How (un)helpful are rules for you ?

[WattsHumphrey]

Hrrm. I have this argument with lokidr quite regularly.

I like rules. I like to know that there's a way to find out what should be happening in a given situation. But I wing it more often than not. I take what I know and I modify it to fit the current situation and I deal with it. From there, I'll go back and look up the rule after the game if it's likely to come up again.

Basically I think that rules should be used wherever possible, but should not slow down the game. If I don't remember a rule and nobody else does, then we'll just have to get it right next time so that this time isn't bogged down with figuring out how something works.

 

[Numion]

I ask this since it's accepted that D&D is the father of RPGs, but with such attitude it alienates itself from the true motives of an RPG.

You speak heavy words. By whom were these true motives of RPGs decided upon? For us the motives are to overcome the challenges, loot the treasures and to level up.

With an occassional stop at the tavern.

D&D doesn't alienate us; some game like Nobilis would alienate us from RPGs.

 

[Shadowlord]

I appreciate the fact that the rules are available, but get really frustrated when the game slows down indefinitely while someone tries to determine whether bonus x stacks with bonus y, or exactly what pattern the grenade splash should be.

If the DM has trouble maintaining consistency without referring to the rules, then they are available and that is a good thing. However, I much prefer a DM that can make an improvisation and remember it later (at least through the rest of the session - I also don't mind changes later on if need be), thus keeping the pace of the game up over one that has to refer to the book continuously in order to make sure the "correct" ruling is made.

Exactly what I meant.