Ok, I believe I've finally come out of the closet and decided to say this...
As a thirty-nine year old, playing for the past twenty-eight years, this recent concept of "rules lawyers" is something completely new to me. Original AD&D was wise enough to put a caveat on the very opening page to say that the rules are entirely dependent upon the interpretation of the DM and that the DM's word is final. This demanded that a covenant be created between the DM and the players that they understand a few necessary facts
A) We're all here to have fun
B) nobody is out to screw anyone over
C) Given that the DM is god in their game, you submit to their rulings
However, thanks to RULES LAWYERS...this has somehow changed. Rules are now to be used *against* the DM and not there for the DM to run a cohesive fantasy world. It has devolved into a sincere "us vs. you" mentality. As a DM, I abhor this. I don't LIKE to see people have a bad time. I like to see people have heroic fun !!!
Even playing in other people's games I do my best to remember that they are the DM, the GOD in this world...and not to get all upppity or declare "hey, that's not what the rules say"..at times I've faultered, but in the end, I try not to. I try to talk to the GM privately and work something realistic out. And DM's, this requires that you be open to suggestions and not develop a case of megalomania...
Can't we all try to adopt this?
I agree whole heartedly with the OP. I have a high dislike for Rules Lawyers! As a player if the DM makes a ruling I have a question about I ask for clarification. As a DM I say at the beginning that I may vary from the core rules at times but will try to be consistent. There is no call for someone to try to run the game from the players chair. If you want to run the game be the DM.
Just my 2 cp.
However, thanks to RULES LAWYERS...this has somehow changed. Rules are now to be used *against* the DM and not there for the DM to run a cohesive fantasy world. It has devolved into a sincere "us vs. you" mentality. As a DM, I abhor this. I don't LIKE to see people have a bad time. I like to see people have heroic fun !!!
If you believe that a game has "us vs you" mentality because of Rules Lawyers than I want to play in your games. The change from "DM decides the rules" to "the Rules are the Rules" is due to too many "DM vs Players" DMs out there.
"DEATH TO DM FIAT!"
Or "the NPC's lead you around by the nose telling you how you stink."
Or "Becuase I'm the DM and I said so."
Or "Well I know I said that but this is how it's working now."
"All Hail Everyone knowing what stuff does!"
"DEATH TO DM FIAT!"
Or "the NPC's lead you around by the nose telling you how you stink."
Or "Becuase I'm the DM and I said so."
Or "Well I know I said that but this is how it's working now."
"All Hail Everyone knowing what stuff does!"
First of all, DM's have a far more difficult time juggling the WORLD than the players do in their myopic self sightedness...
Second, there are exceptions to every rule...
Third, as stated, DM's need to be mediators...listening, being open minded, and overly concerned with the outcome - that being that everyone have FUN...
If you believe that a game has "us vs you" mentality because of Rules Lawyers than I want to play in your games. The change from "DM decides the rules" to "the Rules are the Rules" is due to too many "DM vs Players" DMs out there.
Consider yourself not invited to my game :)
I agree whole heartedly with the OP. I have a high dislike for Rules Lawyers! As a player if the DM makes a ruling I have a question about I ask for clarification. As a DM I say at the beginning that I may vary from the core rules at times but will try to be consistent. There is no call for someone to try to run the game from the players chair. If you want to run the game be the DM.
Just my 2 cp.
I had someone once, a nice enough guy...got totally bent outa shape because I had an ogremage cast lightning bolt instead of cone of cold...didn't change the outcome of the scenario had I used a cone of cold instead...When I pushed back as to what it was that got to him so much about it he said something to the effect of "because I don't know how to defeat the monsters when you do that"...
Next time I'll just submit the adventures in triplicate to my players before running them for their approval :)
[removed double post, moved thread to Gamer Life forum]
How DARE you!!
It says in the rules that you cANNOT do this on a monday!!!
Of course in the long run this runs equally on all sides of the table.
A bad DM or player causes problems for everyone.
Myself, if I see what I perceive as a mistake by someone on a rule I'll point it out, point out where I get my information from (with the book to the page) then say, "But you are the DM."
Now if the DM rules one way on something I EXPECT him to rule that way on that topic everytime.
However I also point out to the DM when someone (a player, even myself) provokes an AoO or something precisely becuase I shouldn't take advantage of the fact the DM is juggling more than I am.
|
What is wrong with knowing the rules and expecting the game to be played according to them?
Would you accuse someone of being some crazy rules lawyer because he insists you are out on the third strike in baseball?
What if this horrible person then informs you that you need 10 yards to get a first down in football, not 9 yards and 11 inches?
And heaven forbid this abominable creature decides to roll again after getting doubles in Monopoly! Take him out and shoot him!
What is so trascendently "special" about wargames and D&D that knowing the rules to them is considered such at offense against basic human social interaction?
There is nothing wrong with house rules that "everyone" knows about, like the various Free Parking tweaks with Monopoly.
There is nothing wrong with new monsters showing up now and again in D&D.
There is something very significantly wrong with a DM who ignores rules left and right without bothering to let the players know and prepare ahead of time, or to change their plans and preparations spontaneously when something they expected is suddenly revealed to not to be true because the DM cannot deal with it in his game.
I wonder though, are players to be allowed to selectively delete rules from the game as well when they find it inconvenient?
What is wrong with knowing the rules and expecting the game to be played according to them?
Would you accuse someone of being some crazy rules lawyer because he insists you are out on the third strike in baseball?
What if this horrible person then informs you that you need 10 yards to get a first down in football, not 9 yards and 11 inches?
And heaven forbid this abominable creature decides to roll again after getting doubles in Monopoly! Take him out and shoot him!What is so trascendently "special" about wargames and D&D that knowing the rules to them is considered such at offense against basic human social interaction?
There is nothing wrong with house rules that "everyone" knows about, like the various Free Parking tweaks with Monopoly.
There is nothing wrong with new monsters showing up now and again in D&D.
There is something very significantly wrong with a DM who ignores rules left and right without bothering to let the players know and prepare ahead of time, or to change their plans and preparations spontaneously when something they expected is suddenly revealed to not to be true because the DM cannot deal with it in his game.I wonder though, are players to be allowed to selectively delete rules from the game as well when they find it inconvenient?
Wow. I think you read one thing, and thought it was another. Start your own post.
|
|
There is a huge difference between a player asking for a clarification and a player trying to twist the rules to his benefit. I have no idea how many times over the years I've had players pulling some F. Lee Bailey type rules twisting to get an advantage. And, frankly, I haven't met too many "rules lawyers" who know the rules half as well as they think they do.
Silverhair plays in my game (we have three different games with three different DMs currently active) and he is a great example of the kind of player I like. I make a ruling, he asks for a clarification, we move on. If he has an issue with something, we discuss it during the break or after the game.
Too many times, I've seen a "rules lawyer" get off on ruining everyone else's fun over some quibbling little point, grinding the game to a halt.
As a point of reference I watched an excerpt from The Gamers II where a player contradicts the DM and "browbeats" the DM into allowing a class and a race that the DM had specifacally said earlier he was not allowing in his game. This scene is to me what exemplifies a "Rules Lawyer". The Player opened his PHB and showed the DM what was said in the PHB about all races and classes being allowed in the game.
This is what I refer to as a "Rules Lawyer". Now with that being said, if I am running a game and I make a ruling in game, go with it, then come to me out of game and show me where you think I was mistaken. But do not hold up the game with arguing about minutia. That just spoils the evening/day for everyone.
Just my 2 cp. Sorry about the ranting.
Silverhair plays in my game (we have three different games with three different DMs currently active) and he is a great example of the kind of player I like. I make a ruling, he asks for a clarification, we move on. If he has an issue with something, we discuss it during the break or after the game.
Can't you just FEEL the love oozing here? :)
|
|
Of course in the long run this runs equally on all sides of the table.
A bad DM or player causes problems for everyone.
Myself, if I see what I perceive as a mistake by someone on a rule I'll point it out, point out where I get my information from (with the book to the page) then say, "But you are the DM."
Now if the DM rules one way on something I EXPECT him to rule that way on that topic everytime.
However I also point out to the DM when someone (a player, even myself) provokes an AoO or something precisely becuase I shouldn't take advantage of the fact the DM is juggling more than I am.
Was going to say this... but you did to... This is how I am to...
I run into many DMs who either
1.. Don't know the game.. and appreciate learning the rules.
2.. Have many house rules that I have no clue of when I start playing and when I point out the mistake and find out it is a house rule I say ok..and then later after the game can decide if I like the house rule and if it is worth staying in the game *Most games I don't stick with are because of terrible house rules that either break the game or unbalance the game more it is now.
3. Or different interpretation and if the GM sees it different then me I will go with the GM and bring it up at a later time if I think his interpretation is way off *after the game*
But I won't start arguments in the middle of the game as a player unless. the GM gets pissy about it and angry at me for originally bringing it up.. I hate that.. and I am not going to stay in that group for very long.
Most Bad DMs I meet are the ones that take it personally if I question or correct something.
Now as a GM I have no problems with players correcting me if I am wrong.. But if i think they are wrong and I make my decision and they still argue with me.. I will get upset.. Usually I end up not inviting back that player.
I definitely agree that there's no point in arguing with the DM. The player who argued about the electrified ogre mage is just ridiculous; there's no rule that says that the DM can't create new monsters!
But I agree with the other posters who don't like playing the kind of game where the DM makes up 5 new house rules each session. That's when I politely say "This game is not for me" and I bow out gracefully.
As a point of reference I watched an excerpt from The Gamers II where a player contradicts the DM and "browbeats" the DM into allowing a class and a race that the DM had specifacally said earlier he was not allowing in his game. This scene is to me what exemplifies a "Rules Lawyer". The Player opened his PHB and showed the DM what was said in the PHB about all races and classes being allowed in the game.
I notice you didn't mention the part where the DM at first denies the "rules lawyer" (i.e. the "bad gamer" in the movie) a roll for a save. Only after the rules lawyer stands up for his "right" does he allow it (which due to some house-rule "critical save failure" back-fires on the rule lawyer).
Now as a GM I have no problems with players correcting me if I am wrong...
If you are the GM, how can you be wrong?
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?
Read the original poster's post again:
"And DM's, this requires that you be open to suggestions and not develop a case of megalomania..."
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?
Kinda sad, ain't it? Makes you wonder if they are actually rules lawyers themselves!!!!
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?Read the original poster's post again:
"And DM's, this requires that you be open to suggestions and not develop a case of megalomania..."
Congratulations~!!! Your "point" has NO merit whatsoever.
Congratulations~!!! Your "point" has NO merit whatsoever.Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?Read the original poster's post again:
"And DM's, this requires that you be open to suggestions and not develop a case of megalomania..."
Huh? I thought I was agreeing with you that DMs and players have to work together and trust each other. Obviously I failed my Diplomacy check. :~(
Huh? I thought I was agreeing with you that DMs and players have to work together and trust each other. Obviously I failed my Diplomacy check. :~(Congratulations~!!! Your "point" has NO merit whatsoever.Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?Read the original poster's post again:
"And DM's, this requires that you be open to suggestions and not develop a case of megalomania..."
Not really. It seems that whereas I was saying DM's such as myself face with rules lawyers...it suddenly became a magnet for those decrying the sins of "bad dms".
honestly, I couldn't get what you were trying to say...sorry for the snarky riposte!!!
|
|
I thought you KNEW it is always the DMs fault when the whiny PC can't kill an ancient red dragon with a toothpick...
I've been playing a LONG time, and, I'm sorry, but players have gotten whinier and whinier over the years. God, you let one PC die and suddenly you're a "big meany who promotes doubleplusunfun".
God, go play Amber or Tea Party or something...
I thought you KNEW it is always the DMs fault when the whiny PC can't kill an ancient red dragon with a toothpick...
You know, I had a good group of gaming friends that started from high school and went until a few years ago when I was 35...then I moved to Denver...and BOOM...culture shock.
Actually, I wonder what it might have to do with the "pick-up game" mentality of things like Living Greyhawk...
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?Kinda sad, ain't it? Makes you wonder if they are actually rules lawyers themselves!!!!
Personally, I like to think I'm the "good" kind of rules lawyer, i.e. I'm very familiar with the rules, but I certainly wouldn't argue with the DM if he has a good reason for ruling the way he does.
The "bad" kind of rules lawyer (e.g. the guy who argues that all ogre mages use Cone of Cold) I wouldn't call a "rules lawyer" -- I'd just call him a "jerk". :-)
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?Kinda sad, ain't it? Makes you wonder if they are actually rules lawyers themselves!!!!Personally, I like to think I'm the "good" kind of rules lawyer, i.e. I'm very familiar with the rules, but I certainly wouldn't argue with the DM if he has a good reason for ruling the way he does.
The "bad" kind of rules lawyer (e.g. the guy who argues that all ogre mages use Cone of Cold) I wouldn't call a "rules lawyer" -- I'd just call him a "jerk". :-)
I hear ya...but all in all it just came across feeling like some sort of chess game...with the party versus me...rather adversarial...
|
|
I thought you KNEW it is always the DMs fault when the whiny PC can't kill an ancient red dragon with a toothpick...You know, I had a good group of gaming friends that started from high school and went until a few years ago when I was 35...then I moved to Denver...and BOOM...culture shock.
Actually, I wonder what it might have to do with the "pick-up game" mentality of things like Living Greyhawk...
Nah, it's endemic to gaming everywhere now, except for maybe in Shadowrun and Cthulhu.
Character death is now a "flaw in DMing", it doesn't "advance the story", it is "unfun". Character classes that can't do everything all the time are "flawed". Anything that actually challenges players, puts them in situations where they may not have access to all their goodies is "unfair".
I was reading a thread on the GITP forums where a player was asking what his wizard should do after a rehmoraz (actually, he said "really hot worm, he didn't know what a rehmoraz was, which I thought was cool. I wish I had more players that didn't know everything...) ate the mule that had his spellbook in its saddlepacks. Most of the thread was other players saying what a tool the DM was for doing that to him. The OP said something to the effect of "Dudes, lighten up. The DM wasn't 'out to get me', he didn't even know my spellbook was stored in the saddlebags". The people responding showed me exactly how "wussified" the modern player is...
Sad, really.
Strange? Am I mistaken or was the title of this thread "Death to Rules Lawyers"? I was pretty sure DM's were not mentioned in the OP first posting. If you wish to discuss bad DM's might I suggest starting a thread of your own?
Oh, sorry to [urinate] in your cornflakes.
Let's murder everyone that doesn't agree with the OPer!
Is that better?
EDIT: Fixed the word for silverhair, don't want to upset him.
"doubleplusunful"? Oh, well. If we are going to talk DM's, I am learning that there are more styles of DMing than there are stars in the sky. With that being said, I think of myself as a mediocre DM. I am familiar with the rules and can follow a written module fairly well. But as with the Beta playtest I don't know everything and do not think I can be expected to know it all. If I run across a situation ingame that I am not sure of I have no problem turning to a more knowledgeable player and asking what he knows. I just have a problem with the one that tries to run my game from the players chair by telling me what I can and cannot do. If you do not like my style, go find someone whose style of DMing you do like. I and the people playing in the game are here to have fun, not hear you b**ch and moan about why won't I let you do so-and-so.
Just my 2 cp.
|
|
"doubleplusunful"?
For the record, I wasn't talking about your half-orc, I was referencing an earlier game from the "bad days" about three years ago.
You took dying quite well, actually, and I appreciated that ;)
And, dude, we had a BLAST yesterday. You did a good job, frankly, and I'm looking forward to next Sunday :)
pres man wrote:
Oh, sorry to piss in your cornflakes.
Let's murder everyone that doesn't agree with the OPer!
Is that better?
My friend, (and I use the term loosely) you have just shown that you can be both childish and ignorant at the same time. Congratulations. If you cannot express yourself without cussing at me or anyone else then do not address me again.
pres man wrote:
Oh, sorry to piss in your cornflakes.
Let's murder everyone that doesn't agree with the OPer!
Is that better?
My friend, (and I use the term loosely) you have just shown that you can be both childish and ignorant at the same time. Congratulations. If you cannot express yourself without cussing at me or anyone else then do not address me again.
P*** is a cuss word to you? Wow, you are quite sheltered, o'high and mighty one. Here, I'll fix it for you so you don't get your panties in a bunch.
I would say just shoot Sebastian, but why waste a bullet on him?
My apologies to the rest of the thread. I cannot and will not tolerate inconsiderate people that cannot express themselves with no profanity. Yes, p*** is a cuss word to me thankfully my generation paid the price so your generation Mr. pres man can be ignorant all you want to be.
In answer to your unspoken question I am 60 years old, and a Vietnam Veteran. As if that makes any difference to you. Good day to you sir.
HD's GF had a problem in game yesterday when it looked like the others were going to kill some mastiff watch dogs. I wasn't real thrilled about it either but I figured out a way in game to save them. That's what DM's are supposed to do. Isn't it?
In favor of "pres man"'s choice of words, I'll publicly state that I cuss like a sailor in heat. I also find it rather limiting to not do so here. Suffice it to say, I like to liberally add flavor to my flowery adjectives, adverbs, nouns and verbs~!
However, the issue here is that you (unsuccessfully) attempted to thread-jack and turn the intent of the thread around from one talking about gamers from a DM's perspective into one about DM's from a gamer's perspective.
Now, feel free to go #%^# yourself and take a flying leap :)
|
|
HD's GF had a problem in game yesterday when it looked like the others were going to kill some mastiff watch dogs. I wasn't real thrilled about either but I figured out a way in game to save them. That's what DM's are supposed to do. Isn't it?
Yeah, I thought it was funny that we had to explain to her, later on, that hellhounds were "bad doggies" and deserved to die...
hehehe
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I would say just shoot Sebastian, but why waste a bullet on him?
Particularly given that I'm immune to such mortal weapons.
Now, if you wanted to kill Sharoth, all you would need to do is write "scratch and sniff" on the bottom of a swimming pool.
You would invoke the wrath of the SPCA or something. Plus, my gf thinks his avatar is "cute" and she would be sad...
Did you explain that I am a total bad-ass, cute pony avatar notwithstanding?
(Unless such explanation would ruin the chick-magnet effect of the avatar, in which case, forego it, and instead explain that I am sensitive and deep and stuff.)
My apologies to the rest of the thread. I cannot and will no tolerate inconsiderate people that cannot express themselves with not profanity. Yess, p*** is a cuss word to me thankfully my generation paid the price so your generation Mr. pres man can be ignorant all you want to be.
In answer to your unspoken question I am 60 years old, and a Vietnam Veteran. As if that makes any difference to you. Good day to you sir.
Out of respect I'd do my best not to curse around you...
In favor of "pres man"'s choice of words, I'll publicly state that I cuss like a sailor in heat. I also find it rather limiting to not do so here. Suffice it to say, I like to liberally add flavor to my flowery adjectives, adverbs, nouns and verbs~!
However, the issue here is that you (unsuccessfully) attempted to thread-jack and turn the intent of the thread around from one talking about gamers from a DM's perspective into one about DM's from a gamer's perspective.
Now, feel free to go #%^# yourself and take a flying leap :)
Murder everyone that questions a DM!
If a player dares question you, hit him upside the head with your DMG!
If that doesn't work, use the chair of persuasion!
Did you explain that I am a total bad-ass, cute pony avatar notwithstanding?
Somehow I think your choice of avatar is much like my pink bubblegum dice that I've lovingly titled my "Tutti-Frutti Dice of Death and Humiliation".
My players get ROYALLY po'd when I land a nasty blow against them with those dice :)
I think I used to use, "Go take an aerial fornication in a circular mobile piece of pastry with a hole in the center".
I am not against semi-appropriate profanity. Such as smashing your thumb with a hammer. I just think people should be able to express themselves without using a crutch which I view profanity as.
Again, just my 2 cp.
Murder everyone that questions a DM!
If a player dares question you, hit him upside the head with your DMG!
If that doesn't work, use the chair of persuasion!
So, how exactly does that rather thin and awkward tangent feel that you are desperately clinging to ?
|
|
Did you explain that I am a total bad-ass, cute pony avatar notwithstanding?
(Unless such explanation would ruin the chick-magnet effect, in which case, forego it, and instead explain that I am sensitive and deep and stuff.)
Sebastian, she's a legal secretary. When I told her your back story (Lawyer, the "bonus" Bella Sara cards, etc...) she thought she should get a poster of your avatar for her boss :)
I think I used to use, "Go take an aerial fornication in a circular mobile piece of pastry with a hole in the center".
I am not against semi-appropriate profanity. Such as smashing your thumb with a hammer. I just think people should be able to express themselves without using a crutch which view profanity as.
Again, just my 2 cp.
IMHO, more importantly be able to experess their views in a cognant and intellectually cohesive manner. Once proven, THEN grab the swear-shaker and apply liberally!!!