Save my Game: Do the Right Thing.

[crash_beedo]

Umm, people keep calling this an article... it's an editorial - like, the guy's personal soapbox. A blog or something. So this blogger gets up there, and says, you know - "Sometimes when the players have beat down most of my monsters, and it's all over for my side but the crying, I scoop. And sometimes when the players are getting the snot kicked out of them, and I don't want a TPK, I fudge something." End of blog.

This isn't different than general DM advice in just about any edition - I think the blog... er "editorial" is mainly focused on newbies, anyway.

But Dragonbait's reply was awesome:

"I can't say I'm impressed with the article. He's telling everyone to ditch the RAW and start using other rule systems. How am I going to convert my group's Paladin to the White Wolf system? It's total BS! It shows that they don't even want people playing 4e D&D because they are already showing that 7e is coming out next year. And that game is going to rape my neighhbors and kill my dog and ruin imagination land forever. It's typical WoTC BS. And the algorythm comparing GURLS 3e to Warhammer RP 2e and D&D 3E sounds like total asstacular crap.

I'm glad I didn't waste my time reading the article, or else it would have really pissed me off with what they were saying. "

I'm with ya man, I can't believe they're shoving 7E at us already!

 

[Brown Jenkin]

The other element is a "say yes" philosophy and then inventing a rule to cover it, rather than saying no, because the rules don't explicitly allow it.

Which then runs into the "Thats not what you said last time" philosophy of players. Players make choices based on expectations about how the DM will rule. When the rules can change arbitrarily it can lead to both hard feelings as players think they are being discriminated against or upset that they plan they made with the new rule won't work because it has changed again. The RAW is there for both players and DMs.

 

[justanobody]

Umm, people keep calling this an article... it's an editorial - like, the guy's personal soapbox. A blog or something.

It is listed as an article for the Column Save my Game, and not listed as an editorial for Dungeon.

The November Editorial was "Push 'em Real Good".

Now the column may just be a soapbox, but it is listed as an article and not just some opinion piece.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

Which then runs into the "Thats not what you said last time" philosophy of players. Players make choices based on expectations about how the DM will rule. When the rules can change arbitrarily it can lead to both hard feelings as players think they are being discriminated against or upset that they plan they made with the new rule won't work because it has changed again. The RAW is there for both players and DMs.

Some players, some groups.

Not mine.

*Whew*

WP

 

[The Green Adam]

The End is Nigh!

D&D has finally come to understand itself and written the revelation in an official source magazine?! Hold me...I'm frightened.

I kid, I kid...Seriously though, any game producer/product that thinks its creation is the end all be all is out of its head. The RAW rules are RAW and much like a fine steak I would never consume it as such. It needs to be cooked, seasoned and a favorite garnish and side dish added to taste to really make a meal.

Great, now I'm hungry.

AD
"We have enjoyed preparing many of your esoteric dishes. Your Monte Cristo sandwich is a current favorite among the adventurous."

 

[Obryn]

It is listed as an article for the Column Save my Game, and not listed as an editorial for Dungeon.

The November Editorial was "Push 'em Real Good".

Now the column may just be a soapbox, but it is listed as an article and not just some opinion piece.

So, um... Anything any employee of WotC says is an official company statement?

You're familiar with the term "editorial," right?

-O

 

[catsclaw227]

This schism is hardly new to the area D&D. The two main faction are "RAW" (Rules as Written) and an other side that has yet to be cutely named.

I like to call it RAWR (Rules As We Read'em)

As you were....

 

[firesnakearies]

I'm glad I didn't waste my time reading the article, or else it would have really pissed me off with what they were saying.

Haha! I laughed.



$

 

[WalterKovacs]

Ultimately, any DM can have bad habits ... it's important to remember them. In 4e, the rules don't explain how the universe works ... it won't cause everything to fall apart to let something slide, or have a monsters HP drop a bit, etc.

This isn't new feature by any stretch of the imagination, but people steeped in 3e/3.5 might be used to the comprehensive rules pertaining to everything, and may have gotten into habit of defering to the RAW. This is a gentle reminder that with 4e ... everything is already exception based in the first place, so maing an exception may not necessarily break the rules of how the world works, or set up a precedent.

Anyway, I know that my players got a kick out of the wizard saving the fighter from a 100 foot drop because her Bigby's Icy Grasp conjuration happened to be floating above the pit waiting for the solo to ge closer. By RAW, I could have killed the fighter, and had the wizard continue to be a bit ineffectual maintaining two sustainable effects against a singe mobile opponent ... or I could take advantage of the situations that were there and allow the wizard to give the fighter a helping hand, pun slightly intended.

You don't have to accept a premise that the rules are fundamentally flawed to see how, on occaision, you can make the game more fun by just saying "why not".

 

[Connorsrpg]

Good article. Why are players of a RPG game threatened by something like this. The advice is to ignore/change/alter/make up on the fly rules that benefit the game.

We do this all the time, and I have a lot of players wanting to do things all the time - so should I just not allow them?

One thing I find a lot is players wanting to get through some small dweebs in the road to get to bad guy at back. Last time it was goblins. OK, so we have a hulking 6ft 6in warforged who wants to go through the goblins...how do the rules handle this unique situation? I believe it is a bullrush, which the warforged is likely to do (but what a comedy to picture if he fails). He pushes 1 goblin 1 square and that is it? He can;t even do that if there are other goblins behind him. Common sense tells me a warforged has a better chance than that to get through, but I understand not wanting to include rules for every such instance in the RAW. (I would be kee to hear how RAW only supporters would have handled this).

We certainly have a ball with such moves all the time. Roll the dice and see what happens. I could tell you how we handled it, but there really is no need. Point being there are MANY actions that would occur in a movie/book that are not in RAW and I wouldn't want a book with too many rules. (Not to flame - I loved playing 3.5, but I do believe that is where the game went wrong - it was actually harder to DM).