Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why are vague rules praised?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 7793347" data-attributes="member: 58197"><p>Gaah. This is one of my pet peeves.</p><p></p><p>D&D is a creative and open-ended game. In principle, it doesn't need any rules at all. You could just play "let's pretend." But in practice, the rules serve three useful functions:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Handle common scenarios for the DM. </strong>There are a lot of questions that come up over and over in D&D. I swing a sword at the monster: Do I hit it? If so, do I kill it? The rules provide a structure to answer these common questions, rather than the DM having to make it up on the fly all the time.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Give players a sense of what is possible. </strong>As a wizard player, if I have <em>polymorph</em> prepared and a 4th-level slot open, I know that I can try to turn an enemy into a frog. If I don't, I can't. I do not have to consult the DM to know this. That saves time for both of us.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>Head off gameplay "crashes." </strong>Improvising on the fly can lead to unexpected problems that interfere with fun - anything from a player getting sidelined for most of a session, to players feeling like third wheels because their contributions aren't useful, to a TPK. A skilled and experienced DM can see these problems coming and head them off, but not all DMs have that level of skill. A good ruleset reduces the likelihood of such "crashes." (Bad rulesets can make them <em>more</em> likely, but that's another topic.)</li> </ul><p>On the other hand, each rule also comes with a cost. It takes up space in the book, it takes time to learn it and time to apply it, it adds to the cognitive load of playing the game. If the benefits do not justify the cost, the rule should be axed and the subject left to DM discretion. (That was one of the key lessons of 3E.)</p><p></p><p>An ambiguous rule carries the same costs as any other rule, but the benefits are reduced or nonexistent. It offers less support for the DM, since the DM has to figure out how to interpret the rule. It does not help players know what is possible, since they have to consult the DM to find out. It is less reliable in heading off crashes, since different interpretations will result in different levels of "crash-proofing."</p><p></p><p>There's a false dichotomy I see a lot between "rules-heavy system with clear rules" and "rules-light system with ambiguous rules." Those are not the only two options. You can have a rules-light system with clear rules. You can have a rules-heavy system with ambiguous rules. There are merits to both light and heavy, but as far as I'm concerned, there is no merit to ambiguous.</p><p></p><p>If the designers are going to put a rule in the rulebook, they should be crystal clear about its intended function. If they intend to support multiple versions of the rule, then present them explicitly as options and specify which one is the default assumption. As DM, I am perfectly free to house-rule whatever I don't like. Ambiguity does not give me any options I didn't already have. What it does give me is headaches.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 7793347, member: 58197"] Gaah. This is one of my pet peeves. D&D is a creative and open-ended game. In principle, it doesn't need any rules at all. You could just play "let's pretend." But in practice, the rules serve three useful functions: [LIST] [*][B]Handle common scenarios for the DM. [/B]There are a lot of questions that come up over and over in D&D. I swing a sword at the monster: Do I hit it? If so, do I kill it? The rules provide a structure to answer these common questions, rather than the DM having to make it up on the fly all the time. [*][B]Give players a sense of what is possible. [/B]As a wizard player, if I have [I]polymorph[/I] prepared and a 4th-level slot open, I know that I can try to turn an enemy into a frog. If I don't, I can't. I do not have to consult the DM to know this. That saves time for both of us. [*][B]Head off gameplay "crashes." [/B]Improvising on the fly can lead to unexpected problems that interfere with fun - anything from a player getting sidelined for most of a session, to players feeling like third wheels because their contributions aren't useful, to a TPK. A skilled and experienced DM can see these problems coming and head them off, but not all DMs have that level of skill. A good ruleset reduces the likelihood of such "crashes." (Bad rulesets can make them [I]more[/I] likely, but that's another topic.) [/LIST] On the other hand, each rule also comes with a cost. It takes up space in the book, it takes time to learn it and time to apply it, it adds to the cognitive load of playing the game. If the benefits do not justify the cost, the rule should be axed and the subject left to DM discretion. (That was one of the key lessons of 3E.) An ambiguous rule carries the same costs as any other rule, but the benefits are reduced or nonexistent. It offers less support for the DM, since the DM has to figure out how to interpret the rule. It does not help players know what is possible, since they have to consult the DM to find out. It is less reliable in heading off crashes, since different interpretations will result in different levels of "crash-proofing." There's a false dichotomy I see a lot between "rules-heavy system with clear rules" and "rules-light system with ambiguous rules." Those are not the only two options. You can have a rules-light system with clear rules. You can have a rules-heavy system with ambiguous rules. There are merits to both light and heavy, but as far as I'm concerned, there is no merit to ambiguous. If the designers are going to put a rule in the rulebook, they should be crystal clear about its intended function. If they intend to support multiple versions of the rule, then present them explicitly as options and specify which one is the default assumption. As DM, I am perfectly free to house-rule whatever I don't like. Ambiguity does not give me any options I didn't already have. What it does give me is headaches. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why are vague rules praised?
Top