How (un)helpful are rules for you ?

[Shadowlord]

Seen the number of books and options for D&D, how much do you really use of it?

The new DMG will be filled with all manner of conditions and ways to calculate dozens of effects.
Will you really be looking up if you take 4d6 or 3d8 damage from collision?
Will you be picking one of the dozens templates or will you simply decide if you're hit or not, based on logic & fairness? Maybe you don't even use a battlemap or models, which is fine. But then many of these strict rules become useless for you.
Since when has an RPG become a math nuisance?

In my experience, rules have to be simple & flexible. In the heath of the moment you'll be guessing & adjudicating, NOT running through books for perfection. That's not the domain of an RPG, that's the work a computer does in a pc game.
Even at home you'd better be putting your time in developing the world & story instead of spending hours looking up the correct stats or rule for X or Y which you probably adapt during the session!

In the end, one can wonder if these books, even a core "rule"book as a DMG, is really indispensable? I could always find more uses for setting books than rulebooks. These things gave me ideas. As for deciding in-game if something could or couldn't be achieved, I never needed hundreds pages of "help".
What I mean is that you don't create unforgettable moments by applying a rule correctly (as stated in the books) but by making the story, the world, and the characters come "alive". Then, why bother with new rulebooks?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Personally, I prefer having solid rules for as many situations as can come up in a roleplaying game. I dislike winging it. Even my house rules tend to be limited to adjusting something for a different flavor, rather than mechanics-hacking.

 

[TiQuinn]

I don't like coming up with off-the-cuff rules if I don't have to. The rules give me a basis to work off of, and I get creative from there.

 

[seasong]

Seen the number of books and options for D&D, how much do you really use of it?

All of it, when I'm in the mood for tactical, rather than narrative, challenge. On the other hand, I enjoy both methods, and when I do the latter, I usually do it without any D&D at all.

In the end, one can wonder if these books, even a core "rule"book as a DMG, is really indispensable?

Welcome to the dark side

Seriously, though, they are indispensable for a particular type of gaming. My Light Against the Dark campaign would not be the same if the rules weren't there. What you are running into is the idea that being indispensable for one type of play does not translate into indispensable, period.

 

[Shadowlord]

But you can never memorize all rules, there will be situations which are uncovered by rules! I didn't mean writing your own rules down, but simply guessing it.

For ex you can use the flexible d20 and set a DC by guessing how tough a situation is. That's like setting a % chance of success. When you follow a rule exactly like written, you'll also end up with a % chance of succes/failure but you must cross conditions first which takes a lot of time and can cause a stall. Result: game becomes boring.

So why not be a fair referee and simply guess how tough or easy something is instead of slowing the game down with "petty" rules. These written rules are only a guideline, a tool for helping the GM, they aren't strict.

I for instance don't need tables showing how much damage a falling object does based on size & altitude. I know if you get a piano (Large) landing on you from the 2nd level, you're not likely to survive it. I'd then rule something like 6d6 dam, Ref DC 15 to avoid. Even if you survive you could be stuck under the piano (Str check to get free), forced to a Fort sv DC 15 or fall unconcious etc.
Need tables for this? No. So why buy those books? The PHB and a campaign setting I understand, but the DMG could be summarized like done in other RPGs (including d20!).

 

[TiQuinn]

For ex you can use the flexible d20 and set a DC by guessing how tough a situation is. That's like setting a % chance of success. When you follow a rule exactly like written, you'll also end up with a % chance of succes/failure but you must cross conditions first which takes a lot of time and can cause a stall. Result: game becomes boring.

So why not be a fair referee and simply guess how tough or easy something is instead of slowing the game down with "petty" rules. Thise written rules are only a guideline, a tool for helping the GM, they aren't strict.

Usually, I look up rules in advance of the game if I have a reasonable idea that a certain situation is going to crop up. I also use bookmarks to help breeze to a certain section. All in all, it takes me 30 seconds to a minute to look something up, and apply it to the game. Players take an hour or more each game to go to the bathroom, raid the refrigerator, and finish up their game of Warcraft 3 before coming to the table. I don't think it's that dramatic a slowdown.

 

[Fenes 2]

It can slow down the game and break the mood if you have to look up the rules in a particular moment. OTOH, it can also slow down the game and break up the mood if you make a rule on the spot for something covered in the rules, and if a player knows about it and was counting on the rules used as written.

I prefer the "let them roll a d20 and wing it" method myself.

Edit: I have to add that while I prepare quite a bit in advance, most of it goes toward creating NPCs and plots, and basic "events" and "problems", the details of which I often improvise during the game, and in reaction to the PCs actions. Rarely do I have detailed events planned ahead - the players tend to wreak havoc with the plans of both DM and NPCs alike.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I do look up rules on the fly sometimes, even if it slows the game down by a minute or two. However, having read through the books a couple of times, I do know a lot of them off by heart, so it reduces the amount of lookup I do. I was won over by Monte's discussion on balance in the DMG and some things I read on message boards, coupled with running 2e games filled with players who would abuse the fact that there were no set rules for some things in the game. Every time they'd ask me to come up with one, I'd do so, but forget to take a LOT into account. And suddenly the PCs are way too powerful and I have to use cheese to take away their power.

Plus, as a player, I'm fustrated when DMs just assign a difficulty and it isn't consistant with already written rules. There was a first level monk in a game that the DM kept allowing to leap 10 ft into the air, which, according to the rules is VERY difficult and requires max ranks in jump for about 20th level plus magic items. But, as the DM saw it, he maxed his ranks in jump and was a monk, obviously he was very good. Most DMs look at it as "under 10 means you fail", when in some cases (climbing down a knotted rope with a wall to brace against) 0 succeeds.

As for them being a guidline, sure, they are. They tell you that a knotted rope with a wall to brace against is DC 0 climb check so that a DM can say "well, that vine is sort of knotted and that is a slippery wall, so I'll say it's a DC 5" On the other hand, I've noticed more of a tendency of DMs to forget the rules once they start running the game and just make things up. This may just be where I'm playing, but I'm playing a lot of Living Greyhawk (according to the LG rules, you MUST run LG per the book, no house rules), and out of the 15 or so DMs I've played under, very few of them knew the rules well. They also seemed willing to almost ignore them.

In short, I like rules to be spelled out so that I have something to point at when I run a game and say "look, it's in the rules, I didn't make it up to screw your character over." Too many arguements over something the DM says should be able to happen due to his personal hunting experience while the one who was in the army insists he knows better and differently.

 

[EricNoah]

I don't necessarily think mid-game is a great time to be looking up rules you're unfamiliar with, but that doesn't mean the DMG or other books shouldn't have the rules in the first place. I recommend reading up on likely rules situations ahead of time, and if you need rules mid-game have a player help by looking things up for you when it's not his turn.

 

[dagger]

We rarely wing it