what kind of DM are you: rule interpretation

[Corsair]

That is another thing: I'd rather have a DM say to me "I know what the rule says and how it applies. I just think that is stupid for XXXXX reason, and instead we're doing it YYYYYY way."

The problem is too many "interpretrive" DMs don't even know the base answer first.

 

[Felix]

Literalist when determining What the Rules Say.

Once I know what the rules say, I have no problem at all changing them to suit my fancy, though my fancy often tends to try to establish a consistent framework for players to expect certain things; so when I don't care one way or the other, I go with what the book says.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Though I am myself a literalist in the sense of, "why else have them"... but so far I have found it impossible to believe that words and phrases were all chosen with specificity in the WotC world. The RAW are so poorly written it requires an advanced degree in linguistics and semiotics just to decipher what it was supposed to mean.

So, as Derrida stated, no 'meaning' is stable; new interpretations are found with every careful reading.

I am obviously an Interpreter/BS Artiste.

 

[James McMurray]

The poll clearly calls for some interpretation as to the meaning of the term "literalist". (Is that even an official poll term? I'm looking in the glossary.....) I'm not sure any of us can really determine what the poll author's intent was, so I guess I'll have to stick to the PAW (Poll As Written).

The opening post clearly defines literalist, and there have been no contradictory FAQs or erratta.

 

[Deset Gled]

but so far I have found it impossible to believe that words and phrases were all chosen with specificity in the WotC world. The RAW are so poorly written it requires an advanced degree in linguistics and semiotics just to decipher what it was supposed to mean.

FWIW, one of the original TSR and 3.0 designers, Sean K. Reynolds, disagrees with you on this.

When you pay someone money for a book with rules matter in it, there is a reasonable expectation that (a) they understand the rules well enough to expand upon them, and (b) they make an effort to use the rule terms properly when expanding upon those rules.

The rules for D&D are very precise in their use of certain words.

More here: http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/terminology.html

Or course, it's worth noting that he's ranting about the fact that publishers (including WotC) screw up on this a lot.

 

[TheGogmagog]

Keep in mind, this is the RULES forum, so the people who come here are to some degree concerned about what RAW states. I would bet your poll will show a greater disregard of the rules over in the 'House Rules' forum.

I only scan the general forum when I've caught up on all the discussions here, and only been to the house rules forum once when considering a campaign specific variant.

 

[Bad Paper]

I answered mostly literalist, or whatever the exact wording is, but it doesn't really fit.

As an experiment in my current campaign, I have tried to allow everything to work exactly as written with virtually no meddling on my part. Clearly, this is a problem, as some of the more lopsided rules will really stir up trouble. Unfortunately, I have to occasionally reach down and tweak something. House rules:

• no massive damage
• incantatrix rule for metamagic (inc. rods and divine)
• Scribe Scroll is not Take Dictation
• fractional BABs and saving throws for multi/prestige classers

I think that's pretty much my entire house rule list. Hence, my campaign is really lassez-faire, and my interpretation of the rules winds up being the same. The splat books have murdered game balance, but hey, that's what splat is for, eh?

Luckily, I have a rather levelheaded group, and there are no munchkins. Nevertheless my wife the druid is nigh invincible.

 

[seans23]

I think that's pretty much my entire house rule list.

You forgot "An assassin's death attack is not considered a death effect for the purposes of reincarnation and raising."

or is that just when I DM?

 

[crazy_monkey1956]

I stick close to the rules whenever possible, but if something needs fixing for my campaign, I'll fix it. Luckily, that amounts to very little so far. Then again, I also use a fairly limited array of books at the moment as well. I do have a couple of house rules, but they're almost all flavor and don't affect PCs directly.

 

[billd91]

I start with the rule as best I can figure it out and then interpret it from there.