Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ackron" data-source="post: 2243904" data-attributes="member: 17127">So far as my own games go, I fall into the "lawful" camp rather than the "chaotic" one.I believe the game is most fun when the characters have as much access to the rules as the DM (monster and NPC stats aside). I don't believe in keeping rules from my players, because I believe the game is played best when both sides have complete access to the rules. That said, I don't believe every player needs to have the rulebook memorized before he plays, as long as he can look up the rule when he needs to understand how it works to make an informed decision.So far, I don't think there is to much disagreement about any of that (from what I can tell).Regarding in game rulings, however, I have found that the game is at its most fair when the rulings during the game are consistent with the listed rules given before the game. What that means is that during the game, I (as the DM) will enforce the rules as written even when they don't make any sense. In fact, it has always been my position that any argument that begins "but it doesn't work that way in real life" has no bearing on a D&D rules discussion (at least not in game). So in the racetrack example given above, in my campaign whoever lost initiave would lose, and that would be the end of it, regardless of the character's speed. The only time I will create house rules during the game, is when a situation arises that is specifically not covered by the rules at all, which is pretty rare.My personal feeling is that playing the game "by the book" as much as possible is the best way to avoid personal bias either for or against the PCs. That is relevant to me because oftentimes I don't trust myself not to be biased. That being said, however, I would not be opposed to playing in a looser game run by a GM who I could trust not to be biased (and in fact, I have played in, and enjoyed such games).Now, in between sessions, I can (and do) issue house rules for situations that came up during the game that I felt were unfair. For these rulings, I do not feel that I have to get approval of my players beforehand, and indeed, oftentimes these house rules are unpopular. However, I feel that when I am not under the pressure of running a game, I can be objective enough to issue house rulings that I believe are fair to all sides. These new house rules are distributed to the players before the next session, and if players want to change the way their characters are built as a result of the new rules, that is usually ok.</blockquote>

Verification