Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8090798" data-attributes="member: 18">The idea that a bad behaviour has to be specifically called out as bad in the rules of a game is pretty wild! By this sort of logic, any deeply obnoxious behaviour that the rules fail to call out is actually totally fine. This all goes back to what I was saying though, you're taking the ultimate Rules Lawyer approach to D&amp;D, a totally legalistic approach that basically says &quot;unless it says something is wrong in the actual rulebook, it's not only not wrong, it's probably intended!&quot;. It an approach, I guess, but it's a ridiculous and laughable one. D&amp;D isn't that well-written, nor is it intended to be. Even 5E make a lot of assumptions about what people know, and how they'll behave, and expects them to fill in the gaps. This is why some groups have some pretty bizarre takes, even in the internet age. I've seen it myself as I helped a friend with some friends of his who wanted to learn to play but couldn't figure out a bunch of stuff.So this sort of &quot;if it's not actually written in the books, it's meaningless!&quot; approach is pretty funny, really.Did you play any previous editions? I'm guessing you might not have.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8090798, member: 18"] The idea that a bad behaviour has to be specifically called out as bad in the rules of a game is pretty wild! By this sort of logic, any deeply obnoxious behaviour that the rules fail to call out is actually totally fine. This all goes back to what I was saying though, you're taking the ultimate Rules Lawyer approach to D&D, a totally legalistic approach that basically says "unless it says something is wrong in the actual rulebook, it's not only not wrong, it's probably intended!". It an approach, I guess, but it's a ridiculous and laughable one. D&D isn't that well-written, nor is it intended to be. Even 5E make a lot of assumptions about what people know, and how they'll behave, and expects them to fill in the gaps. This is why some groups have some pretty bizarre takes, even in the internet age. I've seen it myself as I helped a friend with some friends of his who wanted to learn to play but couldn't figure out a bunch of stuff. So this sort of "if it's not actually written in the books, it's meaningless!" approach is pretty funny, really. Did you play any previous editions? I'm guessing you might not have. [/QUOTE]

Verification