PDA

View Full Version : "Ah screw it"



Mastikator
2011-06-23, 02:08 PM
As a DM, when you find yourself looking though the books to find out what the rule said, how often do you find yourself saying "ah screw it, this is how it'll work" for the sake of game flow.
Lately I've found myself sacrificing rules I don't easily have access to just to make the game run faster, assuming the rulings in question are adequate, how OK do you consider this habit when you play? If your DM did this, how would you feel?

Amphetryon
2011-06-23, 02:29 PM
As a DM, when you find yourself looking though the books to find out what the rule said, how often do you find yourself saying "ah screw it, this is how it'll work" for the sake of game flow.
Lately I've found myself sacrificing rules I don't easily have access to just to make the game run faster, assuming the rulings in question are adequate, how OK do you consider this habit when you play? If your DM did this, how would you feel?

Provided that the Game Master in question makes it clear that s/he's making an ad hoc ruling for the sake of game flow, I've got no issue with this. It's when the GM says that his ad hoc ruling is actually the RAW/RAI - and it ain't so - that I get the nerdrage.

The Glyphstone
2011-06-23, 02:45 PM
It'd also depend on what the rules were - I expect a measure of rules knowledge from anyone who intends to GM. If it's something arcane and complex like grappling rules or 3-dimensional combat, ad-hoc away. If it's something simpler but obscure like the difference between cover and improved cover (but not total cover), fine. If it's as basic as the AoO rules or reach rules, raeg.

Tyndmyr
2011-06-23, 02:50 PM
It'd also depend on what the rules were - I expect a measure of rules knowledge from anyone who intends to GM. If it's something arcane and complex like grappling rules or 3-dimensional combat, ad-hoc away. If it's something simpler but obscure like the difference between cover and improved cover (but not total cover), fine. If it's as basic as the AoO rules or reach rules, raeg.

There is this too. I swear to god, every time I have to explain to a GM that a five foot adjustment is not a move action, I want to punch a baby.

If you want to GM, at least read through the core rulebook once. And before resorting to ad-hoc, ask if your players if they know where the appropriate rule lives. Especially that budding rules lawyer who's jumping up and down with his finger in the book.

Nachtritter
2011-06-23, 03:29 PM
If it takes me more than five minutes to look up and understand/incorporate a rule or deal with a situation with multiple interpretations on the rulebooks, I just let common sense dictate what's going on. Stopping the game for any longer than that can really break the flow, and the rules are meant as storytelling aids, not as a rigid mechanic that you have to follow slavishly. If I can't find the exact amount of damage a dude gets for getting dropped into a ravenous animated thresher maw, then a handful of d6s will do me just fine.

LibraryOgre
2011-06-23, 05:40 PM
All the time. That's what a GM is for. If someone wants to look up the rule later, fine, but unless the rule as written is going to majorly impact how things played out, I ain't gonna bother.

lerg2
2011-06-23, 06:06 PM
I do this all the time, and sometimes I do it when I know the rule quite well. A wise Kevin Lodge once said- "It fits the story, story trumps rules." And I have a 3 minute rule as follows: If you can't solve the issue in three minutes, it's DM's ruling.

dsmiles
2011-06-23, 06:44 PM
I have a specific rule for these occasions:

"An ad hoc ruling will be made, if, after one minute during combat (or five minutes out of combat) the rule in question can't be produced by either the players or the GM."

I let the players know at the beginning of every session that this is the case, and nobody has ever argued for more time. My group sees these as reasonable time limits for the sake of game flow.

Knaight
2011-06-23, 06:55 PM
I use nice, light weight systems that I have completely memorized, so this doesn't come up. However, if I were to try to GM GURPS or Burning Wheel for extended periods of time, I'd allocate maybe 30 seconds to finding a rule before winging it.

holywhippet
2011-06-23, 07:06 PM
I don't do it often, if anything I'm a bit of a stickler for the rules. Last one I remember was when I was told I'd only be able to move half my speed because I'd tumbled out of range of some enemies. The rule is actually that you move only half speed when going through squares that are threatened. Plus that's the 3.5 ruling - we were playing 3.0 and I'm not sure even that much is implemented.

Quietus
2011-06-23, 07:14 PM
I have a pretty solid, near-encyclopedic knowledge of the rules in the Core books, excepting many spells, so it rarely comes up that I don't know how a particular rule works. If it's something obscure that I expect to come up for a session (say, a monster has an odd ability), I'll bookmark the appropriate page just in case. In most cases, if something comes up I'm not 100% on, and no one else at the table is, I'll make a ruling, and then examine the actual rules after the game. I don't want the flow of the game slowed down because I can't remember the exact details of that obscure ability.

This has actually come up recently; I'm not used to players using divination effects all that much, and a player wanted to use Locate Object. I was under the impression somehow that it would find ALL of a given item within range; It finds only the closest one. I gave a player a number of "hits" with it in the game session, then looked it up afterward and found out the truth. When I clarified that, I mentioned that A) Hey, my bad, and B) The previous results remain, but the spell would work properly in the future. I think that this i pretty much the only fair way to do things, barring situations where your player has wheedled and munchkined their way into an unfair advantage.

Tyndmyr
2011-06-24, 12:44 PM
I do this all the time, and sometimes I do it when I know the rule quite well. A wise Kevin Lodge once said- "It fits the story, story trumps rules."

There are few phrases in RPGs I hate more than "story trumps rules". It's a role-playing game, not a role-playing story.

I resort to "screw it" exceedingly seldom. As in, I can't recall the last time it happened. This is for two reasons...first, I know the rules of games I GM quite well before I do so. Secondly, because I don't set up scenarios to use rules with which I am unfamiliar. If I want an arial combat scene, or there is a good chance of a fight turning into it, I'll pop into the rules beforehand as part of preparation to refresh.

With strong familiarity comes an ability to find rules rapidly. Five minute rule, etc is simply unnecessary with my group because it is never going to take five minutes for the group to find the rule(s) in the book, read them, and come to a conclusion.

dsmiles
2011-06-24, 12:47 PM
Secondly, because I don't set up scenarios to use rules with which I am unfamiliar. If I want an arial combat scene, or there is a good chance of a fight turning into it, I'll pop into the rules beforehand as part of preparation to refresh. Unfortunately for me, even though I do the same thing, my players tend towards insane levels of creativity, and bend encounters in totally random directions. (Not break, though. Thankfully.) Sometimes, I just don't see it coming.

Tyndmyr
2011-06-24, 12:55 PM
It happens, on occasion. Then, if we happen across rule territory that none of the rules-nazis know(there are three of us who consider reading rulebook for fun a valid hobby), a quick race to find the appropriate rules happens. It's generally a pretty quick thing. Rules Compendium is an underrated book, IMO. Sure, it's pretty much ONLY good for this, but it's remarkably easy to find things in very rapidly, which is a plus if you like to avoid not-playing time.

Now, if only I had a reliable way to stop distractions like vodka, women and video games, I'd be set.

McStabbington
2011-06-24, 12:59 PM
Unfortunately for me, even though I do the same thing, my players tend towards insane levels of creativity, and bend encounters in totally random directions. (Not break, though. Thankfully.) Sometimes, I just don't see it coming.

I like your rule, but I would amend it to add a Rule 0: anything that ruins either the session or the spirit of the game is subject to immediate DM veto, regardless of rules. For example, one time our group had an hour to blow, and decided to see just how tough a Tarrasque really is. So one player played the Tarrasque (tweaking the feats a bit for greater endurance), and the other three of us built our own great wyrm dragon. We ended up having to fudge a reflex save to grab a buried log or something when I cast reverse gravity on the area around the Tarrasque, because that would have just made him helpless while we flew in and gradually burned him down with our breath.

Saph
2011-06-24, 01:11 PM
I've got a fairly encyclopaedic knowledge of the rules, and I still end up saying "okay, roll X" fairly often to resolve actions where I don't want to put the game on hold. An example from a battle in my last campaign, where the Swordsage character was fighting a ToB Rakshasa in a trap-filled maze:

1) Swordsage uses Death from Above, jumping over the Rakshasa and stabbing at her neck. Rakshasa dodges the attack.
2) Swordsage touches down on the other side, and the floor crumbles out from underneath him - it's a pit trap. He passes his Reflex save, but has nowhere to go except back into the Rakshasa's square. I say that he catches the side of the pit instead, and he's left hanging off the edge, right at the Rakshasa's feet.
3) It's the Rakshasa's turn, and with a grin she bends down to where the Swordsage is hanging off the edge of the pit, and aims her claws at the Swordsage's fingers. The Swordsage says he lets go of the edge before the blow lands, and I let him do it: his Jump and Tumble skills negate most of the damage from the fall.
4) With her target now 20 feet beneath her, the Rakshasa instead takes a 5-foot step away from the pit and engages the next member of the party.

That whole sequence took about 60 seconds, plus another 60 seconds of the rest of the party laughing at the Swordsage and the pit trap ("Watch as I leap over the enemy's head to land safely on the aaaaaargh."). We've got another DM who's a stickler for the rules, though, and I guarantee if he'd been running it the game would have gone on hold for at least ten minutes while he looked up the rules about where you end up after a pit trap, whether you can slash someone's fingers to make them let go of a ledge, whether you can let go of a ledge as a free action, whether you're allowed to change a declared action, etc etc.

Ozreth
2011-06-24, 01:35 PM
If we can't find the rule with a minute of looking through the Rules Compendium (great book, as somebody above me mentioned) we just make up something that makes sense and look it up after the game.

IME this seems to be the basic rule of thumb. Either handwave it and look it up later, or try to find it quickly then handwave it.

The story, adventure, and character fun is at the heart of the game, not nitpicking over rules.

Now, if rules lawyering is what is fun to your players, then by all means look up the rule. Whatever makes things enjoyable all around the table.

Traab
2011-06-24, 01:55 PM
Is there a D&D search engine online you can use to do a rules check? Sort of a combination of Ask.com and a library of every sourcebook available? If not, there frigging well should be!

"What is the damage reduction of a halfing/rogue/barbarian attacking a giant stone golem with a great axe when launched by his ice giant party member according to 4.0 rules?"

That sort of thing. :p

Admiral Squish
2011-06-24, 02:11 PM
If you look closely, you can see the EXACT moment that the DM said 'screw it' in TTGL. Episode three, when Kamina tries to 'combine' for the first time. But hey, I mean, look how awesome that one turned out. If it works, it works.

Rules are a framework. I like to think of D&D as a more sophisticated version of cops & robbers. Except now, when you shout 'Bang! I shot you! You're dead!' there are rules that keep the game from descending into 'Nuh-uh! I dodged it!' 'Yuh-huh! I hit you!' 'Nuh-uh!' 'Yuh-huh!'.

Delwugor
2011-06-24, 04:11 PM
I will often ask if anyone else knows the rule first but after that I make a quick call. Anyone can argue and/or complain after the session has ended.

randomhero00
2011-06-24, 04:14 PM
OP I do it all the time, but then again my players do crazy, unexpected stuff ALL the time. Like trying to ride the enemy.

I swear, no matter what...

DM "Flying monkey's with red eyes descend upon you. 100 yards out."
Player "Ok, I jump on its back, grapple it, and then try to ride it."

LibraryOgre
2011-06-24, 04:20 PM
OP I do it all the time, but then again my players do crazy, unexpected stuff ALL the time. Like trying to ride the enemy.

I swear, no matter what...

DM "Flying monkey's with red eyes descend upon you. 100 yards out."
Player "Ok, I jump on its back, grapple it, and then try to ride it."

We have one guy who tries to grapple EVERYTHING. He once tried to grapple a Tyrannosaurus. We had to talk him out of it.

Jay R
2011-06-24, 08:33 PM
If a player is basing his tactic on the specific wording of a specific rule, then he can find the rule. If nobody else knows the rule at the moment, then what makes sense is as good as the written rule, and often better, since it was designed for the specific situation at hand.

valadil
2011-06-24, 11:44 PM
Two factors come into play.

How vital is the rule? I'm more likely to look up if something should kill a PC than something trivial.

Do I have a clue where the rule appears? For aquatic combat, I'll check the DMG. If I know the section or page number, I'm even more likely to look it up. What I object to is the delay in finding the rule.

That said, rules lookups can and should be done in prep. If you know a kraken is going to pull players overboard, you damn well better look up aquatic combat. It's part of your homework as GM. If your players botch a teleport and end up going to sea, and you improvise a sea fight, nobody will hold it against you if you weren't prepared for aquatic combat.

Dimers
2011-06-25, 01:29 AM
... there are three of us who consider reading rulebook for fun a valid hobby ...

Not just fun, either. I am the tank among my fellow players: if their characters are threatened by DM misreading or ignorance, it is my duty and my honor to protect them with the holy writ of page references. :smalltongue:

Anderlith
2011-06-25, 09:44 AM
Hardly ever, I know most of the rules by heart & those that I don't know by heart I know where to find. To me, I find it infuriating when a D&D ignores rules in favor of winging it. Some times I graft my own ideas (spells, equipment, etc) into a system & therefore must make up new rules, but that is as close as I come to "Ah screw it"

DeadManSleeping
2011-06-25, 10:09 AM
This comes up often when there are multiple rule systems or complex rule systems that we know, but are taking a while to work out.

For example, if I'm playing Exalted, and both attacker and defender have scenelong Charms that apply to an exchange, and they both also use one-time Charms that apply to that exchange, you have a ton of modifiers to deal with. Normally, I'd go through it all, but if the combat's been going on a while, and the good guys are really winning, that's an "ah screw it" moment.

Relatedly, I will often forgo a more complex thing in favor of a more simple thing on purpose. Like, if a character is trying to make a Gadget in Spirit of the Century. I could check all the Engineering and Science stuff to get all the numbers. I know exactly how to do that. However, if their action precipitates fun (like, say, enabling the party to engage in a chase scene rather than falling behind and having to do an investigation scene), and I know they already have their mechanics geared towards being able to do that sort of thing, then I just let it fall to an ad-hoc roll. I'm not sure if that counts as "ah screw it" since I am not engaged in deliberation in the first place, but there it is.

dsmiles
2011-06-25, 11:07 AM
It happens, on occasion. Then, if we happen across rule territory that none of the rules-nazis know(there are three of us who consider reading rulebook for fun a valid hobby), a quick race to find the appropriate rules happens. It's generally a pretty quick thing. Rules Compendium is an underrated book, IMO. Sure, it's pretty much ONLY good for this, but it's remarkably easy to find things in very rapidly, which is a plus if you like to avoid not-playing time.Given the collective rules knowledge of myself and my players, I've probably only had to invoke my rule five times in as many years. But it's nice to have a limit to the amount of downtime we suffer, since we can only get together once a month, or so.

Now, if only I had a reliable way to stop distractions like vodka, women and video games, I'd be set.Yeah, right. :smallwink:

Tyndmyr
2011-06-25, 12:45 PM
Hardly ever, I know most of the rules by heart & those that I don't know by heart I know where to find. To me, I find it infuriating when a D&D ignores rules in favor of winging it. Some times I graft my own ideas (spells, equipment, etc) into a system & therefore must make up new rules, but that is as close as I come to "Ah screw it"

I think that counts more as homebrew than "screw the rules". And homebrew is a wonderful thing when done well.

I'll admit that caveat is a humdinger, though.



Yeah, right. :smallwink:

Don't get me wrong, they're wonderful things...but when they mix with D&D, the game kind of tends to get left in the dust. Separating playing and party areas helps somewhat...provided you can keep them out of eye/earshot of each other. Given the nature of drunk people, this is a somewhat spotty solution.

Mike_G
2011-06-25, 03:31 PM
Now, if only I had a reliable way to stop distractions like vodka, women and video games, I'd be set.

If I could find a way for gaming to stop distracting me from booze and women, I'd be a happier man.

Never had much interest in video games.

CotV
2011-06-26, 12:33 PM
More than anything I try and maintain the momentum and flow of the game and if that means pulling an "Ah screw it" I do it. But I always try and jot down a quick note of what rule slipped me up and after the game make sure to learn it.

Tyndmyr
2011-06-26, 09:11 PM
If I could find a way for gaming to stop distracting me from booze and women, I'd be a happier man.

Never had much interest in video games.

Huh. Perhaps if we gamed together it'd balance out. I've had many a roleplaying game break out into a party, but I think I've yet to go to a party that broke out into a roleplaying game.

That would be frigging awesome if it did, though.

Gnome Alone
2011-06-28, 04:11 PM
Is there a D&D search engine online you can use to do a rules check? Sort of a combination of Ask.com and a library of every sourcebook available? If not, there frigging well should be!

"What is the damage reduction of a halfing/rogue/barbarian attacking a giant stone golem with a great axe when launched by his ice giant party member according to 4.0 rules?"

That sort of thing. :p

Yep, you just go to "giantitp.com" and type your question into the forums. Then the nice advice-mo-trons help you out. :smalltongue:

Chess435
2011-06-28, 11:27 PM
Yep, you just go to "giantitp.com" and type your question into the forums. Then the nice advice-mo-trons help you out. :smalltongue:

Can I sig that?

Gnome Alone
2011-06-29, 05:48 PM
Can I sig that?

Ha ha, be my guest. Might wanna take the smiley thing out, but whatever - go nuts.

navar100
2011-06-29, 05:58 PM
My DM wants me to be the rules lawyer. If I'm wrong or tehre are extenuating circumstances I don't know about he says so, and I acknowledge and backoff, and if I'm right he adjusts. If we both don't know and a quick search doesn't get an answer, he'll make a ruling and research when we're not playing. It was during such a research that we learned in Pathfinder rogues can sneak attack corporeal undead! He thus ruled corporeal undead can also be critted.

Only if a character's life is on the line will a thorough search be made. If an answer still cannot be found then he'll err on the side of not killing the character. The character can still be out of commission, just not dead.

Solaris
2011-06-29, 06:05 PM
If you want to GM, at least read through the core rulebook once. And before resorting to ad-hoc, ask if your players if they know where the appropriate rule lives. Especially that budding rules lawyer who's jumping up and down with his finger in the book.

No, no, what you should do is ad hoc without asking, and then when the rules lawyer jumps up you shoot him. Empty your magazine, then reload and shoot him again. Just to be safe, find his next of kin and deliver your 9mm condolences.
God in heaven with all His angels, I hate rules lawyers.

TOZ
2011-06-29, 07:15 PM
Anytime I don't know the rule off the top of my head, unless the player is already looking it up I'll make it up. We have limited game time as it is, so wasting it searching the books is not time well spent. And since I have the rules mostly memorized except for very obscure mechanics and spells, it doesn't come up that often. I expect my players to know what spells they are using, and I expect myself to know what spells my NPCs are using. I expect myself to know the system I'm running, but not to be a machine capable of photographic memory. And Rule of Cool is a valid trump card.

Frozen_Feet
2011-06-29, 07:33 PM
I mostly say "screw it" when the players are fixated on attempting something inconsequental and distracting me from the flow of narrative pertaining to some other player/character. For example, if the players repeatedly try to search a room that is empty, find a shop that will not be there, try to fish for the umpteenth time that day etc., I will eventually just go "that's it, you get nothing. Gimme my dice and wait for your turn!"

Mike_G
2011-06-29, 07:37 PM
No, no, what you should do is ad hoc without asking, and then when the rules lawyer jumps up you shoot him. Empty your magazine, then reload and shoot him again. Just to be safe, find his next of kin and deliver your 9mm condolences.
God in heaven with all His angels, I hate rules lawyers.

I like the cut of your jib, sir.

TheAbstruseOne
2011-06-29, 07:49 PM
I do this frequently as I encourage my players to try wacky fun stuff. At least in 4e, I know the rules pretty well and I keep the Rules Compendium behind the screen at all times. But if my players try something crazy and I don't know the rule off the top of my head, can't find it in a reasonable amount of time (I keep a mental countdown from 100 if it's in combat), and none of the players know; I give up and make an ad hoc ruling.

I make it clear that this is how it's going to be handled for this session then I'll research more and let them know by email or at the next session's ramp-up time if the RAW says something different. I've never had it come up in a life-or-death situation, but I usually err on the side of the PC. If it's something that might be bad for the PC, I'll actually ask "Does that sound fair?" and listen to arguments if there are any about why it's not fair (though I've only had that happen once with someone who thought Acrobatics was a better choice than Athletics). I make a final ruling and briefly explain why I'm making that ruling. Any further discussion is for after the session.

The whole process has never taken more than 5 minutes, and I use the exact same process for rules questions (Does X stack with/override/work with Y? sort of things). I've only had one problem and that was in my very first 4e session I ever ran when I was still fuzzy on the rules. I gave an NPC a Ring of Invisibility before I knew all magic rings were Paragon Tier items and had gotten massive nerfings from 3rd Ed and one of my players kept complaining about the halfling NPC's ring being "broken" (as in overpowered). I ended up making it a plot point that the specific group of reoccurring NPCs had a crapload of overpowered magic items but made them "broken" as in they all had flaws that made them not work correctly or consistently (the ring required a saving throw every round to stay on or it failed for a month, one sword backfired and attacked the wielder on an attack roll of 1-2, etc).

Gabe the Bard
2011-06-29, 08:45 PM
I use a laptop, so I can look up rules pretty quickly on the SRD. If it's a feat or a spell from a non-core book, then it takes more time, but we usually try to get the rules straight in our group before moving on, even if it takes a bit of time. If it seems like it will slow down the game way too much, then we make up a rule and look it up later.

Tyndmyr
2011-06-30, 12:25 PM
No, no, what you should do is ad hoc without asking, and then when the rules lawyer jumps up you shoot him. Empty your magazine, then reload and shoot him again. Just to be safe, find his next of kin and deliver your 9mm condolences.
God in heaven with all His angels, I hate rules lawyers.

Rules Lawyers are useful. Use them to do the looking up for you.

It's like having the guy who likes to fiddle with things whenever it's not his turn in combat. Have him keep track of initiative or something. Bam, he's happy, and it's one less thing for you to care about.

Some games put a lot of weight on the DM...nothing wrong with sharing that around on occasion.