Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 McFlizzle Feb 12, 2015 8:34:45	Does anyone have insight into when the rules aren't followed by WotC themselves?   For example, Inflict Wounds does 3d10 damage. This is 50% more than the GMG's guidelines for 1st level spell damage. That's huge. It's more than the 25% increase for spells that do no damage on a save. I would think that spell is similar being no damage on a miss. For level 1 vs CR 1, that's a likely instant kill.   Do you have any other examples?
#2 bawylie Feb 12, 2015 8:50:52	Do not try to bend the spoon with your mind. That is impossible. Instead, recognize the truth. There is no spoon.
#3 mellored Feb 12, 2015 9:07:15	McFlizzle wrote:
#4 IxidorRS Feb 12, 2015 9:18:21	mellored wrote:
#5 Ranthalan Feb 12, 2015 9:19:01	It doesn't violate the rules.  The specific always overrides the general.
(Reply to #5) AaronOfBarbaria	Ranthalan wrote:
#7 mellored Feb 12, 2015 9:55:06	IxidorRS wrote:
#8 Oriet Feb 12, 2015 10:11:07	IxidorRS wrote:
#9 Rhenny Feb 12, 2015 15:40:10	When you watch live stream games from the WoTC designers, they change or leave out rules all the time.   In one session that Chris Perkins ran, he had none of the players make multiple attacks although they were definitely over 5th level.  On one occassion, I think it was either Rodney, Greg or Mike (I know...not very specific...lol), said that it might be better to let players just re-roll using inspiration points rather than decide before hand and do something with advantage.   That kind of rule breaking is what I thought your title suggested.
#10 Satyrn Feb 12, 2015 16:31:59	Oh, I break rules regularly as DM, and not consistently. Just this week, a couple rounds into one fight I combined half a dozen mooks into a sort of swarm that pulled onto the fighter. I don't remember how I ruled it, so when I do the same thing again it will not be the same. I really don't think my players care so long as they have fun ... I should say that I do that kind of thing to make the fight more fun, not challenging, so the players aren't likely to feel I'm cheating or something like that.
#11 Illithidbix Feb 12, 2015 16:33:13	I got the vague impression from Mike Mearl's tweets that he doesn't care about strictly paying attention to the 1 interaction with an object rule.   http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/30/eldritch-free-hand/
(Reply to #3) JohnLynch	mellored wrote:
#13 FFSAA Feb 13, 2015 9:33:39	Ranthalan wrote:
#14 mellored Feb 13, 2015 9:48:10	JohnLynch wrote:
(Reply to #13) Ranthalan	FFSAA wrote:
(Reply to #14) AaronOfBarbaria	mellored wrote:
#17 mellored Feb 13, 2015 11:15:39	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#18 Devils-Advocate Feb 13, 2015 14:27:45	mellored wrote:
#19 Noon Feb 13, 2015 16:10:50	McFlizzle wrote:
#20 masterfat78 Feb 14, 2015 1:20:23	This thread reminds me of how tsr constantly contradicted their own rules in their modules.
#21 JohnLynch Feb 14, 2015 5:45:44	mellored wrote:
#22 Rastapopoulos Feb 14, 2015 12:22:34	In any case spell design should not follow hard rules like that, they should be general guidelines at best.   Or else spells will inevitably seem "samey" and generic. I'd rather they are developed freely and common sense dictates their limits.   There will always be some spells that have an edge in damage or something over some others, but situations in the game are diverse enough that you'll always find cases where the other works better than the one.