Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crust" data-source="post: 5843653" data-attributes="member: 22330">As DM of my own group, my players often try to hold me accountable to the written rules, and most of the time, I do adhere to the RAW.  The 3.5 rules are so specific that any action can be interpreted by a die roll and a modifier of some kind.  There’s very little that a DM can invent that an experienced player won’t spot as outside the RAW and therefore “DM BS.”  I’ll admit it’s annoying when my players tell me what I can and can’t do, but it’s important that my players understand that 2+2=4 on both sides of the DM screen, so deviating from “reality” is something I rarely attempt.The 3.5 rules are so specific that if DMs adhere to the RAW for the most part, players should feel comfortable knowing that their actions will have “this” result in most cases.  Players can trust that if they can think it up, there’s a rule to back it up, and players who know the rules can make better decisions and anticipate things in advance, allowing for some interesting gaming.  However, if the DM is altering the rules and observable reality round by round, he’s a terrible storyteller and should probably read a novel or ten.  There has to be a common understanding between player and DM of what can and can’t be done, and the DM can only go so far when bending that reality before players start opting out of the game.In my own experience, a player of mine recently said to me before his PC entered Avernus, “I’m worried about what you’ve cooked up for us.”  My response to him was, “You mean what the devils have cooked up.”  I’ve been playing with these guys since 1998, so we know what to expect from each other.  When I deviate from the rules, there’s always a rational reason for it, and if players press me for answers, I provide them.  In the case of monsters and other enemies, I hardly ever use monsters as they exist in the published rules.  They’re always advanced, with class levels or additional hit die, so my players know that studying the monster manuals may be interesting reading, but it’s not going to allow much metagaming.DMing is often about reacting to the players’ decisions, not about following a script.  At least that’s how I see it from a casual DM’s perspective.  If the DM decides that his hobgoblin boss suddenly requires uncanny dodge, that hobgoblin suddenly becomes a barbarian, and in the next round, he might rage.  This assumes that the hobgoblin hasn’t already behaved in such a way that makes barbarian levels impossible or ridiculous.  This is not intended to screw with players’ heads (though unfortunately that’s what happens).  It’s intended to create tension, conflict, and an exciting encounter that players won’t easily breeze through.  I edit on the fly at a near-constant rate.</blockquote>

Verification