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
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with a DM who takes things too literally
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="gribble" data-source="post: 4863739" data-attributes="member: 12430"><p>Sure, but define "basic character abilities". There's nothing inherent in the class features that lets the fighter push. So you're defining using a power as a "basic character ability"?</p><p></p><p>A lot of the "exploits" rely on the way the RAW work with certain powers (rain of blows, cascade of blades). Unless you're one of the WotC designers, you can't speak with any authority about the RAI, so as a DM you have to use some interpretation. If a DM isn't happy with the way a power is being used it should be within his ability to rule on how it works in his game. If a player can't convince him otherwise, what makes the player's judgement any more suspect than the DMs?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, *I* do. That doesn't change the fact that not all DMs do, and that some err on the side of caution. My point was that if the DM feels that a rule is broken, doesn't fit with the world he's portrayed, or doesn't fit with the narrative of his story, or any one of a hundered other good reasons, he's well within his rights to change it or interpret it differently. As long as he's transparent about it and the players understand where he's coming from. </p><p></p><p>A DM shouldn't be expected to blanket allow every RAW from every book/article WotC publish and then "make it work". If a player wants to use something it's up to that player to convince the DM that it works.</p><p></p><p>At least that's the way I've always played/run the game.</p><p></p><p>Sure in this specific example it should have been very easy for the player to describe how it works, and the DM should have allowed it once the player had done that. And no, I'm not in the camp you have to narratively describe every action - once the player has described how it could work, and the DM has been convinced by that description, the player should be allowed to use it that way without describing stabbing the giant in the foot every time. Heck, I'd probably even do it offline in a game I was playing in or running.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gribble, post: 4863739, member: 12430"] Sure, but define "basic character abilities". There's nothing inherent in the class features that lets the fighter push. So you're defining using a power as a "basic character ability"? A lot of the "exploits" rely on the way the RAW work with certain powers (rain of blows, cascade of blades). Unless you're one of the WotC designers, you can't speak with any authority about the RAI, so as a DM you have to use some interpretation. If a DM isn't happy with the way a power is being used it should be within his ability to rule on how it works in his game. If a player can't convince him otherwise, what makes the player's judgement any more suspect than the DMs? Sure, *I* do. That doesn't change the fact that not all DMs do, and that some err on the side of caution. My point was that if the DM feels that a rule is broken, doesn't fit with the world he's portrayed, or doesn't fit with the narrative of his story, or any one of a hundered other good reasons, he's well within his rights to change it or interpret it differently. As long as he's transparent about it and the players understand where he's coming from. A DM shouldn't be expected to blanket allow every RAW from every book/article WotC publish and then "make it work". If a player wants to use something it's up to that player to convince the DM that it works. At least that's the way I've always played/run the game. Sure in this specific example it should have been very easy for the player to describe how it works, and the DM should have allowed it once the player had done that. And no, I'm not in the camp you have to narratively describe every action - once the player has described how it could work, and the DM has been convinced by that description, the player should be allowed to use it that way without describing stabbing the giant in the foot every time. Heck, I'd probably even do it offline in a game I was playing in or running. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Dealing with a DM who takes things too literally
Top