Should I become a Rule's Lawyer?

[Witness]

I've been playing in my current campaign for about a 18 months. The DM has a alot of RPG experience but not much experience with 3E, and often plays fast & loose with the rules. We don't use miniatures, we usually just go around the table rather than counting down initiative, etc. Over the course of the game afew rules issues have come up that I feel haven't been handled well but overrall I feel it is an excellent campaign and he is an excellent DM. but...

I also play in a very rules-heavy dungeon-crawl style game with guys who have memorized every rule and every rule book. Because of this (and my patrolling the Rules forum here) I've noticed some discrepancies between how-we-do-things and how-things-should-be-done-by-the-book in the first game. Specifically these issues are:

1. Casting most spells is a full-round action rather than a standard action.

2. Death domain special ability deals damage even if target has enough hit points to survive.

There is some other little stuff but I won't get into that. Neither of these big issues were ever stated as official house-rules, rather this is just how we have played so far. I did try to bring up the issue of #1 and he seems to think that is the way it is supposed to be. Because we were in the middle of combat , and I did not have a specific page/rule reference I let the issue drop. #2 is a little more complicated because the character with that ability is a PC and that PC and my PC are mortal enemies. Also, he just took a feat to enhance that ability (Enhance Spell-like ability or something, from BoVD which I don't have).

So what is the best way to handle this? Do I bring these rules discrepencies to light? insist that we adjudicate combat with initiative and battlemats and miniatures? Or do I bite my tongue, sit by obliviously as Death's cold Maximized Enhanced +5 Hand of Slaying descends upon me and ...

 

[Tom Cashel]

My reaction, as a DM, is no. If you're happy with the overall feel and flow of the campaign, you're only going to throw a wrench in that flow by calling the DM on rules quibbles. Look on the bright side: you get to play a rules-heavy, by-the-book game approximately half the time.

 

[Angcuru]

My answer is in the form of a question, Mr. Trebeck.

Is coating your hands in honey, your hair in worcestershire sauce, your torso in T-Bone steaks, tying your ankles together with beef jerky, and shuffling through a grizzly-bear-infested forest why yelling "EAT ME! I'M FULL OF NUTRITIOUS GOODNESS!" a good idea?

 

[blackshirt5]

I think we all know the answer to that.

Although I've considered, as of late, covering myself with honey and then handcuffing my hands behind my back and walking back and forth down Eli Street in Colonia yelling "Eat Me!", but that's another bad idea.

As is becoming a rules lawyer.

 

[Witness]

Yes but much of my enjoyment of the campaign comes from my PC. Also all of my leverage comes from the PC. MY character is the only one who has been around since the beginning of the campaign and as such, the other characters often defer to mine because he has seen and done tthe most and is the most entwined with the various actions and intrigues. The evil guy with the Death touch however, tries (and often succeeds at) taking the game in a direction that I not only don't want but don't enjoy. So in a bigger sense, by not saying anything, my character is more likely to die, the game is more likely to evolve into something very different which I do not like, and munchkinism will reign unchecked.

 

[blackshirt5]

So there's only one thing to do: Kill the Death Touch guy, and send him to the Hell of Eternal Celebrity Jeopardy!

 

[Witness]

posted by Tom Cashel:

My reaction, as a DM, is no.

So does that mean that, as a DM, you wouldn't want to know when you had made a mistake or a bad ruling? Doesn't being wrong and being TOLD your wrong ultimately make you a better DM?

 

[Witness]

Posted by blackshirt5:

So there's only one thing to do: Kill the Death Touch guy, and send him to the Hell of Eternal Celebrity Jeopardy!

The problem is, he has a whole evil organization at his back, not to mention potential armies of undead, tons of money, and lots of magical items. While I have goodness and right on my side (well lawful-neutrality at least), I still am at a distinct disadvantage. It is a very personal grudge and my good-aligned companions aren't really a part of it. Even in a one-on-one fight, with the Death Touch the way it is I would probably lose.

 

[physicscarp]

Respectfully disagree with everyone

I have to disagree with the responses offered so far. Discussion of the rules with your DM, at the appropriate times, does not make someone a rules lawyer. I have found my self in the same situation before, especially with people not familiar with the 3E rules. I recommend speaking with the DM after the game, and simply pointing out the particular rules. Make it known that some of the rules changes are taking away from your enjoyment of the game, but that the final decision is up to him, and that you'll respect it. Once he makes his decision, that's it. Either play within his rules or find a different group.

On a side note, these small rule changes can have a definite change on the game and rules. For instance, if your DM allows you to draw a weapon as a free action, how do you think the guy with Quick Draw is going to feel? Probably cheated out of a feat. And I'd agree with him. Things like requiring all spells to be full round actions changes the feel of the game, AND the feel of certain PC classes. If players are not made aware of these before playing, then that is a problem. Just out of curiosity, how long do sorcerer's take to cast a spell that has been altered with a metamagic feat?

Carp

 

[Witness]

Just out of curiosity, how long do sorcerer's take to cast a spell that has been altered with a metamagic feat?

There are a couple of charcters who are multiclass sorcerers but only 1 or 2 levels so they can't cast high enough level spells that metamagic has ever been an issue