Rules Lawyers, how do you deal with them?

[kkoie]

I can appreciate your problem. It's real easy for some people to suggest to 'know the rules' but sometimes you can miss a rule and thats understandable. If your rules lawyer brings it up once, thats fine, if you accept the rule he mentioned then theirs nothing to worry about, if you do not accept the rule and he wants to argue then you can handle the situation like this.

Basically tell him that you are the DM and you decide which rules are implimented. This rules lawyer is forgetting that the DM has the first, and last say on what rules are accetable in a game!

As a matter of a fact, at the begining of your next session, inform everyone that from now on, there is no problem with bringing up a rules discrepancy once. You and the player will have a brief discussion about the rule, and you will then say either yes or no as to whether or not the rule is acceptable. If it is not, then thats the end of the discussion, if the player starts to argue then he has this statement as an advance warning that arguing with the DM can and probably will be detremental to his characters survival. Tell everyone that its rude to waste time arguing about rules while everyone else is sitting on their butts.

This may sound harsh, but lets be honest, the evil rules lawyer deserves it, he's being a butthead by constantly harranging you. I imagine the first time he takes a bolt of lightening from the sky that deals out 50 points of damage (or how ever much you think is appropriate) will get him to hush up really fast. Thats exactly what I did when I had a player who was being a total goof-ball by argueing with me insessantly. I out and told him, while it wasn't even the monsters turn in combat yet, that he takes 10 points of damage. I said it will get worse if this keeps up. His argueing immediately ceased. The 10 points really didn't make a big differnce in the combat either.

DM: You are standing in the middle of a vast plain with no tree's or rocks or anything. In the distance you see a large red dragon approaching you.

evilruleslawyerplayer: I hide in plain sight.

DM: Hide in plain sight? Their are no trees, bushes, rocks, what exactly are you going to hide behind?

evilruleslawyerplayer: Look, the rules state I can hide anywhere, so I hide in plain sight.

DM: Well you need some sort of shadow to hide behind, their are no big objects to give you cover so unless you give me some idea where you are going to find a shadow, your butt is in plain sight of this dragon.

evilruleslawyerplayer: No way let me get the book and I'll show you where it specifically states...

DM: The sky immediately darkens into a thundercloud, and lightening is flashing, you gonna continue to waste time and risk getting hit by a bolt or are you going to have your character do something?

 

[Dungeon Master]

Nobody knows all the rules. I had the same situation crop up in my campaign a few months ago.
I made myself very clear to the group, if they have a rules clarification or dispute that they simply pull me aside and discuss it rationally. This alleviates the involvement of the rest of the group and makes for a faster turn around time.
I don't care how long you've played or how well you know the rules, players that try and munchkinize a game should be flogged.

I'm the DM, I make mistakes, I'm not perfect. The same is said of players, they make mistakes and are far from perfect.


My advice, talk with the problem player. Tell he/she why you feel the way you feel and what you expect of he/she in the game. explain mutual respect in regards to hosting the game and playing in the game. Be firm, because if he/she is truly a munchkin, they will wine and get irritated. If this is the case, give them the option of playing elsewhere.
If these actions are bringing the level of fun for the rest of the group down, you don't need that element in your campaign.

Us DM's gotsta stick together!

The DM

 

[Darkness]

I'm kinda with Tsyr on this one. (BTW, dude, what became of your custom title? )

If the rules lawyer is right and tells me in time, I thank him and adapt the situation accordingly.
If I miss something but someone notices it later, I admit having made a mistake and move on - but I won't re-write history, so to speak.
Also, I'm a perfectionistic math geek - so I don't make too many mistakes anyway.

And a munchkin rules lawyer is tied up, blindfolded, led from the room, braced against a wall in the courtyard and shot until dead. No, that's not right: He's also shot a few more times after he's dead just to make sure.

 

[buzzard]

And a munchkin rules lawyer is tied up, blindfolded, led from the room, braced against a wall in the courtyard and shot until dead. No, that's not right: He's also shot a few more times after he's dead just to make sure.

I'm fond of the "beaten like a rented mule" school of attitude adjustment myself. I don't like the holes in my walls.

Buzzard

 

[Tsyr]

It's pending... It's been on my mind to ask Morrus one o' these days.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Hi All,

I'm sure this has come up before, but how do you all deal with Rules Lawyers

Nuke them from orbit; it's the only way to be sure.

BG

PS or let them GM, whichever is legal in your state

 

[xjp]

Who plays with all the rules anyway? Hardly anyone. If they bring up an obscure rule, just say that you aren't using that rule in your campaign. If it is a good rule, just say you'll use it next time.

 

[Falcon]

In the campaign I DM, I began it by saying that there is no way I will be able to memorize all the rules and create the campaign, and that I don't mind any rules corrections/discussions, as long as they are done in the spirit of helping us all along in understanding the rules better.

I also implemented a "Two-Minute Rule." If a discussion crops up, then we have two minutes to agree on a ruling for the rest of the session. If someone gets clarifying answers that differ with the session's interpretation, we email it to everyone, and move on.

Rules need to be there in order to provide a common reference for playing, but they are not the reason of the game.

 

[Zerovoid]

Sometimes an extended rules argument with the DM is unavoidable if they are playing extremely wrong and stupidly. For example, apparently I am the only one in my area who understood the AOO rules after reading them the first time. This may be thanks in part to Eric Noah's old site, with those handy diagrams.

Anyway, after DMing one group for about 4 months, I finally got a chance to play, with a different group of my friends. They had some stupid idea that enemies get AOO's when you moved up to attack them. It took me about 20 minutes of arguing, pointing out rules quotations, and referring to online sources. This mistake would completly change the way the combat was played, and there was no way I was giving up until I won them over to my side.

Flash forward about 6 months. Another group. Incidentally, this game didn't last very long, since most of the people just talked about vampire LARP the whole time. They were playing that enemies get an automatic AOO when you move up to attack them, but that charge was a special action that eliminated this. About half an hour later, after referring first to the PHB, then to the AOO cheat sheets on Eric Noah's site, then to the official WotC FAQ, I finally managed to convince them. Here is probably the highlight of the argument paraphrased, "Of course the person who's standing still has the advantage. I'll stand here with this wooden practice sword, you take this one, do you think you could hit me without me hitting you first?" No, you idiot, that would be a readied action. Apparently I'm the only one who heard of those either.

I try to keep my arguments concise about minor things, and respect the DM's rulings, but its really hard when you know that you're right, and there are some things that I will not back down from. Actually, the examples above are probably the worst rules interpretation I know of, and the only time I ever held the game up for an extended argument.

 

[Kestrel]

Ball-peen hammer to the knuckles...works every time.