Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Does RAW have a place in 5e?
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="Authweight" data-source="post: 6393864" data-attributes="member: 6693417"><p>The issue with RAI is that the I part is often nowhere near as clear as some people think it is. A good example of this was an argument I saw here about whether a monk should be able to knock the tarrasque prone with one of his ki powers. By RAW, he clearly could. A lot of people argued that this was patently ridiculous and abusive, but just as many felt that the result was entirely intentional and desirable.</p><p></p><p>I don't have a problem with people wanting to house rule things to fit their own game. But it bothers me a lot when people get called munchkins for just wanting to go by the rules in the book. I feel that house rules should be stated up front. I also feel that if a GM house rules something in the middle of a game, any affected players should be allowed the chance to switch their character in response to the new ruling. </p><p></p><p>I don't like the attitude that says the GM can just do what they want and everyone else has to deal with it. For this reason, the concept of RAW is important. Maybe you'll play it differently at your table, but we can all start with RAW as a baseline so we can make it clear what changes are being implemented before they come up in play.</p><p></p><p>Also, clear rules don't have to take away GM initiative. A rule can simply say, "the GM may decide what this means." That's okay - it is both clear and open-ended. What is bad is when a rule is open-ended because it is phrased poorly. That leads to unnecessary conflict. If you don't want there to be a RAW ruling on something, just say so in the rules, don't get there by creating confusion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Authweight, post: 6393864, member: 6693417"] The issue with RAI is that the I part is often nowhere near as clear as some people think it is. A good example of this was an argument I saw here about whether a monk should be able to knock the tarrasque prone with one of his ki powers. By RAW, he clearly could. A lot of people argued that this was patently ridiculous and abusive, but just as many felt that the result was entirely intentional and desirable. I don't have a problem with people wanting to house rule things to fit their own game. But it bothers me a lot when people get called munchkins for just wanting to go by the rules in the book. I feel that house rules should be stated up front. I also feel that if a GM house rules something in the middle of a game, any affected players should be allowed the chance to switch their character in response to the new ruling. I don't like the attitude that says the GM can just do what they want and everyone else has to deal with it. For this reason, the concept of RAW is important. Maybe you'll play it differently at your table, but we can all start with RAW as a baseline so we can make it clear what changes are being implemented before they come up in play. Also, clear rules don't have to take away GM initiative. A rule can simply say, "the GM may decide what this means." That's okay - it is both clear and open-ended. What is bad is when a rule is open-ended because it is phrased poorly. That leads to unnecessary conflict. If you don't want there to be a RAW ruling on something, just say so in the rules, don't get there by creating confusion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Does RAW have a place in 5e?
Top