Tell me that D&D 3.0/3.5 isn't really like this

[WizarDru]

Sanishiver and Rassilon make some good points, and you should heed them. D&D 3.X CAN devleop into this sort of play, if a DM and players allow it. 3e doesn't stifle creativity, IMHO, but it does quantify enough actions to set a reasonable expectation of what can and cannot be done. This can lead to situations where clever or inquisitive tactical players can attempt odd combos or push the rules a tad to see what happens.


In our group, we have a five minute rule. IF we can't find a resolution to a rules question in less than five minutes, the DM makes a rules call and we move on. Players can research the answer afterwards, but unless it results in a player death by mistake, there are no reversals. What happens in Greyhawk stays in Greyhawk. Emphasis is on keeping things moving and not getting bogged down in specifics unless it becomes necessary.

During an epic battle against an ancient dragon, for example, the party rogue, on a flying carpet, noticed that the dragon had a ring of Heal that was allowing him to stay in the fight. She decided to steal it off his finger in mid-combat. The rules were unclear on how to handle it, so we improvised. One quick reading of sleight-of-hand later and the battle was in full reversal as the dragon watched the rogue flying away with his ring and his victory. Still a memorable part of one of the best sessions I'd ever run.

 

[IronWolf]

When I DM I try very hard to not slow down too much for the unusual issues. If it is some unusual situation I tried to think of the appropriate skill check, assign a quick DC for it and then have them roll. If there was a question on how it could have been handled better we would cover that on the message boards between sessions so we could play closer to the rules if need be in the future, but the action in the game stood as improvised that particular time. We would rather be playing than looking up rules during our actual sessions. The message boards we use can be used rules discussion between games.

 

[Desdichado]

2.0: NEVER let a player see this book, or know the GM only rules. Perhaps kill a player's character if they look at the DMG without your permission (so they know how important this is). These rules are for the GM only, and only the GM can make a ruling in a game . . .

That made some sense, back in the day when D&D was new, but it would be absurd for my group. All of us, on occasion, are the GM. To even suppose that we aren't pretty familiar with the "GM only" rules when we're taking a turn as the player is ridiculous.

I think that's true for many groups. Lots of people who are players are also, or at least have been at one point, GMs too.

 

[Rassilon]

That made some sense, back in the day when D&D was new, but it would be absurd for my group.

Well, for the first few years this particular DM was our only DM. We thought it was just him (good DM by the way), but contrasting the pre 3.0 philosophy to the 3.x philosophy makes me think it was him plus the rules he was reading . . .

(Again: re my "quote" from 2.0 DMG above - it didn't say exactly what I claimed, it just has the tone aI strove for).

Rassilon.

 

[vulcan_idic]

From a thread on RPGnet that kind of depressed me:

******
Yep, that's a darn-near perfect example of why I hate D&D 3e and love C&C. I've seen stuff like that come up all the time in D&D 3e games. I can't stand it.

Personally, I think D&D 3e makes DMs less competant. Because the rules spell out so many specifics (but not all specifics), they end up too reliant on the rulebooks and unable to make decisions when needed. Here's been my experience with 3e:

1. A player wants to do something out of the ordinary. I groan because I know where this is heading.
2. The DM stops the game to a halt and spends 15 min or more looking up the appropriate rule. I start watching the clock.
3. Meanwhile, player's also start looking up the rule. It reminds me of a war game mentality.
4. No one can locate a rule that handles the exact situation. I think, "surely the DM will just come up with a quick ruling so we can return to playing" - but this optimism is sorely misplaced.
5. Because DM fiat in 3e is "forbidden", both sides attempt to argue which rule comes closest like some bastardized appeals court hearing. I amuse myself by pretending I'm watching Law & Order.
6. After an hour or more, there is still no consesus and I'm so bored I'd rather be at work.
7. Finally, the DM is forced to hand-wave the incident temporarily, but will spend the next week on message boards trying to get a more "official" ruling, which could retroactively affect reality. I start wondering why I still play this...
******

It's not really like that, is it? Because this guy's experience is the same as my own. I've only played 3.0/3.5 with one group of people these past few years, and honestly, that's what our sessions are like too. I think I need either a new group or a new game.

But the problem above is with the group, right? Not the system, right?

Sigh. I need a pep talk. Tell me something to cheer me up.

My groups follow this a bit, up until about step three or so. If we as a group can't find anything about it after a quick trip through the table of contents and/or index the dm calls it for that instance and we continue play, doing research later (sometimes a player that night between combat rounds other times all until the next session). Until we find an official ruling we keep consistant with the ruling of the first time, but it never changes things retroactively, just once we find the rule forward. It works pretty well and it seems to keep the game moving.

 

[StupidSmurf]

My DM fiat's in the garage getting a tuneup.

I think the example given in the initial post DOES happen, but I'd hardly call it characteristic of all sessions. I used to know almost every damned rule in AD&D/2ndEd, and now not only have I had to un-learn, re-learn 3.0, I then had to edit my knowledge of 3.0 to accommodate 3.5. It's going to take a few years for me to reach that same level of complete rules assimilation I got with the old rules system. So, yeah, sometimes there's a halt in the action to check on rules covering something that we don't usually see in the game. Meh. Stuff happens.

 

[The_Gneech]

It's not really like that, is it? Because this guy's experience is the same as my own. I've only played 3.0/3.5 with one group of people these past few years, and honestly, that's what our sessions are like too. I think I need either a new group or a new game.

No, D&D is not like this. Certainly none of my games ever have been. We do reference the rulebooks, particularly for Grappling (which is still a major pain), but we do it quickly and if there isn't a handy answer, we make one up and keep moving. d20 + modifier-of-choice vs DC. Easy peasy.

-The Gneech

 

[jasper]

Q. Is any game with rules more than one page like this? Yes
I had this problem when I started playing 1st, 2nd and 3E
I had this problem when play Star Fleet lawyers um battles
I had this problem when playing Gurps, Traveller, Chill etc.
It is the process of :
1 Learning the game system
2. personalities in the game group
3. Lack of experience running a game as in knowing when to move on and worry about the correct rule later.
Not the system but the gamers.

 

[Umbran]

It's not really like that, is it?

It isn't what the game is like at my table. What he's describing there isn't a problem with D&D. It is a problem with the GM not knowing enough about pacing a game session.

That is, of course, if the report is accurate. Humans exaggerate on quite a regular basis, especially about things they find annoying.

 

[Nellisir]

But the problem above is with the group, right? Not the system, right?

The problem is the DM. I'm a big believer in DM's controlling the "metagame" (which is not the same as DM tyranny). The DM should control when the game starts, and when it ends; how quickly the group moves, and the speed of rules decisions. Either make a ruling and move on, or assign someone else the task of looking up the rules and move on. If the game stops for more than five minutes, and the DM isn't caught in the bathroom, something's wrong.

(And most groups I've been in have at least two people who lose focus in far less than five minutes -- myself among them).

Cheers
Nell.