Rules Enforcement Poll

[Numion]

Next poll idea:

Do you ever alter your plans for an encounter to suit unexpected actions by PCs?

 

[fusangite]

Numion, Valiantheart, you seem to be carrying over the animosity from the other thread, which is unfortunate.

If you want to understand why I produced figures for the poll both with and without other, look at the comments of Bendris Noulg:

Other: I used the SRD as an outline to produce my own rules, enforcing those without hesitation, ignoring the Core Rulebooks.

In public opinion polling, something with which I have professional experience, it is common to produce multiple tallies including and excluding difficult to quantify selections like "undecided" and "other." And if you think I'm unfairly inflating option #2 by doing this, look at the comments of Psion.

As to your question, Numion,

Do you ever alter your plans for an encounter to suit unexpected actions by PCs?

I imagine there would be a 100% yes response were you to post it as a poll. It should hardly surprise you given that you have actually spent more time in the other thread attacking my decision to do precisely that than you have attacking my position regarding the rules.

In response to your statement,

This (being right in others eyes) is pretty important to you, isn't it?

Well, given that this poll is in response to a dispute with one of my players for the purpose of ascertaining whether my behaviour was reasonable based on the norms of the gaming community, public opinion is exactly what I'm trying to guage here. I'm someone who is easily shaken by personal confrontation (hence my preference of gaming over a number of other forms of social interaction) so when I'm involved in one, I assume that someone is being unreasonable. I just want to make sure that that someone isn't me, which tends to be my usual assumption when I'm confronted.

Given that the purpose of this thread and the original thread which discussed this concept was not to determine if I am objectively "right" but rather to determine if my way of interpreting the rules is out of sync with the larger gaming community, the opinions of others is what it's all about. Regardless, I feel like I'm on much firmer ground, whether your statistical methodology says that 56% agree with me or 71%.

I'm sure that you're correct that this concern is a character flaw on my part but I'm doing my best to correct it.

 

[mmu1]

Well, this poll is turning out much like the other thread where these issues first appeared. Factoring out "other," about 70% seem to share my vision of the D&D rules. Even with "other," a solid majority seem to share my views.

I'm surprised how unpopular the my preferred mode in more rules-light systems is -- it seems like almost no one just rolls dice for NPCs just to make noise.

Except that your poll choices are really geared to slant the responses in a certain way... Two choices about making changes because they make players "unhappy"? I wonder how the responses would look like if some of them were "I change the rules when I feel they don't fit my group's playing style" or "I change the rules if I feel it makes the game more fun."

 

[Apok]

Other.

It's my belief that the rules as presented are there for a reason, so following them is a good idea. However, I have no qualms changing or ignoring rules that I feel are pointless or add nothing to the overall feel of the game.

One of the things I like about 3e is the fact that you don't have to make as many "on the fly" decisions when certain situations arise. Also, if everyone knows what the rules are, then everyone is assured that they are being treated fairly and not being discriminated against by some arbitrary DM ruling.

I know alot of DMs out there who are very much of the attitude, "It's my game and I'll run it however I like, damn the rules!" This isn't necessarily a bad thing, per se, but for players who are unused to that particular DM's quirks, it can be a real rude awakening and easily kill any fun or enjoyment they may have had.

 

[Enceladus]

I subscribe to Henry's "Shoot one player per hour until they agree with you." philosophy.

Much easier, but a tad messier.

 

[s/LaSH]

I'll follow the rules, but <allegory> if they stop halfway down the hall for a ten-minute chat with Bob from accounting, I'll consult the floor plan and try to find my own way, assuming they'll catch up later </allegory>. Um, yeah. Especially when it comes to character concepts, I'm very flexible. (Of course, they're my concepts, but the players are in my world now, whether they realise it or not.)

 

[Celtavian]

Re

I strictly enforce both House and Core rules. Consistency is very important IMO. I have written up all my house rules and placed them in a binder for perusal by the players. I don't like springing changes on players or not giving them a reference for any rules changes I make.

 

[Mark]

I went with "other". I generally follow option 2, but have sort of a "keep the game moving" house rule. To wit: If you can't find the answer to question quickly, make something up and move on with the game. After the game, learn the real rule (or make a house rule) so this situation doesn't slow us down next time.

I rarely if ever feel it necessary to "ignore the rules to make the plot of the game go the way I want it to." First, that sounds a bit like railroading. Second, I feel I owe the players a sense of consistency and the rules + my house rules are a stable body of world physics that they can rely upon. Third, as DM, I wield enough power as it is to manipulate the game; I don't need to rob the campaign of consistency in order to facilitate the fun of the game.

Finally, you can do a lot with the "DM's best friend."

Leaving aside the House Rules thing, that's pretty much my approach. I think it bears mentioning that consistency includes from session to session and "what's good for the PCs holds true for the NPCs" rule.

Let's face it, there are plenty of rules and learning them all isn't easy.

I also will ask the players to either tell me what they know or give me their "best guess" in a pinch. If it is in combat and the player insists on the "letter of the law" it can't hurt too much to let them look up a rule and move on with other areas of combat or other initiatives...in some cases, of course.

 

[Valiantheart]

FROM FUSANGITE

Numion, Valiantheart, you seem to be carrying over the animosity from the other thread, which is unfortunate.

Heh. You are the one who created this poll in some sort of self validation attempt. I didnt say that you stink as a DM but that you handled one scenario less than optimally. To have to create a very slanted poll in order to validate your POV in a single scenario seems pretty sad, actually.

 

[bwgwl]

I wonder how the responses would look like if some of them were "I change the rules when I feel they don't fit my group's playing style" or "I change the rules if I feel it makes the game more fun."

if the rules don't fit my group's playing style, i get a new system; i don't even bother with house rules.

your second quote is functionally identical to fusangite's #2 poll choice: changing the rules to make the game more fun == house rules.