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="Siberys" data-source="post: 6413929" data-attributes="member: 30619"><p>[MENTION=45197]pming[/MENTION] - None of those actions are dex-based skill checks, so if that were RAW instead of the mushy mess that is the existing wording, yes, more specific /would/ also be miles clearer.</p><p></p><p>If the GM thought those actions should be penalized for wearing a cestus, they could make a ruling. GMs should always be /able/ to make a ruling. I just dislike rules that /require/ it.</p><p></p><p>And, honestly, my position doesn't intersect with number of rules all that much. I tend to play games now that have much, much lighter rules systems than D&D has /ever/ had, and none of those games try to rely on RAI - everything rules-wise is laid out in pretty direct mechanical language. Take a look at Fate Accelerated for an example of such a game. Contrast with lighter versions of D&D - they replace mechanical weight with "situational" weight (for lack of a better term - I refer here, again, to the need to make a ruling instead of just resolving a rule).</p><p></p><p>Let me put it another way; I'm talking about the difference between Rules and Guidelines. Rules should, given one input, have exactly one output. Guidelines allow for more variance. When I purchase a game, I want a RULEbook - I am pretty capable of handling the Guidelines myself. If I just wanted Guidelines, I'd just do collaborative writing exercises. I buy a game for the structure that Rules provide.</p><p></p><p>TLDR - YMMV and all that, but if a game is going to have lots of little exceptions - like every edition of D&D - obfuscating their mechanical implementation seems like a bad way to speed up the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Siberys, post: 6413929, member: 30619"] [MENTION=45197]pming[/MENTION] - None of those actions are dex-based skill checks, so if that were RAW instead of the mushy mess that is the existing wording, yes, more specific /would/ also be miles clearer. If the GM thought those actions should be penalized for wearing a cestus, they could make a ruling. GMs should always be /able/ to make a ruling. I just dislike rules that /require/ it. And, honestly, my position doesn't intersect with number of rules all that much. I tend to play games now that have much, much lighter rules systems than D&D has /ever/ had, and none of those games try to rely on RAI - everything rules-wise is laid out in pretty direct mechanical language. Take a look at Fate Accelerated for an example of such a game. Contrast with lighter versions of D&D - they replace mechanical weight with "situational" weight (for lack of a better term - I refer here, again, to the need to make a ruling instead of just resolving a rule). Let me put it another way; I'm talking about the difference between Rules and Guidelines. Rules should, given one input, have exactly one output. Guidelines allow for more variance. When I purchase a game, I want a RULEbook - I am pretty capable of handling the Guidelines myself. If I just wanted Guidelines, I'd just do collaborative writing exercises. I buy a game for the structure that Rules provide. TLDR - YMMV and all that, but if a game is going to have lots of little exceptions - like every edition of D&D - obfuscating their mechanical implementation seems like a bad way to speed up the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Does RAW have a place in 5e?
Top