Quote from: Blackhand;597680It seems as if when someone brings up a RAW thread on this board it's demonized for "not understanding how the game is set up / played".  Like it's somehow a crime to hold the books up to be technical manuals meant to be referenced during a game and not just put on the table for the "feeling" created by the game??

Butthurt much? In the case of AD&D First Ed it means you don't understand the game to me, yes. In other games' case, you might be right, on the other hand, especially if their manuals are meant to be used like technical descriptions on how to use a toaster oven or some such. I'm thinking that somehow you kind of completely missed the point of my post in your "1e challenge" LULz-circus. Come on, make me proud! Try reading the post again. Maybe some time you'll get it.

Quote from: Benoist;597693

Butthurt much? In the case of AD&D First Ed it means you don't understand the game to me, yes. In other games' case, you might be right, on the other hand, especially if their manuals are meant to be used like technical descriptions on how to use a toaster oven or some such. I'm thinking that somehow you kind of completely missed the point of my post in your "1e challenge" LULz-circus. Come on, make me proud! Try reading the post again. Maybe some time you'll get it.

Strawman attack.

You admit in this post you are entirely subjective.

Quote from: Blackhand;597696Strawman attack.

You admit in this post you are entirely subjective.

:rotfl:

LOLwut attack!

You really are trying very hard, aren't you? Here. I'll help you.

Quote from: Benoist;597602I wouldn't call that position of mine "objective", however, since we are talking about fundamentally subjective things like games and having fun with your friends and basically talking about a set of tools that can be used in any number of ways in that context.

I enjoy the O/AD&D paradigm of play the most. It represents the best expression of the D&D game that produces the best, most enjoyable results at my game table. I can argue about what I see there as valuable, useful and entertaining, describe how for instance level limits make sense to me and in what context of play, but still, fundamentally, by its very nature, the argument is not objective: it's dependant on a number of particular interpretations, applications, a specific attitude in regards to the framework the books provide and how you use them in a game to have fun with real life people participating in an intrinsically social activity. By its very nature, such a discussion is subjective.

Darn. I'm not being objective on a subject matter that ... cannot be objective.

Well done, inspector Clouseau. Well done.

Are you sure you read the post in the first place?

Quote from: Benoist;597700:rotfl:

LOLwut attack!

You really are trying very hard, aren't you? Here. I'll help you.



Darn. I'm not being objective on a subject matter that ... cannot be objective.

Well done, inspector Clouseau. Well done.

How do you expect anyone to continue to take you seriously?

Quote from: Blackhand;597702How do you expect anyone to continue to take you seriously?

Are you reading my mind?! I was going to ask you this!

Quote from: Doctor Jest;597616It's even worse in Savage Worlds, since your ability or skill score is written as a die type.

"I have Fighting d6, what do I roll for that?"
"Uh... a d6?"
"Oh. Ok"
Over and over and over again

After two years of straight SW, I still had to tell one player that the skill die and the Wild Die do not add. :mad:

Blackhand, there's more to understanding the game than the rules system. I could take someone who played CP2020 for 10 years and have them play Exalted and they won't have any idea what the fuck is going on mechanically or in the setting or okay bad example, but they will still have the fundamentals and will probably be able to contribute to the game a lot more than someone who's played a few sessions of Exalted and that's it.

You don't have to know the rules well to contribute.

Quote from: vytzka;597716Blackhand, there's more to understanding the game than the rules system. I could take someone who played CP2020 for 10 years and have them play Exalted and they won't have any idea what the fuck is going on mechanically or in the setting or okay bad example, but they will still have the fundamentals and will probably be able to contribute to the game a lot more than someone who's played a few sessions of Exalted and that's it.

You don't have to know the rules well to contribute.

This thread is about rules though, right?

The point I was making was that if:

• A person can read,
• Wants to learn the rules,
• The manuals are in front of them during the game,

Then it follows that:

They will learn the rules themselves if the manuals are clear and concise, especially if they are veterans of other games and are familiar with such conventions of gaming as are present in the new system.

In my experience, I've got exactly 10 minutes after just announcing a game that people start pulling books off our shelves and educating themselves so that they can get what they might consider optimum advantage.

Obviously this doesn't apply to most groups on this board.

Quote from: vytzka;597716You don't have to know the rules well to contribute.

I'm fairly lax when it comes to rules-proficiency when I GM. I think the GM should be the definitive authority on the rules at the table. In fact I've been known to encourage those new to the game I'm running not to sweat the rules and just play their characters.

Still, failing to apprehend the basic task resolution mechanic of a game after an uninterrupted two-year-long campaign eventually gets to one's nerves. And don't get me started on the guy who's been playing AD&D 2e for 20 years, claims to be the resident wizard (sorry, "mage") specialist, and still doesn't know how sleep works. Get your shit together, pal. If you want your character to be a Badass Wizard, the player should have at least a modicum of working knowledge about the things his character does, and how best to exploit them. I don't really demand player skill, but I definitely reward craftiness in all things.

Quote from: The Butcher;597719I think the GM should be the definitive authority on the rules at the table.

Agreed, but this should be scenario specific adjudication.

Players should be able to roll characters by themselves, understand the basic mechanics of the game in passing and generally be able to conduct themselves in game.  

For instance, knowing the rules to climbing and using your gear apply all the time.  Yet, the GM will determine how those rules interact with his dungeon, such as the pit trap with slimy walls that hinders climbing.  That isn't in the rulebook, but it's in the GM's scenario.  A GM that decides on a different procedure every time someone climbs out of a pit (or whatever scenario you like) is risking losing his players if they are paying attention to the rules, and they might think him an insufferable douchebag out to lord it over them.

I'd turn the question in the OP around and say if what my character can do and I need to roll isn't obvious from a quick character sheet then it's not the kind of game I want to play anyway.

And the GM insists we try that game with lot's of moving parts, rules full of exceptions, arbitrary limitations and baroque subsystems and with cluttered character filled with obscure terms - especially obscure Latin terms - then the system becomes the GM's problem, not mine. I'm happy to describe my characters intentions, he can navigate the overcomplicated system of which he is so fond.

Quote from: T. Foster;596881(But, OTOH, it is kind of annoying when someone's been playing in your group for, like, 6 months and still has to be told every damn time which dice to roll for his attack and which dice to roll for damage, and is seemingly completely incapable of telling the difference between a d8 and a d10...)

Yes, this is the only sort of thing that pisses me off.

We have one player who doesn't really know any rules and doesn't really care to learn, but he knows what dice he has to roll and with what bonuses on his powers. He knows that to attack he rolls a D20+2 (plus whatever other modifiers I tell him), and that to use his doctor skill he has to roll a d6 and get five or less.

On the other hand, we have a different player who has been with us for almost two years now that, EVERY SINGLE TIME he attacks, has to try to calculate his entire attack bonus over again. He's like "ok, I rolled a natural 12! Now, I look at my attack bonus, right? and str modifier? that's 2 + 1, plus its steel so I get a +1...so 16"

(note that he ALWAYS yells out what he actually rolled first, so that I often answer "ok you miss", and then have to wait, or clarify when he points out he hasn't gone through adding all his bonuses)

I swear to christ it makes me want to write a giant "+4" on his sheet to see if he gets the fucking point.

I don't even think he does it from ignorance; I think he does it because every single time he somehow hopes the calculation will come out differently and he'll get a higher total.

RPGPundit

That reminds me of a pet peeve of mine.


When a dnd player rolls a total of a 15 and hits an enemy.

Next round, the player rolls higher than 15...and nothing else has changed.

*player struggles to add bonuses"

"Do I hit?"


well yes...duh

I will admit to being frustrated by one player who can never seem to remember what to roll in GURPS (3d6 roll under for pretty much everything), but usually I can work around this. As long as people are paying attention to what is going on in the game, I'm a happy camper.

Besides, I'm the only one who owns any games that aren't D&D. I don't expect everyone to know the rules. Hell, I don't always know all the rules...

Quote from: Bill;598005That reminds me of a pet peeve of mine.


When a dnd player rolls a total of a 15 and hits an enemy.

Next round, the player rolls higher than 15...and nothing else has changed.

*player struggles to add bonuses"

"Do I hit?"


well yes...duh

Ugh.

Yeah, that would be annoying.