After seeing a plethora of threads involving what I consider rules minutia. I'm looking at you "scry and fry", "ice tomb hex", sno-cone wish machine". It got me thinking, do you need an "official" response or can you make a decision yourself.
But, but what about new players, how will they manage to run a game if one of these ultra-rare situations happens and what will they do if they go to another table and the rules are different.
I don't know play whatever is fun at your particular table and When you go to a table with different rules, make your desicion about whether that game is for you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think some of it is the fact that a number of players dont have access to a regular group and play in PFS where you do not always play with the same people.
However, Outside of PFS im not sure why people cant simple come up with a rules conclusion that works for their group and move on from there. Outside of stuff like ice tomb hex (which i agree could be re-wroded) a number of stuff like the recent MWF Kasath trend seems to be all munchkin driven (however, if thats a mis-construed observation my appologies)
I think there are often a number of posts by people who either have a preconcieved view of how something works but their DM disagrees and they need an 'official' opinion. These specific hreads are a mixure of the player being correct and the DM being obtuse to the player insisting their reading is correct with 20 people telling them they are wrong.
Really, as I dont play PFS i havent had much personal desire to get an official view point. Most issues can be worked out with a common understanding with players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most DMs I've played with believe that unless there's a really good reason to change it, they should keep it Rules as Written. This can be a problem when the RAW is nonsensical.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think this 'demand a ruling' phenomenon is really a function of the internet, rather than of actual in-person gaming.
Very few players (or DM's) are going to sit still for the equivalent of a 15 page thread-worth of arguments about something. And it's even less likely that the level of frustration and snark that pops up in these situations is actually taking place in face-to-face rules quibbles.
Suck up an hour or two sitting at someones kitchen table trying to prove to the DM that "FOO doesn't work that way" while the rest of the party has to listen to you, and the odds of you being invited back for the next session are vanishingly slim.
In my experience people know that already. So generally the DM just rules and that's that. Nobody has ever called up the devs at one of my sessions to demand arbitration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After seeing a plethora of threads involving what I consider rules minutia. I'm looking at you "scry and fry", "ice tomb hex", sno-cone wish machine". It got me thinking, do you need an "official" response or can you make a decision yourself.
But, but what about new players, how will they manage to run a game if one of these ultra-rare situations happens and what will they do if they go to another table and the rules are different.
I don't know play whatever is fun at your particulat table and When you go to a table with different rules, make your desicion about whether that game is for you.
In almost all cases where there is a serious question about how the rules should be interpreted, I normally reread over the rules and make a non-binding decision for that moment. After the game, or if there is a break period during the game I'll look up the rule again and see if our question is common and if there is an answer to it. From that point on, I'll use that answer.
In general, I refrain from changing the rules from RAW during the course of a game. As as DM, and as a player, doing something like that during play feels as though the players are being ambushed by a house rule.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone likes to be right.
Some people try to make that happen by finding out what "right" is and adjusting their own position to be in line with it.
Others instead try to get someone to change "right" to be the thing they already believe.
These two groups produce very different kinds of threads.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to be able to play a character in more then one group without having to redetermine how all the rules work, determine what the group considers "appropriate" power level wise, or having to learn to another set of house rules. Maybe if there was rulings on how these things worked, balanced game design and less of a need for houseruling, this would be possible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After seeing a plethora of threads involving what I consider rules minutia. I'm looking at you "scry and fry", "ice tomb hex", sno-cone wish machine". It got me thinking, do you need an "official" response or can you make a decision yourself.
But, but what about new players, how will they manage to run a game if one of these ultra-rare situations happens and what will they do if they go to another table and the rules are different.
I don't know play whatever is fun at your particular table and When you go to a table with different rules, make your desicion about whether that game is for you.
Bear in mind that the vast majority of Pathfinder players don't post on the forums. That plethora of threads represents a relatively small sampling of the overall player base.
It's not necessarily a bad thing, either. Some players want to use RPG rulebooks as definitive games in themselves, and enjoy trying to find solutions to the tactical puzzle that is represented by a situation set within the boundaries of the rules. It's a perfectly valid playstyle, and not something that players themselves have developed - over the years we've seen games built in ways that cater (intentionally or otherwise) to that style of play. Others may simply want a well-defined playing field for moving between games without having to adjust.
Personally, I feel too many rules step on my toes as a world builder. I know how I want certain "physics" to work in my world, and when there's a clash I overrule the rulebook in those circumstances. I see every individual campaign I play in (on either side of the screen) as representing a unique RPG designed by the GM utilizing a set of rules to do the majority of the groundwork. Some people "play Pathfinder", while I "play John's Jade Regent Campaign" without too many expectations of things being the same when I "play Fred's Reign of Winter Campaign."
I play with people that trust each other's judgement, so we don't have problems with GM rulings even if they clash with the rulebook. So far nobody has ruled anything ridiculous, and we tend to go in with a fairly laid-back attitude to "winning", focusing instead on creating a rich story.
Not everyone has that kind of group. Not everyone wants that kind of group. If we all had to play the same way, there'd be a far smaller audience for RPGs, and therefore far less material for us all to share.
(I'll admit, it frustrates me a bit when I see people trying to nail down every little detail of the game, but that's my problem to deal with.)
No I do not.
Some of the topics that people want answers for I agree with and many others just make me roll my eyes.
There are just SO many rules and options in Pathfinder than when one of them isn't fully explained or fixed I have no problem with that. Its bound to happen in any game with this much content and im glad they fix as many issues as they do.
Simplest reason, Many groups such as mine follow the theory That it is easiest not to have house rules and as such if something as written comes into dispute between two or more people in our group then we need an explanation and definitive answer to the problem.
"Run my game"? No.
I would like them to do their job and support their game though, which is why I request FAQs and such for broken things.
|
Very few players (or DM's) are going to sit still for the equivalent of a 15 page thread-worth of arguments about something. And it's even less likely that the level of frustration and snark that pops up in these situations is actually taking place in face-to-face rules quibbles.
Suck up an hour or two sitting at someones kitchen table trying to prove to the DM that "FOO doesn't work that way" while the rest of the party has to listen to you, and the odds of you being invited back for the next session are vanishingly slim.
I've acually seen it happen before.
That's when I go to the kitchen and do things to the silverware.
I think that internet anonymity also helps spur this though.
|
|
I personally like perusing to see if weird rule crap that's giving me a brainfart has been covered by the dev's.
And, yet....I've actually looked at something they said, decided that it was wrong, and told the player "I don't care what So-and-So said, I disagree with them."
Not only that, I resisted the urge to call them out on it and in doing so became one less water drop in an unending line of bleak waves eroding away at the metaphorical beach that is their finite supply of give-a-rat's-ass.