Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Alternate thought - rule of cool is bad for gaming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tglassy" data-source="post: 9385427" data-attributes="member: 6855204"><p>I've always seen "the Rule of Coolk" as a means of choosing the direction to go in a particular instance. Like, I introduce a dragon, and my player asks if it's female, and I say yes, and he squeals, cause he's playing a horny bard and has never had the opportunity to seduce a dragon. I role my eyes. But it is his dream. So I allow AN ATTEMPT. </p><p></p><p>He failed, of course. Miserably. But if he'd done better, things would be different. </p><p></p><p>What I don't like "Rule of Cool" for is allowing a player to do something that isn't on their character sheet. For example. Had a DM once who allowed a Fighter to run up a wall 20 ft, leap off and land on the monster's back, jabbing his swords in. An awesome, cinematic moment...except that Fighter's can't run up vertical surfaces. IN FACT, there IS a Class who specifically gets this as an ability: Monks. Monks specifically gain the ability to run on vertical surfaces, and on water, as a part of their class. </p><p></p><p>The DM allowed it cause it was 'cool'. But in doing so, he basically gave a Monk ability to a Fighter. What does that say to the Monk, who specifically chose that Class so he could do things like that? It means he could have saved his time and picked any class cause the DM would just let you do Monk stuff anytime you wanted cause it's "cool". Of course it's cool! That's what makes Monks cool!</p><p></p><p>So no, if a player comes to me and asks "Can I do this?" I say "Can you do that on your character sheet?" And if the answer is no, then that's their answer.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tglassy, post: 9385427, member: 6855204"] I've always seen "the Rule of Coolk" as a means of choosing the direction to go in a particular instance. Like, I introduce a dragon, and my player asks if it's female, and I say yes, and he squeals, cause he's playing a horny bard and has never had the opportunity to seduce a dragon. I role my eyes. But it is his dream. So I allow AN ATTEMPT. He failed, of course. Miserably. But if he'd done better, things would be different. What I don't like "Rule of Cool" for is allowing a player to do something that isn't on their character sheet. For example. Had a DM once who allowed a Fighter to run up a wall 20 ft, leap off and land on the monster's back, jabbing his swords in. An awesome, cinematic moment...except that Fighter's can't run up vertical surfaces. IN FACT, there IS a Class who specifically gets this as an ability: Monks. Monks specifically gain the ability to run on vertical surfaces, and on water, as a part of their class. The DM allowed it cause it was 'cool'. But in doing so, he basically gave a Monk ability to a Fighter. What does that say to the Monk, who specifically chose that Class so he could do things like that? It means he could have saved his time and picked any class cause the DM would just let you do Monk stuff anytime you wanted cause it's "cool". Of course it's cool! That's what makes Monks cool! So no, if a player comes to me and asks "Can I do this?" I say "Can you do that on your character sheet?" And if the answer is no, then that's their answer. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Alternate thought - rule of cool is bad for gaming
Top