Results 31 to 58 of 58
-
2019-10-14, 12:54 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
-
2019-10-14, 04:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2018
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
I've recently started DMing a lvl16 DnD 3.5 party. While I have some general knowledge of the rules mostly I just wing it. Fake it till you make it. That is why I really appreciate it when I have some players that can correct me when I go overboard. I really need the help, especially when casting is concerned. Spells are relatively complicated for me. To be honest I think rules lawyers are relatively young players who aim to be the best/most powerful characters that they can be. While older players tend to be more rules relaxed aka as long as it fits the story line almost anything goes.
I try to avoid situations that are rules heavy and focus more on the roleplaying part with the occasional listen, spot, diplomacy checks. In an 3 hour session we might role two to three times. However next session I will surprise them with an annoyed green dragon, surprise will be relative since we have a divine oracle in the group. To test the combat capabilities of the group. Many players switched characters.
-
2019-10-14, 07:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-14, 07:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
A good DM will tell their players about any special changes to the setting before the game starts. If I've removed elves from my setting, I better tell you before you decide to roll up that elf PC.
At the same time, a good player shouldn't assume the DM won't make changes and probably shouldn't base their plans on things without confirming with the DM that they'll be valid in the upcoming adventure. If you plan on making a stealth-based PC in my game, make sure you ask about and understand any modifications to the stealth rules I may have made.
-
2019-10-14, 12:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
If players have some kind of understandable misconception, or the GM failed to communicate something important out, then the way to go is to offer a retcon or some other recompense.
But if a player wants to make any kind of deep plan, he should consult with his GM. The GM can work out how it would resolve, and can say whether the PC would know things like whether it can't possibly work and if there's an obvious way to make it more effective.
-
2019-10-14, 01:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2019
- Location
- Wyoming
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
It's important to distinguish "I brought Ralph the Elf Slayer to the game whose goal in life is genocide of the elves." only to find out there are no elves; and "I want to do this thing that we all just assumed worked as written." only to find out the DM has some unique ideas on how that should work. We can't reasonably expect the players to ask the DM if every rule in the book works as written, and since the players aren't in charge of the rules, the onus is on the DM to communicate rules changes to the players beforehand, especially if they are fundamental elements of gameplay.
Knowledge brings the sting of disillusionment, but the pain teaches perspective.
"You know it's all fake right?"
"...yeah, but it makes me feel better."
-
2019-10-14, 01:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
-
2019-10-14, 01:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Communication goes both ways, of course.
But I tend to agree that the weight of the responsibility is on the DM to make sure the players know about any changes to the setting or basic assumptions of the game. At the same time, if a player has a specific thing they're hooking their PC on, it can't hurt to just double check that that thing hasn't been amputated.
-
2019-10-14, 01:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Toledo, Ohio
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Or, equally likely, the player who took time and effort to craft careful strategies or delicate plans based on a specific interpretation of a rule only to have the DM interpret it a different way. I had a player argue with me for half an hour because I wouldn't allow his big, unexplained, multi-step (each step of which seemed odd, but not so odd as to raise suspicion) plan to work on the grounds that the Sunlight spell doesn't actually create sunlight because nothing in the spell description says it does. He assumed, based on the name, that the light made by the spell would function exactly like the light from the sun, including vaporizing vampires.
-
2019-10-14, 01:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Last edited by Koo Rehtorb; 2019-10-14 at 01:48 PM.
-
2019-10-14, 02:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Of course this can happen, and when it does it can be annoying BUT the player should respect the DM's rulings. I was specifically addressing how one might be said to be "playing the game wrong" which alterning the rules without letting the player know certainly falls under (unless this is Paranoia of course).
For a more concrete example from my own group, in Exalted 2nd Edition there are a lot of charms intended for fighting wars under the Mass Combat system. Individuals, even might Solar heroes, are at a real disadvantage if forced to fight armies singlehanded, at least if they aren't statted for it. So a character in my group builds a millitary officer, buys her troups etc at character creation and is sure to mobalise them so she can keep up with the party as the Solar we are hunting is fleeing the city we are in (a little judicious collateral damage by the party made them want to take the fight away from civilians) and force them to fight an army to escape.
As we sight the Nellens Ralta coming over the hill with her spearmen the Storyteller says "well I don't really want to have to use the Mass Combat rules so..."
Now Ralta's player was a rules lawyer (you have to be to navigate Mass Combat) but that didn't make their annoyance less valid.GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-14, 03:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Puffin Forest had a good video on this. He identifies a divide between two groups: rules traditionalists and rules lawyers. The former are encyclopedias that fill in whenever there's a gap, and those range between useful and necessary for a group to function depending on system complexity. Most people on the forums fall into this category.
The other group are rules lawyers, who take any and all disfavorable rulings handed down to them by the judge and appeal, discredit, or maneuver around precedent to obtain a victory in court. Exactly what a client needs to win a case that could decide their entire future. Entirely unnecessary in a game to be had in free time for fun.
-
2019-10-15, 01:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-15, 01:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2014
- Location
- Tulips Cheese & Rock&Roll
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
The GM is a rules judge.
And sometimes rules jury and rules executioner.The Hindsight Awards, results: See the best movies of 1999!
-
2019-10-15, 01:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- California
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Here is an example.
6th level spell flesh to stone.
How can this be broken?
My DM does not like and house rules break enchantment a 5th level spell does not work. Even when the break enchantment spell says specifically that it will. My DM feels I am rules lawyering an answer.
I say all I did was pick a spell that most players think is trash and used it effectively to make the people turned to stone by a Basilisk back to flesh. I looted those that missed the saving throw.
He always say his players only want sheep in a pen with magic items around their neck to plunder. He did not like it when I took the right spell to plunder the sheep(stone statues).
-
2019-10-15, 02:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Must, resist, urge, to...
Flesh to stone also turns all carried gear to stone, making me wonder how on earth you were able to plunder them?
Sorry but it can be painful to hold those in
In all seriousness that comment might have started an actual rules lawyer debate (re item saves and the fact that the spell targets the creature BUT states is effects their gear) but what you said isn't rules lawyering by any sane definition. It does rather devalue Stone to Flesh apart from dealing the Flesh to Stone (which Break Enchantment DOESN'T work on being 6th level) and fringe golem hunting roles however. Fringe golem hunting roles that are a themselves an endless pit of rules lawyerness due to one really dumb line in Stone to Flesh mind you...GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-15, 08:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2018
-
2019-10-15, 08:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- California
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
If you read break enchantment it turns them back to flesh just like stone to flesh would. They blow the saving throw the flesh becomes (some sort of gooey mess). The magic items and normal gear are not flesh they survive metal does care for time. My 1/2 orc wizard does not mind getting her hands dirty searching through the gooey mess for the items she seeks.
That is how you loot stone statues with that spell. They die I take there stuff.
Stone flesh and flesh to stone are 1 round spells break enchantment is a full 10 round spell.
-
2019-10-16, 02:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Are people seriously rules lawyering in this thread?
Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.
"I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!
-
2019-10-16, 04:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2014
- Location
- Tulips Cheese & Rock&Roll
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
The Hindsight Awards, results: See the best movies of 1999!
-
2019-10-16, 08:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
No, it just says they are free from the effect. In this case Stone to Flesh is worse as it can kill people. The casting time is better I admit, as is the lack of a caster level check, but all in all Break enchantment is a better way to deal with it if you can. 100% on my top 10 spells to have as scrolls in the emergency kit.
Before anyone goes off, I might ask, how much is this back and forth annoying you? You see if this was a game and this conversation was happening I am sure the various players might be irritated and just want to get de-stoned already, because stoned characters are no fun to play. Call it a demonstration . Incidentally this has reminded me of another reason why Rules Lawyers can be unpopular.
TLDR, other players often dislike it when Rules Lawyers follow rules or point out flaws the DM was unaware of or had forgotten.Spoiler: a small sceneDM "OK, so only the party rogue is still active but he has disarmed the "Flesh to Stone trap" you all kept setting off."
Rogue player "OK, well I head out of the dungeon with what loot we have to see if I can find anyone who knows Stone to Flesh for some reason."
Wizard player "I've got that in my spellbook. I found a scroll a few sessions ago, remember"
Rogue player "But you are a statue."
Wizard player "I have a scroll of Break enchantment in the party's panic kit. You have like, +20 UMD."
Rogue player "Well, not that high. But it won't work"
DM (confused and worried as the out he put in place is not being taken) "Why?"
Rogue player "I mean, its a bit meta-gamey to assume that old stonerobes there, anticipating the situation, explained what the spell would and wouldn't work on but unless you want me to waste the scroll. See Flesh to Stone is a level 6 spell, Break Enchantment has a max of level 5 spells for things you can't just dispel."
DM (realising he has to populate a town and work out why the half dozen slimes in nearby corridors won't come and errode the party in the meantime.) "Ah..."Last edited by Evil DM Mark3; 2019-10-16 at 08:25 AM.
GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-16, 08:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2018
- Location
- Louth, Lincolnshire, UK
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Because they can be a right pain. I don't open the rulebook during play so anything I'm not sure about I will make a ruling on and move on with the action. If a player pipes up with "Well, actually......." it slows things down and I'm not willing to take the time to disrupt a session to look a rule up. I'll look it up afterwards or in a break and sort things out after that.
-
2019-10-16, 08:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
If rules are vague, then someone can argue multiple end results. Rules were once (and are a little now in 5e) vague. A rules lawyer did not help you learn the rules because no one could really learn the rules. No one could read the rules and play the way those who wrote them played. Not having well defined rules can create circumstances where player selection expectations of character options do not meet the game rules (sometimes to a harsh degree).
Now if rules are clear and well written, then having a "rules lawyer" may be helpful. Having a rules lawyer about who can understand internally consistent rules could be helpful in learning the game, or in making a fair ruling. Having someone argue an opinion over how they think a poorly written ambiguous rule should be interoperated is much less useful than someone who understands well-written rules.
Having a lawyer about when the laws say "do good stuff" and "don't do bad stuff" is not all that helpful.
Having a lawyer about when the laws say "do not do X" and "you must do Y" may be quite helpful.
-----
As someone who has a high likelihood to choose my words for accuracy, and has the tendency to interpolate words literally, I can attest that people somewhat often do not choose their words accurately. I have on many occasion followed the dictionary definition of one or more directions given, only to find out that the words provided were not using the dictionary definition, but something close. Some ideas do not even have words. It is frustrating to search for an idea without a word.
For example we get ~60 to ~75 new insurance agents every year. My boss said "grab X, he sits next to you" . . . I checked the surrounding cubicles, and X was not there. He meant to say X sits somewhere near you. Someone writing rules might use next to, to mean near, and screw up everything.
For example at work we had a chart with three keywords for the same idea. This only confused customers and insurance agents alike. Imagine if there were three keywords for the same rule, and then the rule was updated, but only mentioned one keyword. This would be a situation where having a rules-lawyer about could be helpful, or annoying.
If by reading a spells range, and description the logical rational person would interoperate the target as "next to" as "near", then perhaps in another spell written by another author where the word "next to" could really mean "next to", and this would cause confusion. With loose language use we would need some sort of ruling, and it would cause confusion.
-----
Poorly or loosely written rules can drive logical folks mad, as there is no way to know how a character would actually work before making the character. I have had my fair share of characters that were less fun to play because I did not have time to read the rules before character creation, and/or the fluff did not match the crunch. Having a rules lawyer around who read the rules would be useful to check a character concept to see if it matched the rules.
I have also made characters who end up being much more effective then one would suspect. For one con I randomly made a character for a new game, and made a doctor. I had a better chances to hit the aliens with my space-gun, then those who selected combat classes. I was kicking-but. Now those who selected a combat class would expect to be the ones who would kick more-but, then the doctor, in combat. Expectations and results should somewhat match-up.Last edited by darkrose50; 2019-10-16 at 09:49 AM.
-
2019-10-16, 08:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Wandering in Harrekh
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation? I'd say, similar reasons to why lawyers in general do. They can be (stereotypically) abrasive, sneaky, overly concerned with the letter of the law, focused on winning an argument to the exclusion of other concerns, and can get very expensive (in terms of game time taken up). But much like real lawyers there are times where you very much want one in your corner.
-
2019-10-16, 09:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
Back in the day a rules lawyer was an absurd argumentative person working off of OPINION.
Back in the day before fancified game designers and highfaluting inter-webs were runnin' amuck rules lawyers would argue rules when there was NO WAY to know what the RULES AS INTENDED were based on the RULES AS WRITTEN. Now we have better written rules, and better ways to find out how the RULES AS INTENDED to be used.
Back in the day the rules were a guideline, and the DM would interoperate them. Imagine having to ask your DM a bunch of questions over how things work at her table, because the rules as written were only a little helpful.
RPG's have progressed, and greatly corrected the issue to ensure that the RULES AS WRITTEN better match the RULES AS INTENDED. Basically we, as a community, learned from our past mistakes.
Back in the day each monster that would "swallow whole" would have its own rules listed. Each swallow whole was different for each monster, and this was sometimes confusing. Now monsters have the "swallow whole" keyword, and we have one rule-set for "swallow whole". Back in the day a DM might have used monster X to fight the PC's, but might have mistakenly used the rules for monster Y's swallow whole. The wrong monsters "swallow hole" ability might be considerably more powerful than the monster in the combat is intended to be.
I know that it would impact my fun if the wrong rule was used that resulted in my characters death. Removing (or lessening) the possibility for mistakes, like using the wrong monster's swallow whole, makes it less likely to get into arguments over rules, makes it less likely for people to have bad experiences, and makes it less likely for folks to give up on the hobby.
Good rules matter, because words matter.Last edited by darkrose50; 2019-10-16 at 09:44 AM.
-
2019-10-16, 09:38 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
-
2019-10-16, 10:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Over there!
- Gender
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
GNU Terry Pratchett
My DMing advice.
Hong Kong
-
2019-10-16, 10:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
Re: Why do rule lawyers have a bad reputation?
He can do some quick scouting around to make sure the party isn't in immediate danger if he ups and leaves. But really the solution to this problem was don't get everyone but one person in the party petrified in the first place. They've already almost lost the game and getting away from this without a TPK, or a bunch of deaths at the very least, should be challenging.