Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="balterkn" data-source="post: 3146939" data-attributes="member: 46546">Generally I've not had too many "core rule" debates in 3.5.  Most of the rules issues have to do with how to customize characters to get to a specific, desired role-playing objective.I'm one of the older version DMs (some 1e, mostly 2e and 3, now 3.5) mentioned above (although young 30's isn't really that old).  My main issue in adjudicating is that:1- Adjudicating sucks - meaning that if consensus cannot be reached, then a decision must be issued to continue play.  This is the inherent problem with being a DM.2 - Not all 3.X rules are as simple as "flip open the book and point" (my main bad example had to do with a tower shield - I adjudicated against a player in a way that I later determined was consistent with the core rules errata - much drama ensued including very bad conduct from people on both sides of the DM screen)I've managed to avoid most rules debates through a "would you like this pulled on your PCs" debate.  Most of the time, rules interpretations that are momentarily beneficial to the group are quickly abandonded if I indicate "what is good for the goose is good for the gander".However, I do have faults (and most long term DMs probably have some faults, probably because to be a long-term DM one must have some faults to begin with<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )- one of my faults is that I can be heavy-handed and enforce rules interpretations because I believe the impact of the moment may yield a game that becomes unplayable in the long run.  With the tower shield example, I prohibited 360 cover while moving through enemy formations.  I had no desire to have every bad mook carry a tower shield so they could effortlessly walk past the PC fighters and slaughter the PC spellcasters.  Regardless if errata supported that specific call, I don't think I would have much joy playing or DMing if a fighter screen for spellcasters could be so easily defeated.  Fortunately for me, the errata supported the call in that instance.IMNSHO - 3.x generally has fewer long duration rules debates, and the impact of those tend to be less than prior editions.  The issue I find is that some players forget that the point is to create a game where every person (players and DMs) can have fun through effective playing of the game, and not have lawyer debates about exact wordings of rules.</blockquote>

Verification