OP is confusing Rules Lawyer with Rules Expert.

Rules Expert = Excellent!
Rules Lawyer = (And a beer or two afterward.)

Although the line between Rules Expert and Rules Lawyer is fine and paved with the bones of unassuming, unaware, and innocent Dungeon Masters and smells faintly of meat and ketchup and the roars of dragons can be heard not too far away.

 

[Vegepygmy]

As it was said earlier in the thread, the OP is confusing Rules Lawyer with Rules Expert.

If so, I think that's because the "difference" is in the eye of the beholder. Apparently, a "rules lawyer" is just a "rules expert" you don't appreciate.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Vegepygmy basically summed up this whole thread. I'd give him xp if he hadn't recently garnered some from me already, apparantly.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Covered SoS, since I had the same idea.

 

[Zhaleskra]

I prefer to go with Rules Expert and Rules something-I-probably-shouldn't-say-here.

 

[nedjer]

I've never known any "rules lawyer" who got bent out of shape over a house rule. What upsets us is when the rules are changed without notice, and if I choose a longsword for my weapon with the expectation that it deals 1d8 damage (because that's what the rulebook says) only to find out later that this particular DM thinks 1d4 damage is a "better measure," I'm not going to agree with him that 1d8 is just a guideline.

Fair enough - under that circumstance the GM merits four stakes, some rope, plenty of sticky Guatemalan honey and a nest of belligerent fire ants.

 

[Janx]

in my experience, Rules Lawyering was a negative term to describe an argumentative player, or one who cited rules to their advantage. basically using the rules as a weapon, not just as a point of clarification or correction.

Brian VanHoose from KoDT would be a rules lawyer...

A rules lawyer would probably keep his mouth shut if a DM rules error was in his favor

a rules lawyer might correct the DM if an error would hurt a fellow PC

a rules lawyer WILL argue to correct the DM if a DM error would hurt his PC

What muddies this up is there are players who will argue when they are wrong (and may not know it). Which is a different problem.

A Rules expert is useful. When the party comes to a river and they ask if they can swim it, I can then ask "who knows the swimming rules?" and get an answer I can trust and save gaming time not doing a look-up to figure out the rules. Or get whining if nobody knows the rules, so I make it a DC 15 swimming challenge.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

a rules lawyer might correct the DM if an error would hurt a fellow PC

a rules lawyer WILL argue to correct the DM if a DM error would hurt his PC

I don't see those as negative at all.

 

[Alexander123]

I don't see why arguing with the DM when he has made a mistake is wrong. And I don't like the differentiation between rules lawyer and rules expert. In my opinion they are both the same. And this merits the question, why shouldn't he use the rules as a weapon? Isn't that what optimization is after all, it is using the rules of the game to your best advantage.

 

[Diamond Cross]

DM Rule Zero.

Stop arguing. Period.