Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6804598" data-attributes="member: 996">It seems to me like the DM is given primacy over the rules even in that sense.&nbsp; I'm not even sure &quot;Rulings not Rules&quot; is actually in a book somewhere, it's something Mearls has said to sum up the whole philosophy.&nbsp;&nbsp; Anyway, 5e rules are written in natural language, so you can probably find a pretext to rule one way or another if you like, but who judges whether the rules are vague enough to require a ruling?&nbsp; Why, the DM, of course.That illusion can be important to some players, or, less charitably, there are players who will draw conclusions from what they observe at the table that their characters have no basis for.&nbsp; If you roll, the assumption is that the thing you're rolling for isn't entirely out of their league, where if you don't they might assume that it is.&nbsp; If what's really happening is that you decided for narrative reasons that an enemy who might or might not succeed, did in that instance, you'd be telegraphing the wrong in formation.&nbsp; Of course, you might also not want to telegraph the right information. <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=";)" />Now, that's only true of some systems and some players.&nbsp; With a different system and players who are up for it, you can have everything out in the open.&nbsp; Or you can merely keep less behind the screen.&nbsp; It's a matter of system, styles, preferences, and what works for the DM, at his table, possibly even moment to moment.&nbsp; There are times, for instance, when, even though you generally keep things behind the screen, you make a roll in the center of the table, or you tell the players a statistic off the monster's stat block.&nbsp; Running 5e requires a lot of DM judgement and is at least as much art and feel as 'science' or system.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6804598, member: 996"] It seems to me like the DM is given primacy over the rules even in that sense. I'm not even sure "Rulings not Rules" is actually in a book somewhere, it's something Mearls has said to sum up the whole philosophy. Anyway, 5e rules are written in natural language, so you can probably find a pretext to rule one way or another if you like, but who judges whether the rules are vague enough to require a ruling? Why, the DM, of course. That illusion can be important to some players, or, less charitably, there are players who will draw conclusions from what they observe at the table that their characters have no basis for. If you roll, the assumption is that the thing you're rolling for isn't entirely out of their league, where if you don't they might assume that it is. If what's really happening is that you decided for narrative reasons that an enemy who might or might not succeed, did in that instance, you'd be telegraphing the wrong in formation. Of course, you might also not want to telegraph the right information. ;) Now, that's only true of some systems and some players. With a different system and players who are up for it, you can have everything out in the open. Or you can merely keep less behind the screen. It's a matter of system, styles, preferences, and what works for the DM, at his table, possibly even moment to moment. There are times, for instance, when, even though you generally keep things behind the screen, you make a roll in the center of the table, or you tell the players a statistic off the monster's stat block. Running 5e requires a lot of DM judgement and is at least as much art and feel as 'science' or system. [/QUOTE]

Verification