D&D 5E Should player's assume if it's in the DMG then it's RAW?

[Sailor Moon]

Basically, should people just stay away from the DMG if they aren't DMing?

I had a player come to me about selling a magic item. He automatically assumed that all he needed to do was make his Investigation roll and then roll for days to find a seller and BAM, his item is sold. I explained to him that's not how it works in my world. "Well the DMG says XYZ", was the response I got and I told him he shouldn't assume anything he reads in the DMG is automatically RAW.

What do you think?

 

[ExploderWizard]

What is in the DMG is for the DM to use, modify, or ignore as he/she wishes.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think that RAW <> IMC

 

[Celtavian]

We discuss issues such as these as a group. Some of trade off DMing. We like to keep our campaigns consistent across the game world.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

It's not for the players. Even the most basic player assumptions about the DMG can and should be subverted by the DM. In my game, players can find something as simple as a ring of protection +1 and discover that it doesn't work as described in the DMG. That's part of the fun if you're playing and part of the fun if you're DMing, in my opinion.

 

[Morrus]

There might be some acronym confusion here. RAW is "rules as written"; if it's written in the book, it's RAW. That's not the same thing as "optional" or even simply "how it works in my campaign". There's lots in the DMG that's spelt out explicitly as optional, but in reality the whole game is. As the DM you decide how things work.

There's a caveat to that, though. Springing houserules on your players can be a little unfair. It's generally regarded as good form to let your players know in advance which rules you're using, which you're not, and which you're changing. Otherwise you end up in situations where the player tries to do something and out of the blue is told "oh, no, that's not it works in my game", which can easily lead to discontented players.

 

[Sailor Moon]

There's a caveat to that, though. Springing houserules on your players can be a little unfair. It's generally regarded as good form to let your players know in advance which rules you're using, which you're not, and which you're changing. Otherwise you end up in situations where the player tries to do something and out of the blue is told "oh, no, that's not it works in my game", which can easily lead to discontented players.

Then I guess the question becomes this. Should you, as a player, go and read up on the rules in the DMG and assume they are a part of the game?

I don't think it was my fault that I didn't discuss how selling magic items went because I feel like the player shouldn't have gone and read the DMG and assumed that's the way it was done in my game.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

Tell him that nothing, in any of the books is "set in stone". It may be RAW, but that doesn't mean it will be used or used without modifications. Tell him if he has a problem with it, he can DM. Most players, after sitting behind the DM screen for a few sessions, quickly gain a new appreciation for all the things a DM has to do, er, well...behind the screen. IMHO and IME, I've found that the best rulings are ones that place the game and campaign as "more important" than making a single player temporarily happy. (I guess I'm very "Hackmaster-ry" in my outlook on D&D Campaigning and DM'ing). I've been playing this game for something like 34 years, and most of those have been with a single group of players and friends...so I must be doing something right!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Sailor Moon]

I'm not really talking about the spirit of the game where "everything" could be optional. You assume what's in the PHB is how it's going to be unless otherwise told.

I think the DMG is an entirely different kettle of fish.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

As for optional rules in the PHB, I would tell players at the start of a campaign, which I use and which I don't, even when they aren't relevant at first level ("yes, feats are in, multiclassing is not", etc).

As for the DMG, I would probably tell the guy with a Wizard character whether he should expect to be able to craft magic items or not, but I see no reason to go through every rule in the book and tell whether I use it or not. As far as I am concerned the players shouldn't expect anything in the DMG to be true, until I say so. Just because it is RAW, doesn't mean it is a part of my campaign.