Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6977029" data-attributes="member: 996">It certainly /can/ be (who'd stop you?).&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp; But, yeah, there's debate as to whether it should be, and by how much.... In 3e, the community clearly leaned heavily on RAW over tinkering, for instance.&nbsp; 5e actively pulls the game in the other direction.Actual ambiguity in the rules themselves is greater in some editions and less in others (ie clearer rules, more precise jargon).&nbsp; It's quite pronounced in 5e - natural language and rulings not rules and all - but even that still leaves it open for a DM to settle on a less ambiguous set of advance rulings and house rules.Seems to go without saying.&nbsp; Wouldn't want to rule for a bad reason.&nbsp; Just as common sense isn't that common, it's not that easy to make a ruling.&nbsp; It's not just what makes 'sense' (which may very well be completely different things to each player at the table), but what's good for the flow of the story, what's fair, what keeps everyone engaged and gives everyone the illusion that their decisions matter and their characters are contributing heroically (or whatever it is they value their characters doing/being), &amp;c...And all that in a split second, or they get suspicious you're making stuff up......which, of course, you don't want them catching on to.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />...DMing, not as unlike being a Sith as you might think...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6977029, member: 996"] It certainly /can/ be (who'd stop you?). ;) But, yeah, there's debate as to whether it should be, and by how much.... In 3e, the community clearly leaned heavily on RAW over tinkering, for instance. 5e actively pulls the game in the other direction. Actual ambiguity in the rules themselves is greater in some editions and less in others (ie clearer rules, more precise jargon). It's quite pronounced in 5e - natural language and rulings not rules and all - but even that still leaves it open for a DM to settle on a less ambiguous set of advance rulings and house rules. Seems to go without saying. Wouldn't want to rule for a bad reason. Just as common sense isn't that common, it's not that easy to make a ruling. It's not just what makes 'sense' (which may very well be completely different things to each player at the table), but what's good for the flow of the story, what's fair, what keeps everyone engaged and gives everyone the illusion that their decisions matter and their characters are contributing heroically (or whatever it is they value their characters doing/being), &c... And all that in a split second, or they get suspicious you're making stuff up... ...which, of course, you don't want them catching on to. ;) ...DMing, not as unlike being a Sith as you might think... [/QUOTE]

Verification