Some counter-observations...
Yes, but I don't see that there's not much you do about that through the rules. The rules don't tell a DM what tactics to use, or what foes, or what tone to set, or how to evaluate a PC's plans/strategems, or any one of number of different game elements that can privilage a particular player or playstyle.Sammael said:Because DMs can and do play favorites.
Yes. But don't "inconsistant rulings" also benefit the party sometimes? Why assume inconsistancy is always bad? Its been my experience that having a less codified (and consistant) resolution system means that, occasionally, PC's will try, and succeed with, the kind of creative/wacky/downright absurd stunts that every person I've ever gamed with loved and remembered. Some people accept the inconsistancy as a trade-off for being allowed to brainstorm, and I use that term loosely, some very creative solutions to problem (as opposed, say, to always using the same set of rules-legal 'canned' ability combos).Because DMs can and do make inconsistent rules decisions that can greatly affect the party in a negative way. Codified rules help with this.
True. And no rule system can alleviate this problem, because its not a rules issue, its an interpersonal skills one.Because DMs can and do have mood swings.
Yes. But some gamers like to focus on the situation their characters are in, not the underlying mechanics of the task-resolution system (or systems) in place. Some players can ask the DM "Does it look like I can jump the chasm?" and get a meaningful, honest response.Because DMs can and do forget. And they shouldn't have to be the only ones to know the rules.
These people are silly.Because some players playing in a non-codified system expect that their characters can do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.
This, again, is a communication and interpersonal-skills issue. Are you suggesting the a rules-heavier system like 3.5 doesn't produce player/DM arguments?And many DMs don't know how to deal with this without resorting to heavy-handedness and/or arguments.
Last edited: