DM Needs Help with Rules Lawyer

kreynolds · Jul 2, 2003

One can gain the half elemental template via a magical infusion at birth.

LokiDR · Jul 2, 2003

Re: Re: Re: DM Needs Help with Rules Lawyer

Hypersmurf said:
Loki, I hope you take this as constructive criticism, but this is one of the mistakes (like 'rouge') that makes me cringe.

This isn't directly aimed at you, just at the spelling mistake in general, so please don't take offence...

IT'S BLOODY 'ETHEREAL'!

Thank you for your time.

-Hyp.

How about adamantium, mirthral, or any of the other common misspellings? I do recall incensing some one with 'rouge' so much that they posted in huge fonts and strange colors. Then again, I tend to perturb others.

The funny part is, it is just a misspelling and I could care less. You want "ethereal", works for me. My point is, you knew what word I meant and it was not an intentional garbling. You don't need to get worked up over it.

1 4m +h3 |33t h4x0r 0f 3Nw0|d!!!1!

Maitre Du Donjon · Jul 3, 2003

(it's not important) said:
[...]Axomatic[...]

The Axomatic 3000 will decimate an entire forest in mere seconds, and it comes with a limited life-time warranty. Call now and receive a second Axomatic absolutely free.

Maitre D

PS: This is not meant as an insult of any kind. The term "Axomatic" was funny to me and I went with it, that's all. I just wanted to be clear, because there have been some harsh threads lately (hum hum) about misspelling occurences (sp?). - MdD

Hypersmurf · Jul 3, 2003

Re: Re: Re: Re: DM Needs Help with Rules Lawyer

The funny part is, it is just a misspelling and I could care less.

It was six misspellings

Hence "constructive criticism". There's not much point noting a typo to someone. But the same mistake six times indicates a gap in their knowledge, and pointing it out to them helps them become a Better Person (tm)

I have a friend who consistently talked about 'welding' a sword.

Field, Yield, Shield... Weld.

Drove me nuts.

But he's a Better Person (tm) now.

-Hyp.

andargor · Jul 3, 2003

Coup de Gras ("fatty blow") really gets to me... It's Coup de Grâce, dammit!

Also, isn't it "Axiomatic"?

Andargor

LokiDR · Jul 3, 2003

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: DM Needs Help with Rules Lawyer

Hypersmurf said:
It was six misspellings

Hence "constructive criticism". There's not much point noting a typo to someone. But the same mistake six times indicates a gap in their knowledge, and pointing it out to them helps them become a Better Person (tm)

I have a friend who consistently talked about 'welding' a sword.

Field, Yield, Shield... Weld.

Drove me nuts.

But he's a Better Person (tm) now.

-Hyp.

I'm sure I have made hundreds more. I still want to spell exists as "exsists". I do appreciate the heads up, so long as I am a Better Person (tm) now.

Kark001 · Jul 3, 2003

You nearly cant avoid the initial backstab...but after this...just make the life hell for the rogue. It was stated on another thread, that one could concentrate on one opponent...bye flanking rogue....ok, the fighter will get a +4 to hit, but that doesnt hurt as much as that flanking. I would advise some creative dice fudging as well, since some rogues tend to have quite high an ac due to tumbling and high dex...Its amazing that a rogue in light armor can get a better ac then a fighter in full plate when tumbling into partial defense...thats just wrong in my eyes.

If you feel rather nasty, give your Big Mobs some nasty spotting tool (like blindsight and sneak attack) and let him ready an action and sneak attack your rogue right out of existance when he approaches.
If your rogue doesnt bring himself into position with sneaking / hiding...well, spells are the bane of every rogue then.
Beside that...players (at least the one I know) usually rush off after they have spotted a mob...some traps work wonders and arent spotted via blindsight.
Blindsight doesnt defeat well concealed doors, sliding doors and so on.

Hypersmurf · Jul 3, 2003

It was stated on another thread, that one could concentrate on one opponent...bye flanking rogue....ok, the fighter will get a +4 to hit, but that doesnt hurt as much as that flanking.

Careful - that's a hotly-contested interpretation, relying on a dubious FAQ entry and the rules for Gaze Attacks.

It tracks legally if the FAQ is considered gospel, but it does depend on the DM.

-Hyp.

Darklone · Jul 3, 2003

Just take that troll. The rogue will get into flanking position, sure, but will the fighter on the other side? Prolly no. The troll just has to use his AoOs for Trip attacks, then step back (and waste the rogue with rend).

Winternight · Jul 3, 2003

It's already said, but I have to repeat it and emphasize it.
Sneak Attack is the way how the rouge fights,
he has an lousy attack bouns (therefore not as many attacks per round as the fighter) , lousy strength (usually).
Don't deny him that part of fun.
I did once play a rouge and after doing in one game session some cool damage suddenly all creatures were immune to critical damage.
Even normal living ones.
DM quote "I make the monsters not wizard"
He is damm right about that.
But that took the fun about of the game for me, I knew the DM was playing aggainst me not with me like my new DM. So i quit the group.
(how would the standart fighter like it if you take away his weapons and his armor for several gaming sesions, one is really cool, two is ok, three are annoying and every one more is untolarable.
Or the wiz spellbooks, or .... )

About the rules laywering: Tell him OOG, you really hate it. Tell him, if the is a rule unclear he may make a call, but only once. Then dicide on how shure you are, if you are unshure let him have his way. Even if your shure, let him have his way. Only if you are pretty shure over rule him.
Why ?
First off all you can cheat
He flanks - monster has not AC 23 but AC 25.
He does sneak damage - monster suddenly has +30/50 hitpoints
Second you change the rate on who is uncorrect.
When u say rule xy is so he knows that you are right.

And don't look up rule while playing, just play. Look it up afterwards, make a note for the next time.