Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jepeddo 07-20-06, 05:57 AM	I just recently started playing in game. The DM said that it's exactly by the core rules, complete books are usable, no house rules. The DM also said that he has ran a few 3.5 campaigns before. Should I feel like a rules lawyer if I want to correct the DM over blatant PHB rules misuse? The problem is that he seems to get annoyed with me, even when I don't speak up until I find it in the PHB. Here are a few examples: Was letting armor stack with armor bonuses from bracers of armor and mage armor. This presented a problem for me, since I am a fighter/sorcerer who wears no armor, and has turned down the bracers. Problem came up when the platemail toting cleric wanted the bracers of armor. I could have a nice 29AC at level 5 with only a bracers of magic +1 and mundane items. Attacks of Opportunity come out of nowhere. He gives them sometimes when you move next to a medium creature, when you take a 5' step back, or even when I casted defensively and made the check. Combat was too hard to do when I'm getting random damage all over the place, so I brought it up. It was also a bummer that my concentration skill was nerfed. Let the party wizard cast Open/Close, the level 0 spell, on a locked door. It popped open instantly. I had to object right away, because our poor rogue was getting shut out by a level 0 spell. Not DM related, but the same wizard rolls 2d8 for magic missle at level 5. 2d8s? I mentioned it once to the player, but he keeps rolling d8's. I decided to just forget about it. I didn't even notice it until I heard him say "3" for magic missle damage. Anyway, after a few sessions I get dirty looks when I try to correct important core rules. I don't correct him when he seems to make up spells, or have monsters do crazy stuff, because I understand that those are DM territory. I actually enjoy experiencing weird acting monsters and NPC spells. They give me reason to use Knowledge checks more often, since metagaming can't wrongly take over. But I have no idea how my spells, equipment, or combat might function. Luckily, it's not my usual group.
Pegasos989 07-20-06, 07:01 AM	You should be "nice" and borrow DM and the player of wizard your PHB and say "You might want to take look into this book...". Seriously, that guy doesn't seem to know enough rules to DM. Just continue mentioning those rules. If you still get mean looks, when the session is ending, say "Guys, I want to talk to you about something." And then go along the lines of "I do enjoy the campaign cause of DM being so creative and everything, but I have noticed that there is some mad rulebreaking. 2d8 magic missiles? 0 level spells opening locked doors? AoOs out from nowhere? It is even okay if people get confused about them, everyone makes mistakes, but I feel like you guys get annoyed when I correct you. Hey, someone, just tell me what is going on here?"
Karn_Maradis 07-20-06, 07:06 AM	In my mind the DM is free too change some rules before starting a campaign. However, when the campaign is running it does not seem right to change on the fly. I think the entire group must agree. That said, I find your DM is doing a poor job, bacause he's either changing rules when he wants to or he just doesn't comprehend the rules. In my eyes it's your responsibility as a player to remind the DM of how the rules work, or otherwise help him change the rules (thus making houserules) so they seem more fit for the campaign. I don't see something like that as being a ruleslawyer. I players correct me at least once every session. I'm not GOD you know and neither is your DM; we make mistakes. Shortly, stay awake and tell your DM. Otherwise it will grow worse and eventually it might end up in some sort fight. It's a game afterall and it's about fun. Hope I helped you, Greetz Karn
kelvinaw273 07-20-06, 07:09 AM	Sounds like this is best said to your DM in private, exactly as above.
GreatWyrm 07-20-06, 07:46 AM	Also, the way I see definition of "Rules Lawyer" is somone who constantly nitpicks rules, on small technicalities. Not gross breakage like that.
aotrscommander 07-20-06, 08:03 AM	I can be a terrible rules lawyer at times (that's wargamers for you!) but I'm away of the problem and I'm getting better! However, when I bring up an issue, I do it politely in the following fashion 'Strictly speaking, Dungeon Master, this happens...', by which I point out what the rules say so the DM knows that what they are doing is not nessecarily in agreement with the rules but I don't say what they are doing is wrong. If they say, 'well, I'm doing it this way', I just say, 'righto Dungeon Master! Fair enough!' and carry on playing. It's not my place to run the game when I'm not DMing; though I do consider it my place to assist with the rules is a positive manner since I know the game better (and the concepts behind the mechanics) than anyone in my group. (I should lso point out that I'll quite happliy point out things that are detrimental to the party as well as advatangeous - good, fair sportsmanship and all). The danger is not to do it so often, as it becomes impeding the game. If your DM does it regularly, either they don't know the rules (or are convinced they do but don't) or don't care. Either you can have a talk with them, grit your teeth and resign yourself to it or stop playing (options listed in order of preference). If you DM does it periodically (or is getting fragged off at you and the others players are too), sometimes, it's better to just close your mouth and just get on with it. It sounds to me though, more like a case of the former. It sounds as though your DM needs to be (politely) talked to about what he's doing; especially is he's being inconsistant in his rulings.
wonlee76 07-20-06, 11:06 AM	I'm a DM and I admit I have a certain "style" when it comes to rule issues. My basic rule of thumb is if I made a mistake and you can quickly correct me on the mistake, do so. If its a more complicated issue that may take some time to look up, play it for the session as I ruled it and we'll look into it in between sessions and I'll advise the players of the screw up if there was one. In this particular case, it depends on what type of personality your DM has. If he's the type who will flaunt his authority or is a powermonger, bring it up privately in between games. That way your DM saves "face" from being called out on a rules mistake in front of the rest of the group and he will hopefully correct the mistakes by the next session. If he's more like me (willing to take criticism or suggestions), then bring it up as they come up during the game so long as it doesn't end up being a 1 hour session of flipping through rule books to confirm the rule.
Merestil Haye 07-20-06, 11:53 AM	I'm a DM and I admit I have a certain "style" when it comes to rule issues. My basic rule of thumb is if I made a mistake and you can quickly correct me on the mistake, do so. If its a more complicated issue that may take some time to look up, play it for the session as I ruled it and we'll look into it in between sessions and I'll advise the players of the screw up if there was one.That's fine, but if the disputed call is one with vital consequences for the character (eg death or not) I'd expect the issue to be resolved immediately, no waiting. It's simply not acceptable to expect that player to sit for hours watching that combat in which he no longer has a stake, miss out on some roleplayinmg in which his now-dead character had a vital interest and may have materially altered the outcome, and then next week say that the character should not have died, but because you've rp'd since you rule that he did, and that the only method to bring him back involves level loss. That would not exactly inspire me to play the character again. You screw up, I suffer both character power and character development losses? Resolve issues on the spot. The more important it is to a player, the longer you should be willing to take. Don't just brush it aside with "if I'm wrong we'll fix it next week." By then it may be unfixable.
wonlee76 07-20-06, 12:00 PM	That's fine, but if the disputed call is one with vital consequences for the character (eg death or not) I'd expect the issue to be resolved immediately, no waiting. I agree with this as well. If it was a life or death situation for the PCs (if its an NPC or baddie, I don't give a damn if a disputed call results in the NPC's death since they should die eventually), then I will debate/examine the rules more carefully to make sure the death is legit. But for the flow of the game, if its a disputed issue that in the grand scheme of things will not change things when we examine the rules after the session, then the game moves smoother. In general, because of the way I run a game, I don't make too many mistakes with regard to the rules. I'm more likely to forget things in favor of the players usually. Things like SR for baddies, or energy resistance or some special ability.
Tormsskull 07-20-06, 01:38 PM	As a DM my rule is that if I make a mistake, the players get the benefit of the doubt. If I forget to announce a houserule, the player's get the benefit of the doubt. After that, then the players will be held to the rule. I had this come up with Tower Shield's before, I don't like how Total Cover can totally ruin the campaign (low magic) and so rather than throwing in a bunch of "fixes" to combat the one character with a Tower Shield, I house ruled the effects to make it more in-line with the campaign. If your DM isn't very aware of rules, it can become very difficult to play when you think things are going to go one way, and they do not. I would keep a list of all of the times the DM didn't follow the rules, and then after the session, when you can get the DM alone, show him the list and ask him if these were houserules or if maybe he is simply interpretting the rules incorrectly.