ignoring rules, am I wrong? [Archive] - Wizards Community

ignoring rules, am I wrong? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Athos
04-19-06, 11:28 AM So in my group we've had some problems with me "Rule lawering", not being the DM in this campain, I still know they rules better than everyone else, (I got time to read the book) but eveytime I would bring up a rule someone didn't like it would turn into an argument, which would end up me finding it in the book to prove it (I was right 95% of the time), and then everyone would get angry at me for slowing down the game.

since then I have submited to there wishes and I don't do this anymore, if its a major issue I talk to the DM afterwards, but my problem it this, everyone else gets to ignore possible dibilitaing rules due to the fact that they don't know them, so am I wrong, knowing these rules, to ignore them since no one else seems to have to follow them, since they haven't read the books, and understood the rules as I do?
wellofworlds
04-19-06, 11:59 AM As a rules lawyer I have learn it is not conducive to start a argument. I make a suggestion that there a possible mistake happening in the moment. I will pull out the book and point it out. I then let the dm decide how to follow the course. In the end it the dm choice how to follow the rule. As a rules lawyer it not your job to enforce the rules, only to point them out. Let the party decide. In result for this it has lead to making little home rules for the campaign which makes everyone happy. As long as they do not try to make rules for the moment then change rules again to suit a specific person.
kelvinaw273
04-19-06, 12:00 PM Well, your group got tired of having the game slowed down, but they could have done that by simply taking your word for what was in the rules. You've taken the mature option of agreeing not to slow the game down with rules quoting anymore, which is to your credit. Now your DM should know this stuff to, it shouldn't be your job to point it out to him, so he needs to get with the rule-book himself and read it cover to cover a few times.

With regard to the other players, one of two things is happening:

1) They don't know the rules any better than your DM

2) They do know the rules, but they know the DM does not and exploit the fact (this could be a big reason behind your unpopularity)

There is also option 3, that you are rules-lawyer who just disagrees with the DM's interpretation, but I'll ignore that as you seem pretty amenable to me.

How to plug this gap? Well there is no easy answer. Your DM has to know his or her rules and enforce them. The best way to learn the rules is to play the game, so I can only suggest you run a few games of your own and brook no arguments. Once you are all in the swing of things you can change back DMs if you want to.
Bruunwald
04-19-06, 12:27 PM It's the DM's job to know the rules and enforce them. You are doing the right thing by waiting until after the game to have your discussion with the DM on what was played "incorrectly." Mentioning it - even nicely - during the game is a good way to make sure that everybody else secretly hates you.

Now, perhaps you can go one step further and ask him if he can try to enforce the rules equally during the game. Keep in mind that the DM may have house rules in play that are contrary to what you see in the book. If you think he is not applying strange rulings fairly to everyone, then that's worth mentioning. If, however, he is applying them equally, they may be house rules and you may have to put up with being told the book is wrong for his game.

Your focus should be on equality and fairness. Discuss with the DM his knowledge of the rules, and make sure he understands that you are merely concerned with a fair and equal application of rules, no matter what they are or where they come from.

You should avoid citing page and number as Gospel truth. It's not. It's a game. Strict, religious adherence to the rules in a book of an imaginary game is silly and juvenile and arguing about it is a complete waste of time. Only the application of fairness and the enjoyment of the game, matter. If that means more adherence to rules as written, so be it. If it means the book is less important at this DM's table, then that's good too.

Ultimately, if you must have it word-for-word and it really irks you that badly, I suggest two things:

1. Re-evaluate whether you are able to put the game in a realistic and healthy place in your life without obssessing over it, and if not, quit playing it.

and/or

2. Find a more RAW-friendly group to play with.
moriarty13
04-19-06, 12:38 PM Or if your DM is okay with you knowing the rules well set up some sort of signal. Raise your hand or something to let the DM know that a rule is being broken/ignored and let the DM decide whether or not the current situation warrants a little delay. Most rules arguments shouldn't last long, just go to the page that references it, show the DM, and let the DM decide what should happen.

Ignoring the rules for more cinematic gameplay is fun and can make for an enjoyable game. Trying to play a normal game and having people ignore the rules is not fun at all, especially if not everyone ignores the same rules in the same way. It's a recipe for disaster. One player might be more "wild" with rules breaking and get away with murder, while you sit there and play by the rules and therefore appear ineffective.

The thing is with rules lawyering is that no rule should have to be lawyered twice. Once you all know how Grapple or Attacks of Opportunity work, for example, it's a done deal. Of course if some players really don't want to learn the rules or follow them, then don't play with them.

To answer your second (or maybe primary) question, if everyone is ignoring the rules then sit down with the DM and decide to play more cinematically. Then join in the fun. If the DM would like to play according to the RAW, then it's up to the DM to say "We are going to take the time to figure out the rules whenever someone has a question or concern about said rules. Deal with it." And then enforce that.
David_Roben2
04-19-06, 12:51 PM First things first. I commend you on your good actions and flexibility. Sometimes you simply have to bend to the will of the party.

That said, don't give up on the rules. Keep you principles intact.

Lead by example. If you are going to do something rule intense, do it slowly and let it teach the party.

If you do see something being done completely wrong, you don't have to sit by and let it happen. Just make sure it can be handled easily and quickly. Have the book open to the correct page before you say anything.

Be ready to give the final descision to the DM, even if he decides wrong.

Pick you battles. If it is a small issue that isn't going to ruin the encounter let it go and talk to the DM after.

Finally, don't let the rules ruin you as a player. If something is done wrong it can still be right if everyone is still having fun. Try to keep your ego in check. Just because you know all the rules doesn't mean that they are as important to everyone else as they are to people like us. (this is the one I have problems with. "Hello my name is David and i'm a rules lawyer.") :teach:
Athos
04-19-06, 01:31 PM well thanks for the help it gives me abit of an idea about how to go about it, I have asked my DM to learn the rules better, but he say he doesn't have time, so I figure I'll just use my DMing as a chance to teach them too him, for when he next plays.
Nom
04-19-06, 07:07 PM In any given situation you need to decide whether your DM knows the rules and is choosing to ignore them or is not actually aware of them.

If the latter, then just politely mention to the DM "according to the rules, you'd do it like ...". Make sure your voice and body language communicate that you're not telling him how to run the game, just providing some information that he can heed or discard as he prefers.

You also need to decide whether it makes a difference. If other players (or the DM) are systematically abusing the rules to gain unfair advantage, then it's probably worth taking the DM aside after the game and pointing out the exploit and how using the rules would provide a better solution. On the other hand, if everyone is just glossing over a complex rule and it doesn't make much difference, just let it go.
shadowfox628
04-19-06, 08:12 PM I'm currently in a campain with a new DM (which he's actually doing well in, despite being a bad PC). I'm constantly bringing up rules and making suggestions and complaints. For example, when he tries to change something on the spot (something MAJOR, like the effect of a spell), I argue/suggest/complain against it (he's really out to get me... I can't blame him, though. If I had to DM my clone, I'd get ****** off too). However, this happens several times in one session (we play after school so each session is about 1 hour and 15 minutes).

Anyway... The group has major issues with you. Even at times that wouldn't be great (consulting how to do Spell Save DC's, for instance), I calmly tell him how it works. However, your group seems to hate you telling the rules... period. Now, don't worry about being wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, forgets something, or confuses one thing with another (for example, I was not aware that, in 3.5, Improved Critical and Keen stacked until recently).

Now, your group can be complaining for a few reasons. They may see you as a rule Nazi. Some may be trying to get away with something that's against the rules. Or, in a stupid way, they may see you as a waste of time, since every time you bring up a rule, an arguement starts.

I don't know why they hate you, but one thing may be that's you're just plain RAW. Maybe you are a rule nazi, who knows. My suggestion would be to let some small things pass through. That, or teach them the rules. If they listen, they should shut up.
Ashok_Lal
04-19-06, 09:44 PM Right off the bat i do not condone my own suggestion here! Make your charicter do things that according to the rules he can't do. Then if somebody complains just tell them that you thought it was a rules optional game, and choose, like the group to ignor them. Becourse you know the rules you can best manipulate them.

QUOTE: Bruunwald
You should avoid citing page and number as Gospel truth. It's not. It's a game. Strict, religious adherence to the rules in a book of an imaginary game is silly and juvenile and arguing about it is a complete waste of time. Only the application of fairness and the enjoyment of the game, matter. If that means more adherence to rules as written, so be it. If it means the book is less important at this DM's table, then that's good too.

If that is the case would that not leave half the forums blank and useless. Debate on sush matters is what cleares up the game. Not that i dissagree with you for the most part your dead on, but Athos should realy try to make them listen. The rules make things uniform and fair for every one.
geekling
04-20-06, 05:59 AM You have to remember that no one likes a smartarse.
And that there comes a point where questioning or reminding someone of 'the rules!' just becomes percieved as one-upmanship from your part. Usually fairly close to the point where you're pulling out the book just to 'proove that you're right!' {1}

Really, if someone gets a rule wrong now and then, and the DM goes along with it. That's within his right as a DM. The DM is the umpire - it's part of his job description - not yours. If it really bothers you, it's probably better to just leave and find another game, or run one yourself.

That saying....

You've agreed not to interupt the game and wait until after the game to take up anything of this ilk, so I don't think you're trying to be a total :censored: and that there's hope for you still. :P

am I wrong, knowing these rules, to ignore them since no one else seems to have to follow them, since they haven't read the books, and understood the rules as I do?

No you're not being wrong, you're displaying the sensible, even mature, option of putting everyone's fun and enjoyment in the game first.

Now I'd be tempted to say that in that game, with that group. You've burnt your bridges and shown yourself as a disruptive force in rules discussions, and with this group it's probably wisest just to stay out of them. - Unless invited, ie. if they bring the question to you.

That's not to say that a bit of gentle, non-confrontational debate {2} about the finer points of the RAW is always a bad thing within a group, or that being a rules lawyer is necessarily a bad thing. But with this group, from your description, you do sound like you've lost your chance by taking it way to far when noone else in the group really cared if initializing a grapple is AoO first -Then touch attack! or the other way around.

{1}Referenceing back to the big book of rules to properly answer a question or setteling a dispute is a different matter.
{2}Or even a heated, all out word-wars, kind of debate. On the condition that the parties involved are into that sort of thing. :D
Sereno
04-20-06, 10:18 AM Take a couple of weeks off from rules-lawyering and take notes as to what rules are most being abused by the players.

Then, before a session begins, have a conversation with your friends explaining that YOU are having less fun because people are obviously not playing by the rules and you are try to.

Discuss the biggest problems and educate the other players. There are a number of v3.5 "quick references" out on the net that summarize 90% of the rules in a sentence or two ... I highly recommend getting one (or more) of these and passing them out. Especially if the rules problems are primarily in combat.

Do the other players seem to break rules ONLY when it benefits them, or does it seem that everyone is generally clueless?

If you try to teach them the rules, they might still hate you. If so, they're probably a bunch of jerks and you're better off finding a group who actually likes to play by the rules. Or, learn to play by *their* rules, such as they are, and just have fun.

Personally, I feel for you; I'd rather play with people who know the rules and play by them.

I'm the DM, and I've only got two house rules; save-or-die becomes "save or get knocked down to -1 hit points AND unstable" and spellcasters do not need to prepare 0-level spells.

Otherwise, I try to stick to RAW. It works, it really does.
gwenlock
04-20-06, 01:03 PM Maybe you should DM. :)
Evil DM Mk3
04-20-06, 01:28 PM Got to agree with the above. I was a rules lawyer, now I am a DM. It kinda went like this.

Dwarven cleric:I make an untrained Decipher script cheack. For 18.
Me:Decipher script is trained only.
DM:Is it?
Me:Yes.
DM:Skills can be trained only?
Me:Yes.
DM:Oh. Thanks to Matt you fail.
Me:Hang on...

Halfling fighter:I intimidate the giant, I got a total of 21.
Me:5 bec...
HF:No, dumbass, 12+8 = 21.
DM:20
HF:Oh right, 20.
Me:4 bec...
HF:It was 5 a sec ago!
Me:Yes but...
HF:How the :censored: is it 4 then dumbass?
Me:-16 relative size penalty. Come on the guy can hardly see you!
DM:There is a relative size penalty?
Me:*Grits teeth* Yes.
DM:Oh. Thanks to Matt you fail.
Me:Hang on...

Elf Wizard:I cast confusion on the Oger.
DM:Attack of opertunity. 52 dam.
EW:Concentration cheack. 23 with a natural 20!
Me:Fort save and a fail.
EW:What save? And a 20 is an auto sucess!
Me:Save for massive damadge and no it isn't.
HF:Shut up dumbass!
DC:Stop ruing the game!
DM:Are 20s really not auto passes on skills?
Me: (note I am ashamed at this but it had been a long night) YES YES YES :censored: YES!!!!! TRY READING A :censored: RULE BOOK YOU BUNCH OF :censored: :censored: :headexplo :hoppingma :banghead: :banghead: :rant: :crazy: :crazy:

Rest of group::blink:

DM:Well if you know it all you DM!

I did. We never looked back.

Rule lawyers are usfull to have around, even if you are a rules lawyer DM as you don't remeber it all. If the party trust you and recognises your knowladge you cna really speed up a game, remebering which in the chain cure critical wounds is (ie greater or lesser than serious wounds.) is a real time saver.

Not that all rules lawyers make good DMs, but I find the best DMs are rules lawyers at heart. So long as you remeber that rules are made to be rule 0ed when they make no sence or get in the way too often.
Sereno
04-20-06, 01:36 PM It seems to me that the people who most hate the rules lawyers are the ones who benefit most from cheating.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Athos 04-19-06, 11:28 AM	So in my group we've had some problems with me "Rule lawering", not being the DM in this campain, I still know they rules better than everyone else, (I got time to read the book) but eveytime I would bring up a rule someone didn't like it would turn into an argument, which would end up me finding it in the book to prove it (I was right 95% of the time), and then everyone would get angry at me for slowing down the game. since then I have submited to there wishes and I don't do this anymore, if its a major issue I talk to the DM afterwards, but my problem it this, everyone else gets to ignore possible dibilitaing rules due to the fact that they don't know them, so am I wrong, knowing these rules, to ignore them since no one else seems to have to follow them, since they haven't read the books, and understood the rules as I do?
wellofworlds 04-19-06, 11:59 AM	As a rules lawyer I have learn it is not conducive to start a argument. I make a suggestion that there a possible mistake happening in the moment. I will pull out the book and point it out. I then let the dm decide how to follow the course. In the end it the dm choice how to follow the rule. As a rules lawyer it not your job to enforce the rules, only to point them out. Let the party decide. In result for this it has lead to making little home rules for the campaign which makes everyone happy. As long as they do not try to make rules for the moment then change rules again to suit a specific person.
kelvinaw273 04-19-06, 12:00 PM	Well, your group got tired of having the game slowed down, but they could have done that by simply taking your word for what was in the rules. You've taken the mature option of agreeing not to slow the game down with rules quoting anymore, which is to your credit. Now your DM should know this stuff to, it shouldn't be your job to point it out to him, so he needs to get with the rule-book himself and read it cover to cover a few times. With regard to the other players, one of two things is happening: 1) They don't know the rules any better than your DM 2) They do know the rules, but they know the DM does not and exploit the fact (this could be a big reason behind your unpopularity) There is also option 3, that you are rules-lawyer who just disagrees with the DM's interpretation, but I'll ignore that as you seem pretty amenable to me. How to plug this gap? Well there is no easy answer. Your DM has to know his or her rules and enforce them. The best way to learn the rules is to play the game, so I can only suggest you run a few games of your own and brook no arguments. Once you are all in the swing of things you can change back DMs if you want to.
Bruunwald 04-19-06, 12:27 PM	It's the DM's job to know the rules and enforce them. You are doing the right thing by waiting until after the game to have your discussion with the DM on what was played "incorrectly." Mentioning it - even nicely - during the game is a good way to make sure that everybody else secretly hates you. Now, perhaps you can go one step further and ask him if he can try to enforce the rules equally during the game. Keep in mind that the DM may have house rules in play that are contrary to what you see in the book. If you think he is not applying strange rulings fairly to everyone, then that's worth mentioning. If, however, he is applying them equally, they may be house rules and you may have to put up with being told the book is wrong for his game. Your focus should be on equality and fairness. Discuss with the DM his knowledge of the rules, and make sure he understands that you are merely concerned with a fair and equal application of rules, no matter what they are or where they come from. You should avoid citing page and number as Gospel truth. It's not. It's a game. Strict, religious adherence to the rules in a book of an imaginary game is silly and juvenile and arguing about it is a complete waste of time. Only the application of fairness and the enjoyment of the game, matter. If that means more adherence to rules as written, so be it. If it means the book is less important at this DM's table, then that's good too. Ultimately, if you must have it word-for-word and it really irks you that badly, I suggest two things: 1. Re-evaluate whether you are able to put the game in a realistic and healthy place in your life without obssessing over it, and if not, quit playing it. and/or 2. Find a more RAW-friendly group to play with.
moriarty13 04-19-06, 12:38 PM	Or if your DM is okay with you knowing the rules well set up some sort of signal. Raise your hand or something to let the DM know that a rule is being broken/ignored and let the DM decide whether or not the current situation warrants a little delay. Most rules arguments shouldn't last long, just go to the page that references it, show the DM, and let the DM decide what should happen. Ignoring the rules for more cinematic gameplay is fun and can make for an enjoyable game. Trying to play a normal game and having people ignore the rules is not fun at all, especially if not everyone ignores the same rules in the same way. It's a recipe for disaster. One player might be more "wild" with rules breaking and get away with murder, while you sit there and play by the rules and therefore appear ineffective. The thing is with rules lawyering is that no rule should have to be lawyered twice. Once you all know how Grapple or Attacks of Opportunity work, for example, it's a done deal. Of course if some players really don't want to learn the rules or follow them, then don't play with them. To answer your second (or maybe primary) question, if everyone is ignoring the rules then sit down with the DM and decide to play more cinematically. Then join in the fun. If the DM would like to play according to the RAW, then it's up to the DM to say "We are going to take the time to figure out the rules whenever someone has a question or concern about said rules. Deal with it." And then enforce that.
David_Roben2 04-19-06, 12:51 PM	First things first. I commend you on your good actions and flexibility. Sometimes you simply have to bend to the will of the party. That said, don't give up on the rules. Keep you principles intact. Lead by example. If you are going to do something rule intense, do it slowly and let it teach the party. If you do see something being done completely wrong, you don't have to sit by and let it happen. Just make sure it can be handled easily and quickly. Have the book open to the correct page before you say anything. Be ready to give the final descision to the DM, even if he decides wrong. Pick you battles. If it is a small issue that isn't going to ruin the encounter let it go and talk to the DM after. Finally, don't let the rules ruin you as a player. If something is done wrong it can still be right if everyone is still having fun. Try to keep your ego in check. Just because you know all the rules doesn't mean that they are as important to everyone else as they are to people like us. (this is the one I have problems with. "Hello my name is David and i'm a rules lawyer.") :teach:
Athos 04-19-06, 01:31 PM	well thanks for the help it gives me abit of an idea about how to go about it, I have asked my DM to learn the rules better, but he say he doesn't have time, so I figure I'll just use my DMing as a chance to teach them too him, for when he next plays.
Nom 04-19-06, 07:07 PM	In any given situation you need to decide whether your DM knows the rules and is choosing to ignore them or is not actually aware of them. If the latter, then just politely mention to the DM "according to the rules, you'd do it like ...". Make sure your voice and body language communicate that you're not telling him how to run the game, just providing some information that he can heed or discard as he prefers. You also need to decide whether it makes a difference. If other players (or the DM) are systematically abusing the rules to gain unfair advantage, then it's probably worth taking the DM aside after the game and pointing out the exploit and how using the rules would provide a better solution. On the other hand, if everyone is just glossing over a complex rule and it doesn't make much difference, just let it go.
shadowfox628 04-19-06, 08:12 PM	I'm currently in a campain with a new DM (which he's actually doing well in, despite being a bad PC). I'm constantly bringing up rules and making suggestions and complaints. For example, when he tries to change something on the spot (something MAJOR, like the effect of a spell), I argue/suggest/complain against it (he's really out to get me... I can't blame him, though. If I had to DM my clone, I'd get ****** off too). However, this happens several times in one session (we play after school so each session is about 1 hour and 15 minutes). Anyway... The group has major issues with you. Even at times that wouldn't be great (consulting how to do Spell Save DC's, for instance), I calmly tell him how it works. However, your group seems to hate you telling the rules... period. Now, don't worry about being wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, forgets something, or confuses one thing with another (for example, I was not aware that, in 3.5, Improved Critical and Keen stacked until recently). Now, your group can be complaining for a few reasons. They may see you as a rule Nazi. Some may be trying to get away with something that's against the rules. Or, in a stupid way, they may see you as a waste of time, since every time you bring up a rule, an arguement starts. I don't know why they hate you, but one thing may be that's you're just plain RAW. Maybe you are a rule nazi, who knows. My suggestion would be to let some small things pass through. That, or teach them the rules. If they listen, they should shut up.
Ashok_Lal 04-19-06, 09:44 PM	Right off the bat i do not condone my own suggestion here! Make your charicter do things that according to the rules he can't do. Then if somebody complains just tell them that you thought it was a rules optional game, and choose, like the group to ignor them. Becourse you know the rules you can best manipulate them. QUOTE: Bruunwald You should avoid citing page and number as Gospel truth. It's not. It's a game. Strict, religious adherence to the rules in a book of an imaginary game is silly and juvenile and arguing about it is a complete waste of time. Only the application of fairness and the enjoyment of the game, matter. If that means more adherence to rules as written, so be it. If it means the book is less important at this DM's table, then that's good too. If that is the case would that not leave half the forums blank and useless. Debate on sush matters is what cleares up the game. Not that i dissagree with you for the most part your dead on, but Athos should realy try to make them listen. The rules make things uniform and fair for every one.
geekling 04-20-06, 05:59 AM	You have to remember that no one likes a smartarse. And that there comes a point where questioning or reminding someone of 'the rules!' just becomes percieved as one-upmanship from your part. Usually fairly close to the point where you're pulling out the book just to 'proove that you're right!' {1} Really, if someone gets a rule wrong now and then, and the DM goes along with it. That's within his right as a DM. The DM is the umpire - it's part of his job description - not yours. If it really bothers you, it's probably better to just leave and find another game, or run one yourself. That saying.... You've agreed not to interupt the game and wait until after the game to take up anything of this ilk, so I don't think you're trying to be a total :censored: and that there's hope for you still. :P am I wrong, knowing these rules, to ignore them since no one else seems to have to follow them, since they haven't read the books, and understood the rules as I do? No you're not being wrong, you're displaying the sensible, even mature, option of putting everyone's fun and enjoyment in the game first. Now I'd be tempted to say that in that game, with that group. You've burnt your bridges and shown yourself as a disruptive force in rules discussions, and with this group it's probably wisest just to stay out of them. - Unless invited, ie. if they bring the question to you. That's not to say that a bit of gentle, non-confrontational debate {2} about the finer points of the RAW is always a bad thing within a group, or that being a rules lawyer is necessarily a bad thing. But with this group, from your description, you do sound like you've lost your chance by taking it way to far when noone else in the group really cared if initializing a grapple is AoO first -Then touch attack! or the other way around. {1}Referenceing back to the big book of rules to properly answer a question or setteling a dispute is a different matter. {2}Or even a heated, all out word-wars, kind of debate. On the condition that the parties involved are into that sort of thing. :D
Sereno 04-20-06, 10:18 AM	Take a couple of weeks off from rules-lawyering and take notes as to what rules are most being abused by the players. Then, before a session begins, have a conversation with your friends explaining that YOU are having less fun because people are obviously not playing by the rules and you are try to. Discuss the biggest problems and educate the other players. There are a number of v3.5 "quick references" out on the net that summarize 90% of the rules in a sentence or two ... I highly recommend getting one (or more) of these and passing them out. Especially if the rules problems are primarily in combat. Do the other players seem to break rules ONLY when it benefits them, or does it seem that everyone is generally clueless? If you try to teach them the rules, they might still hate you. If so, they're probably a bunch of jerks and you're better off finding a group who actually likes to play by the rules. Or, learn to play by their rules, such as they are, and just have fun. Personally, I feel for you; I'd rather play with people who know the rules and play by them. I'm the DM, and I've only got two house rules; save-or-die becomes "save or get knocked down to -1 hit points AND unstable" and spellcasters do not need to prepare 0-level spells. Otherwise, I try to stick to RAW. It works, it really does.
gwenlock 04-20-06, 01:03 PM	Maybe you should DM. :)
Evil DM Mk3 04-20-06, 01:28 PM	Got to agree with the above. I was a rules lawyer, now I am a DM. It kinda went like this. Dwarven cleric:I make an untrained Decipher script cheack. For 18. Me:Decipher script is trained only. DM:Is it? Me:Yes. DM:Skills can be trained only? Me:Yes. DM:Oh. Thanks to Matt you fail. Me:Hang on... Halfling fighter:I intimidate the giant, I got a total of 21. Me:5 bec... HF:No, dumbass, 12+8 = 21. DM:20 HF:Oh right, 20. Me:4 bec... HF:It was 5 a sec ago! Me:Yes but... HF:How the :censored: is it 4 then dumbass? Me:-16 relative size penalty. Come on the guy can hardly see you! DM:There is a relative size penalty? Me:Grits teeth Yes. DM:Oh. Thanks to Matt you fail. Me:Hang on... Elf Wizard:I cast confusion on the Oger. DM:Attack of opertunity. 52 dam. EW:Concentration cheack. 23 with a natural 20! Me:Fort save and a fail. EW:What save? And a 20 is an auto sucess! Me:Save for massive damadge and no it isn't. HF:Shut up dumbass! DC:Stop ruing the game! DM:Are 20s really not auto passes on skills? Me: (note I am ashamed at this but it had been a long night) YES YES YES :censored: YES!!!!! TRY READING A :censored: RULE BOOK YOU BUNCH OF :censored: :censored: :headexplo :hoppingma :banghead: :banghead: :rant: :crazy: :crazy: Rest of group::blink: DM:Well if you know it all you DM! I did. We never looked back. Rule lawyers are usfull to have around, even if you are a rules lawyer DM as you don't remeber it all. If the party trust you and recognises your knowladge you cna really speed up a game, remebering which in the chain cure critical wounds is (ie greater or lesser than serious wounds.) is a real time saver. Not that all rules lawyers make good DMs, but I find the best DMs are rules lawyers at heart. So long as you remeber that rules are made to be rule 0ed when they make no sence or get in the way too often.
Sereno 04-20-06, 01:36 PM	It seems to me that the people who most hate the rules lawyers are the ones who benefit most from cheating.