Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7024407" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I see it as two camps of &quot;D&amp;D is broken because there is no rule for ____.&quot; or &quot;D&amp;D is broken because as I read it ____, doesn't work.&quot;versus &quot;The design of 5E relies heavily on DM empowerment, and doing what makes sense for your group.&nbsp; Here's how I deal with _____, you could do that or something similar.&nbsp; Just make a ruling that works for your group and go with it.&quot;Of course I'm biased because I fall into the latter group.&nbsp; <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=";)" />I also do have a pet peeve of people that claim &quot;RAW SAYS!&quot; when it doesn't, or at best requires an interpretation of the rules that I don't think is at all clear or obvious.&nbsp; I know that sometimes I can be (aka may often be, frequently, sometimes but not always) as stubborn as the next guy. I simply don't want to be told that I'm running my game &quot;wrong&quot; because I run it differently since I don't rely on the letter of the book and only the book and nothing but the book so help me WOTC.&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses&nbsp; &nbsp; B-)" data-shortname="B-)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7024407, member: 6801845"] I see it as two camps of "D&D is broken because there is no rule for ____." or "D&D is broken because as I read it ____, doesn't work." versus "The design of 5E relies heavily on DM empowerment, and doing what makes sense for your group. Here's how I deal with _____, you could do that or something similar. Just make a ruling that works for your group and go with it." Of course I'm biased because I fall into the latter group. ;) I also do have a pet peeve of people that claim "RAW SAYS!" when it doesn't, or at best requires an interpretation of the rules that I don't think is at all clear or obvious. I know that sometimes I can be (aka may often be, frequently, sometimes but not always) as stubborn as the next guy. I simply don't want to be told that I'm running my game "wrong" because I run it differently since I don't rely on the letter of the book and only the book and nothing but the book so help me WOTC. B-) [/QUOTE]

Verification