Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 4039366" data-attributes="member: 1757">To a certain extent, I think this is true (and someone needs to give the high-level-fighter-falling-off-his-horse example the axe, since it's not the best one out there), but I think that one can carry this line of reasoning a bit too far. The example I always think of is that of an FR mythal. In 2e and 3e right up until Lost Empires of Faerun, a mythal was a magical effect created by long-lost elven arts that could accomplish all sorts of crazy things... things specifically good for generating non-standard adventuring environments. The why of a mythal was left to what some would call DM handwaving. LEoF then came out with detailed rules for constructing a mythal using epic spell seeds, and you know what? Those rules were insanely complicated, easily abusable if the players could access the abilities detailed therein, and pretty much useless in 99% of campaigns anyway. *That* to my mind is where DM handwaving is superior to explaining everything &quot;consistently&quot; using the rules. IMO, there is no measurable gain in predictability or player enjoyment for the DM to parse out exactly how everything onstage and off happens using the rules. Should there be guidelines for player interaction with offstage events? Yes. For example, I would certainly have Spellcraft, Survival, and/or Knowledge DCs in place to give PCs the ability to understand the implications of various phenomena and events. But I don't think that a DM is gaining much in the way of consistency by forcing himself to simulate everything using codified rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ruleslawyer, post: 4039366, member: 1757"] To a certain extent, I think this is true (and someone needs to give the high-level-fighter-falling-off-his-horse example the axe, since it's not the best one out there), but I think that one can carry this line of reasoning a bit too far. The example I always think of is that of an FR [i]mythal[/i]. In 2e and 3e right up until [i]Lost Empires of Faerun[/i], a mythal was a magical effect created by long-lost elven arts that could accomplish all sorts of crazy things... things specifically good for generating non-standard adventuring environments. The [i]why[/i] of a mythal was left to what some would call DM handwaving. LEoF then came out with detailed rules for constructing a mythal using epic spell seeds, and you know what? Those rules were insanely complicated, easily abusable if the players could access the abilities detailed therein, and pretty much useless in 99% of campaigns anyway. *That* to my mind is where DM handwaving is superior to explaining everything "consistently" using the rules. IMO, there is no measurable gain in predictability or player enjoyment for the DM to parse out exactly how everything onstage and off happens using the rules. Should there be guidelines for player [i]interaction[/i] with offstage events? Yes. For example, I would certainly have Spellcraft, Survival, and/or Knowledge DCs in place to give PCs the ability to understand the implications of various phenomena and events. But I don't think that a DM is gaining much in the way of consistency by forcing himself to simulate everything using codified rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification