Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Traveon Wyvernspur" data-source="post: 5698103" data-attributes="member: 73201">Not sure what you mean by this, as I am asking a question for discussion being something that we have probably all experienced. I didn't think I portrayed a sense of bias in the asking of the question as it wasn't me who was effected by the small example that I placed in the original post. I was an observer and I didn't even pipe up about it because I felt it was something that we should have looked up right then and there and then the DM could have decided what to rule instead of thinking he knew the rule and then having to reverse himself at a later time.I have to disagree with you here, my thought on the matter is that RAW is fodder for rules lawyers and their ilk. I feel that DM fiat is more along the lines of "I can change any rules I like, whenever I like, however I like and if the table doesn't like it they can go play somewhere else." Following RAW and interpreting them is part of the DM's job so that everyone is on the same page throughout the game. Perhaps you misunderstood me with the DM fiat option. Again, the DM fiat option was meant to be more along the lines of the DM being the sole decision maker regardless of what the RAW stated, even if it was perfectly clear, and for example he changes it without even talking to the players about it because "that's the way he likes to do it, he's the DM and he is the god of the world." If the DM is an arbitrator, then he's the one in charge of making the final call on a rule. I don't think this is DM fiat at all especially in a grey-area that could be ruled on in a few different ways and the players bring to the table their opinions on the matter, the DM can rule in favor the player if the argument is sound or if he thinks it's a silly thing he can rule the way he interpreted it. This is the DM's job, and not "dm fiat" to me, this is the way that games are ran.This is open for individual interpretation. Some DM's/Players thing that anything in print is RAW, including core, splat, & SRD. Some DM's/players think that 3rd party splats are junk and akin to RAW changers that break the game. I've seen it both ways so I won't say who is right or wrong. To me house rules change the core rules and "official" splat books with significant differences that would fundamentally change a mechanic. I agree that depending on the group some house rules can be a lot like splat books or they can completely change the game.Oh I definitely agree that 500 pages of a book will not cover every  situation that ever arises. That is why there are grey areas and why  some games seem to need some home-brewing of rules that cover things  that don't seem to be covered in the RAW, my thinking on this is if  there is something that is even loosely covered in the RAW that it  should be taken into consideration before a DM decides what to do. Guess this comes down to the table and the individual players/DM. I've never experienced anything like this in my decade+ of gaming, but I'm sure it has happened to others. I have always felt as a player and a DM that if something is covered in the RAW that's the way it should be done, if something is not covered or if it is a grey-area, that's the time the DM needs to get involved and decide what should be done. If it's a grey-area, the DM is being a judge, referee, or arbiter. If it's not covered in the RAW at all, even loosely, then that needs to be made a house-rule (whether by dm-fiat or dm/player discussion) as long as it is something that is followed by everyone as if it was a RAW.</blockquote>

Verification