Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6400808" data-attributes="member: 22779">I think this tracking example is a very good example of why RAW is so important.&nbsp; Karinsdad is making a ruling based on his gut.&nbsp; He feels that tracking over cobblestones is more difficult than hearing a noise through the ground from ten miles away.&nbsp; Thing is, I'm imagining that this is just a gut feeling and not actually based on any facts.&nbsp; One would hope that when game designers create rules for tracking, they would actually do a smidgeon of research into the matter and be able to make fairly definitive rulings that are not based on simple gut feeling.&nbsp; Having solid RAW means you stop having arguments about whether you can swim in armour (you actually can) or a katana can cut through a tank (it can't).Another good example of why a solid RAW is important comes from the <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?367007-Camping-is-dangerous-(how-can-it-be-made-safer-)" target="_blank">Camping is Dangerous</a> thread.&nbsp; Specifically, in the that thread, the DM made a gut ruling about waking up from an ally on watch yelling - DC 20 - which in turn led to a near TPK of the party.&nbsp; Presuming that this outcome was not what the DM wanted, solid RAW rules should include strong suggestions for how to choose DC's.&nbsp;&nbsp; And even when DC's are necessary.You don't necessarily need a specific rule for every individual thing, but, having strong, specific rules for general adjudication is a must, IMO.&nbsp; Things like Savage World's Rule of 4 - where any final score of 4 or more is a success on any action.&nbsp; The only thing you need to change is die size (determined by abilities in the character) and modifiers (normally chosen from a fairly short list and often not chosen at all).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6400808, member: 22779"] I think this tracking example is a very good example of why RAW is so important. Karinsdad is making a ruling based on his gut. He feels that tracking over cobblestones is more difficult than hearing a noise through the ground from ten miles away. Thing is, I'm imagining that this is just a gut feeling and not actually based on any facts. One would hope that when game designers create rules for tracking, they would actually do a smidgeon of research into the matter and be able to make fairly definitive rulings that are not based on simple gut feeling. Having solid RAW means you stop having arguments about whether you can swim in armour (you actually can) or a katana can cut through a tank (it can't). Another good example of why a solid RAW is important comes from the [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?367007-Camping-is-dangerous-(how-can-it-be-made-safer-)]Camping is Dangerous[/url] thread. Specifically, in the that thread, the DM made a gut ruling about waking up from an ally on watch yelling - DC 20 - which in turn led to a near TPK of the party. Presuming that this outcome was not what the DM wanted, solid RAW rules should include strong suggestions for how to choose DC's. And even when DC's are necessary. You don't necessarily need a specific rule for every individual thing, but, having strong, specific rules for general adjudication is a must, IMO. Things like Savage World's Rule of 4 - where any final score of 4 or more is a success on any action. The only thing you need to change is die size (determined by abilities in the character) and modifiers (normally chosen from a fairly short list and often not chosen at all). [/QUOTE]

Verification