In 8 hours of gaming...

[Ashtal]

That, I find, is one of the strengths of the pre-fab modules. Generally, they've done all that little nitpicky rule stuff for you, and if you've read ahead, all you need to do is tag the necessary bits with a stickynote ahead of time if the information is pertinant.

Knowing even the basic composition of the DMG (and being well-versed in the use of the index) should make any rule check-ups fairly quick. It's only a problem if there's interpreting to be done.

But then again, I like the Dungencraft rule - if you don't know, make it 50/50!

 

[Enkhidu]

For us, the amount of time we spend on rules questions has gotten less as we became more comfortable with the rules themselves - or rather how we were going to reconcile the rules with our 2nd Ed campaign world mentalities.

As of now, it's down to about 10 to 15 minutes a session (we too spend more time on ordering/fixing the food than on rules problems).

But we also made a conscious effort to stop rules questions from affecting gameplay, and did a great deal of (especially combat) rules testing (we have found that d20 skill resolution just rocks). We get together periodically for hour long combat sessions were we take iconic characters and try all of the different combinations and manuevers that we can think up. We get together for "Monster Wars" to test out new and existing monsters and their abilities. And we frequently debate the merits of Rule 0 changes throughout the week, just so long as it doesn't eat up playing time.

Have you tried any of this to cut down on the amount of time wasted?

 

[jasper]

10 to 15 minutes
if we can't find it not there.
If it is rare the person should have it earmarked before it happens.
and as always the
okay we play that way tonight but I check between games. If we did the rule wrong no problem everything that happen did happen but the next time the rule will be used correctly.
I also only use the 3 core books.

of course we have mess up damage reduction, grappling and some spell use.

 

[Akhkharu]

For me, we actually play maybe 1 hour in 8+ hours of possible gaming time. Sometimes it has to do with rules, I for one am new to D&D while the others played in 2nd, and possibly first so we're all sorta getting used to it. The rest of the time it's split between players planning moves during combat (it can take like 5 minutes for 1 person to descide that they are going to delay) and problematic players saying how this should be done this way, etc. and starting an arguement over it.

I brought this issue up with the DM, b/c I for one am not finding it fun at all. It was to the point where I started to read during player & dm arguements (mainly PHB or other source book).

It's only been a few games sinse I brought it up with the DM, though I do still remind the DM about what he told me he's going to do, after a few minutes of him doing it again.

All in all, I do hope it works out for the better, as I do like gaming with them.

Time will tell I guess.

 

[Roland Delacroix]

We play 4 hour sessions every week. We use about 5-15 minuites on rules disputes. If noone knows it and where it is, or cant find it in about 30 seconds i roll off to choose. They look it up and we review it here or the next week before playing. We are all pretty new to d20 though.

 

[mtbdm]

the Best Solution

Undoubtedly, the best solution to this dilemma is the use of the following argument resolution table. Roll 1d10, divide by 2 and consult the table for the method of argument resolution:

1. thumb war
2. rock, paper, scissors
3. coin flip
4. pencil fight
5. the DM is right

 

[TBoarder]

Arg... I wanna be a part of all of your groups!!!

We have a player in our group who has just admitted that he likes rules debates during the game. I'd go so far to say that he prefers them, but that's just my opinion, not his words. He's admitted to preferring complex rules systems when I said I had issues with Song & Silence needing 2 pages to handle garrotting rules. Of course, he's really good at math, so he can handle those kinds of systems far better than I can (He loves Dangerous Journeys).

Unfortunately, every single time something comes up in the game that he doesn't like or agree with (flanking's stupid, it doesn't work that way in real life; Power Attack should be limited to 5 or the weapon's maximum damage, if a 20th level character catches another high level character unarmored he can cause too much damage) or any time we find with something vague in the rules, a rules debate starts. The debates don't even have to be strictly rules oriented. We recently wasted an hour debating whether or not an outsider (a nightmare) can be turned into a Vampire! I'm perfectly happy to trust the DM with his ideas and follow up on them in game, but any time something different comes up, he has to argue about it, which in turn destroys any kind of mystery the DM may be trying to create with a cool new creature or idea. Unfortuantely, I allow myself to get drawn into them once they start, which draws out the debate even longer (since we both have very different ideeas on what's good in an RPG).

So how much time do we spend debating rules for every 8 hours of game time? At the very least 2 hours, sometimes more than 4 or 5 hours... (Never in his campaign though... the only thing that slows that down is his lack of preparation and the fact that he has the attention span of a fruit fly with ADD).

 

[durath]

MTBDM:

Could you clarify your conflict resolution table. I have a question regarding the pencil fight.

How do you determine the winner of the pencil fight? Is it first person to draw blood or is it whoevers pencil breaks first. Can you use mechanical pencils or are only no.2 pencils allowed?

 

[reapersaurus]

our group is a bit different.

I think I'm the only one in the group who even cares about the rules, hence, I'm the resident rules-lawyer.
We also get in rules debates occasionally - I'm the guiltiest one.
But our debates are not about minutia - more like trying to just explain how the rules as written work!

The group wants a rules-free story-gaming experience, but then their inner order-and-law human tendencies creep up and they want rules at specific times.
Then I have to instantly rifle around in my mind for appropriate stuff from the rules, and find the spot where it's stated explicitly in the books, all within about 60 seconds, or they think (in hindsight) like it's me slowing down the game with rules arguments.

 

[hong]

Unfortunately, every single time something comes up in the game that he doesn't like or agree with (flanking's stupid, it doesn't work that way in real life; Power Attack should be limited to 5 or the weapon's maximum damage, if a 20th level character catches another high level character unarmored he can cause too much damage) or any time we find with something vague in the rules, a rules debate starts. The debates don't even have to be strictly rules oriented. We recently wasted an hour debating whether or not an outsider (a nightmare) can be turned into a Vampire!

The best solution to a problem like that is to start a new campaign, and not invite that player. No hard feelings; he just gets his kicks a different way to everyone else.