Common sense

[Samuel Leming]

Common Sense, or what little sense I have.

The rules serve me. I don't serve the rules.

Sam

 

[Umbran]

As usual - it depends upon the specifics of the case. Sometimes it is better to follow common sense. Sometimes it is better to follow the core rules. I do whichever seems to be best for the campaign and the players.

 

[shilsen]

I don't actually believe in he existence of common sense. What seems like common sense to one person often does not to someone else (if you don't believe me, check the Rules Forum). So the vast majority of the time I stick with the RAW and if I deviate from it, I do so based on what I want in the game, rather than on some nebulous quantity called common sense.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Common sense isn't all that common, nor does it always make sense.

When realism and RAW are in conflict, I choose RAW.

 

[Glyfair]

It depends on the exact situation. I would imagine I tend to go with the RAW. If a player takes an action based on the way the rules are written (barring some bizarre attempt to bend the rules in best munchkin fashion), then it should work that way.

If that isn't involved, however, I'll look at the situation. If it's a well established situation in the game, then I'll follow the RAW. If it's an oddity, something that rarely comes up and the situation doesn't make sense, then I'll follow the commonsense.

My issue with just following "commonsense" (beyond the expectations of the players), is that a lot of the foundations of the game break commonsense. For example, take the order of a round. Sitting there until it's your turn and doing everything breaks so called commonsense. However, that's well established as part of the game rules, and changing it would require restructuring the entire game system. Not something I'm willing to do.

 

[Samuel Leming]

So the vast majority of the time I stick with the RAW and if I deviate from it, I do so based on what I want in the game, rather than on some nebulous quantity called common sense.

That's actually a very common sensible approach.

Sam

 

[Wombat]

On the one hand, I am well known for twisting the RAW into pretzels, spaghetti-o's, and moebius strips to fit a concept of what I want a game to feel like, rather than fitting my game to the rules.

On the other hand, to quote many old New Englanders I have met over the years, "Common sense tain't that common."

Therefore I am often leery of the term "common sense", but I do try to have the game feel as "sensible" as it can, given that there are dragons, fireballs, talking swords, and the like

 

[ivocaliban]

Yes, I've had this problem. I've got a player who just loves to question my every decision. To be fair, there are times when he's been correct, but it gets a little much at times and it gets in the way of the flow of the game. Here a recent example that just annoyed me:

Aboard an airship the party is in combat with several wraiths. One character, flying along side the ship decides to hit the wraiths with a gust of wind spell, hoping to blow the wraiths away from the party to buy some time. Well, I say that wraiths are incorpreal and have no weight so they can't be affected by wind, but I'm countered with the fact that that it's a "magical wind."

For me it was simple common sense. You can't blow away wraiths with wind, right? I mean, that's silly. So my player replies, "Yes, but common sense says that you can't freeze (cold) or (burn) wraiths either, but you have a 50% chance to hurt them with magical cold or fire according to the incorpreal definition. So it should be possible for a magical wind to affect wraiths as well."

This went on for far too long and, in an effort to keep things moving, I made a classic blunder by giving in. I thought it would be a fairly isolated incident, but since that time I'm constantly having to debate interpretations with this particular player. So, I'm constantly needing a panel of D&D experts to refer to decide which way to go. I've gotten tougher regarding the issue, but it's still a pain in the aasimar.

(Sorry, about that. It's late. The PC is an aasimar, though.)

 

[Hussar]

If we're talking about a corner case where several rules interact to produce a strange result or a gray area where the rules only kinda-sorta cover it, then I have no problem bending the rules to get the result I feel appropriate to the situation.

However, if we're talking about a clearly defined part of the game and someone wants to complain about "common sense" "realism" or the "real world" then it is RAW all the way. This is a game, not a physics simulator.

Houserules, carefully considered before the game starts, are also allowed.

Later.

More loving for Argo. That's pretty much the way I go as well. I find I can kill more PC's that way.

I've always been curious how anyone can argue realism in a game where you can fight an elephant with a sword and win.

BTW, a simple answer to the wraith case above is the fact that gust of wind does not create magical wind. Never mind that undead are immune to magical cold as well.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

My determining factor is plausibility.

I can believe--if I try hard--that a sword can cut into an important vein or artery in a dragon's leg, allowing the Medium-sized 20th-level fighter to seriously injure the Colossal dragon, even though the dragon could swallow an entire squadron in a single gulp.

I can't believe that that same 20th-level fighter can drop a sack of puppies at his feet, attack each of the 10 puppies once (Whirlwind Attack), and also attack the BBEG in front of him 10 times (Great Cleave) in six seconds (1 round).

So long as it doesn't make me cringe, I go with the RAW, with a smattering of House Rules to create the atmosphere I want, or allow for challenges that the RAW doesn't (I got rid of Comprehend Languages in order to create mysteries involving Decipher Script, for instance.) If the mere idea of it seems preposterious, I sometimes House Rule away the problem, and sometimes just grit my teeth, depending on the specific matter. Some matters are easily House Ruled. Others would present too much of a change in the core game to be worth it.