[Help] Am I a rules lawyer?

[Goddess FallenAngel]

After thinking about my recent games, I began wondering if I wasn't one of those always-dreaded "rules-lawyers". When does "following the rules" go to far? Does reminding the DM that a rule doesn't work exactly the way it's being used for/by another PC count as rule-lawyering? Or is it ok to bring it up, as long as you accept it when the DM says "It's a house rule"?

I have a (admittedly bad) habit of mentioning it when I see rules being used "wrong" (differently then in the book). If the DM says that it is a house rule and I think it is fair, I usually drop it... but if I do not consider it fair, I will bring it up to the DM that I do not beleive that it is fair, and why I do not think so.

Is this too far? I can provide examples, if requested....

 

[Darrin Drader]

Well you know what they say, if you have to ask...

 

[Mark Chance]

All rules lawyers are to report immediately to Room Four for automated spankings on the Rotary Spanking Machine.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Hehe, you know its gonna be a bad one when the game designers start lining up to post about it...

 

[Mark Chance]

But seriously, folks...

To answer the OP's question: It depends. "Depends on what?" you ask. Well, all sorts of things.

Temperment of the GM.
Tone of voice and temperment of the alleged rules-lawyer.
Frequency of the alleged rules-lawyering.
The amount of disruption created by the alleged rules-lawyering.
Et cetera.

As a GM, I don't mind players pointing out rules gaffes. I often forget small details that could be important. My players are also quite good at pointing out rules gaffes that are not beneficial to their characters (i.e., reminding that ogre magi have SR).

So, I guess my real answer is: Don't ask us. Ask the people in your group.

 

[Jeph]

Friend Angel! Please report to the nearest exermination center immediately: knowledge of the rules is clearance ultraviolet.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

It depends on how you do it.

GOOD: Hey, DM. Longswords have a threat range of 19-20 so I think Phil's hit critted on that orc. Unless there's special wacky stuff for this encounter or orc that I wouldn't know about since I'm a player.

BAD: Phil's hit should've critted. You messed up.

REAL BAD: Orcs only have 5 hit points, Phil's hit critted and with Phil's strength bonus there's no way it could have lived.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'd say...

In Game:

Pointing out a rule is being used incorrectly, or has been missed = not rules lawyer.

Arguing the DM's call once he/she has made it, once he has full information = rules lawyer.

Out of Game:

Explaining to the DM why you feel the call was inappropriate, and pointing out how you feel the rule is supposed to be used and why = not rules lawyer.

Arguing with the DM even after the discussion, calling him an idiot, whining about the results of the game, threatening to leave over it = rules lawyer (and jerk, to boot).

It's not always an easy call to make, especially if you're playing with a DM (as I have done on occasion) who never really learned more than the basics of 3E. I find myself correcting him constantly--and as often in favor of our opponents as in our own, just for the record--but I try not to be a jerk about it, and I try not to argue once he's made a decision after I bring up the issue. I don't alway succeed--I'll admit I have my own Rules Lawyer tendencies on occasion--but I do my best.

Ultimately, of course, as others have said, we're not the ones to ask.

 

[Lela]

Is this too far? I can provide examples, if requested....

I'd like to hear some. Personally, I think that it's hard to judge when I've got not details.

So spill it.

 

[d4]

my group (up until quite recently) had two rules lawyers, myself and another guy.

if i notice the DM getting a rule wrong, i might mention it. (i don't always bring it up because i like to keep the game flowing.) if the DM says he's aware of the rule and he's got a house rule or something special going on, i'm totally cool with that. i don't mind house rules.

the other player would also pipe up whenever he thought the DM had ruled something incorrectly. unfortunately, this other guy didn't really know the rules very well (he seemed to be going by mostly 1e and 2e interpretations of situations from what i could see), and even after the DM told him that we were going to do something a certain way, he'd still keep complaining. sometimes he'd go on for ten minutes or more, with the DM and every other player telling him he was wrong and could we just get back to playing?

we had to kick him out, eventually.

what's the worst kind of rules lawyer? an overly argumentative one who doesn't even know the rules in the first place.