Great video, would like to post a flip side to the rules lawyer. They're also the ones that can often keep the players honest at the table (including the GM). Honestly there are times that a GM might rule something that would completely invalidate an ability of a player or on the flip side, a player might misinterpret an ability and give it way more power than it should and wreck a plan made by the rest of the party. Avocation of the rules can be important... as long as it isn't taken to ruin the fun.
For sure, and I appreciate your comment. For my style, and all our professional GMs, we always land on the side of pacing as a priority, whatever that may look like. But yes, for an inexperienced GM, a player advocating for their fellow players/abilities/plans is always a positive.
#3. I rolled low on initiative and was at the bottom of the que. Two noobs took 30 mins. to decide on an action. I cooked two burgers and a can of beans, came back and they *still* hadn't completed their actions.
I hear you. Pacing is so important for a quality game. You don't have to be an expert on your turn, but its important to be engaged, so the pace flows. Thanks for your comment.
The problem I have is the entire concept of dnd is outside of my comfort zone. I decided to step outside of my comfort zone because my comfort zone is unhealthy. If I stuck to what was comfortable I'd self isolate forever.
Thanks for your comment. And I 100% understand. The important thing is to try, as it can help you grow. And that's what a good group is there for, to help you the person even above and beyond your character, see success. Please let me know if there are any topics you'd like me to address for a future video to help out.
Agree with everything but the backstory. Create as much backstory as you like, have fun with it. You may only have a few sentences to express that backstory in any given game, but I'd much rather have a player with a well thought out character who can give a quick answer as to their motivation or interaction as opposed to asking a player about their character and having them stare at you like a deer into headlights.
@@gorlaxss I run a lot of Adventurer's League games. So each session starts off with a character introduction. It is exceptionally rare that I have someone talk backstory for more than a minute. Like maybe twice in decades of gaming. Even folks who I know have gone on insomniatic journeys through the bowels of their character's history. I do try to pull out some extra little bits from people. This week it was my continuation of Dragons of Stormwreck Isle, so everyone had to share what their character was doing to enjoy the island now that all the threats had been dealt with. In my Autumn Harvest module there is a puzzle box that can only be opened by the characters sharing something they are ashamed of. I've had some great stories and interactions come from that one. Litter Patrol has an Astral Fishing scene where the characters can share stories of their youth or answer some of my probing questions. I've always been partial to asking "The charges were all dismissed, but what was it that you were arrested for?" :D I love getting players to get into their character's heads and share what's ticking.
Think like a GM who's trying to find ways of letting an individual character shine. Understand what your fellow characters are best at and use those skills. Don't make that tracking roll just because you thought of it, call over the Ranger and ask their expert opinion on the nature of the scat you found. Stuff like that.
I agreed with everything you were saying, up to the last one. Idk how long you've been playing d and d, but there are SOOOOO many rules and rulings by Jeremy Crawford that I've had maybe one DM my whole life not need a bit of help here and there. It's like the "Umm Actually," game and Matt Mercer. He smokes them as he knows more but still doesn't know EVERYTHING. For the things that they can't remember off hand, it takes time out of the game to look it up. But if you have a rules lawyer it cam be faster. Plus in many games I've played in people like to push the boundaries of what's allowed because of what's not specified. For example, a player I was at the table with wanted to use his familiar to scout the layout of the tunnels ahead and stop every 40-60 feet to perceive and investigate. Claimed that because the familiar can give the help action, he gets advantage on perception AND investigation checks. The DM didn't know, but it specifies they can only grant advantage on attack rolls and only certain creatures like the owl have advantage on perception checks. No advantage on investigation. Things are worded weirdly in the game, especially with certain multiclasses. I have a 3 echo knight fighter/ 3 armorer artificer. So as an echo knight I can make an echo copy of myself somewhere nearby. So the next round, if the echo survives, I use my action to hit the enemy with my thunder gauntlets, then bonus action to switch places with my echo 30 ft away. So the echo isn't TECHNICALLY me, but a COPY of me. But when I hit with the thunder gauntlets, they impose disadvantage on attack rolls against anyone other than me, so the echo being a copy of me could mean no disadvantage but it'd not me but a copy so disadvantage? It can get complicated and rules lawyers can help it run quicker is my point. Yes some can be snobby and act like know it all but some just want a good game experience where people follow the rules and dont try to get away with things
I appreciate your response. I think we have slightly different perspectives/definitions on this. I’m always in favor of players advocating for what their character can do. And as a GM, I absolutely don’t know all the rules. And…the key to a great game is pacing. So if it expedites the game, I’m all for it. One last consideration: I don’t approach D&D as a miniature war game with hard and fast rules, but a social experience. Some approach it from a strict RaW, which is great, everybody does it their own way. I’m glad you’re here and your comment is great for giving people something to think on.😀👍
Kinda depends on what you're classifying as a rules lawyer tbh. On one hand you have the players who are neck deep in the system, know the majority of rules inside and out, and like to refer to official rulings whenever they're unsure of something. On the other you have those who look for loopholes and flaws within the system so they can exploit the gaps between rulings. The first example is an asset to the table, the second example is a liability. In either case, the rules themselves specify that the DM is the final arbiter of the game at their table, so you can be as book-exact as you like and still be 'wrong' for the table you're at if the DM concerned wants to do something differently. I've been running games since 2e, spent the majority of my DM life using 3e and 3.5e, and recently transitioned to 5e. In all that time I've learned most of the rules pretty thoroughly but in my games there are a rather large number of 'house rulings' and alternative rules which have evolved over the years to help cover some of the shortfallings and oddities within the system. Beyond those though, are the 'rule of cool' changes I've made. Ultimately the game is a cooperative storytelling device, and only when everyone is engaged and enjoying themselves does this truly shine, so I will sometimes state simply that the rules are WRONG for a given situation, or perhaps just irrelevant to the moment. This was best illustrated when I decided to create a concept character in 3.5e who was specifically designed to exploit the most ridiculous loopholes of the system, he used a glass tower shield, messed about in shadowy illumination constantly, had a bucket of endless water for the drowning silliness and had a bunch of ridiculous tricks he could pull in game (not to mention the maxed ranks in truenaming, just to hammer the problems home). I've never met a DM who would allow me to play him, but he's 100% rules legal. Stupid as all balls, but legal.
A good DM knows the rules of DnD, a great DM know when to bend them in favour of having a great time. I don't mean that as in "to be good you need to know everything", but the game master should have a basic understanding of the core system and the players should as well understand that dm has final say on implementing said rules or adapting to their own game and table. To meticulously adhere to everything a guy says online, someone who's never been at your table playing with you and argue your DMs final say on a ruling 'cause this stranger said something on twitter about what can or cannot happen on a ttrpg is crazy, and a little bit parasocial if I might say so. Crawford isn't your friend, he doesn't know who you are or what's up with your home games, but your DM and fellow players hopefully are, so you should always consider and respect the thoughts on the game of the real people at the table before a virtual person who you don't even know. To give you an example, I had the weirdest rules lawyering about using the shape water cantrip to FLY. That's right, you're reading this correctly, he wanted to freeze a puddle, stand on top of it, and move it around with his character on top so he could fly, so he could skip an entire mountain. I explained that a cantrip isn't powerful enough to work as an already existing second level spell called levitate and that he was welcome to try something else, but he argued for minutes of in-game time, reading the spell aloud to DM and players, and saying that he should be able to do it, yada yada yada. Not a single other person there enjoyed that, no-one liked playing with That Guy, eventually we booted him because he was problematic ad infinitum, and the rules lawyering was a big part of the issue. So no, knowing the system is one thing, a great thing for sure, but being annoying and arguing with the DM is rules lawyering. Don't be a rules lawyer, nobody enjoys an actual rules lawyer at their table. Ever.
@@claire3614 well I agree with you that people absolutely try all the time to push the boundaries of what is possible with spells, especially cantrips and those rules are there for that specific reason. I'm not saying when I DM that EVRRYTHING is RAW and Jeremy Crawford has final say in everything at the table. But when no one seems to have the answer, an answer from the guy who writes the game is a good guideline. But everyone's game is different so no one has to follow everything RAW. That's not what I'm saying. I was saying IF you want to play a game as close to rules as possible but changing some things, and you get stuck on something and have 17 other things going on like most DMs, sometimes someone assisting and saying this is what it does. When a player casts a spell and they're like alright what's the save or what's it do, someone can help explain. Yes there are rules lawyers out there that are snobby know it alls and it can be annoying I've been in games with those people, but also been in games where the players helped the DM rules lawyering themselves and still all had a great time. It honestly depends on the group
![Yailin La Mas Viral, @kreizyk.official - Dale 2 (Remix) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JaYHBzgqz94/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video, would like to post a flip side to the rules lawyer. They're also the ones that can often keep the players honest at the table (including the GM). Honestly there are times that a GM might rule something that would completely invalidate an ability of a player or on the flip side, a player might misinterpret an ability and give it way more power than it should and wreck a plan made by the rest of the party. Avocation of the rules can be important... as long as it isn't taken to ruin the fun.
For sure, and I appreciate your comment. For my style, and all our professional GMs, we always land on the side of pacing as a priority, whatever that may look like. But yes, for an inexperienced GM, a player advocating for their fellow players/abilities/plans is always a positive.
#3. I rolled low on initiative and was at the bottom of the que. Two noobs took 30 mins. to decide on an action. I cooked two burgers and a can of beans, came back and they *still* hadn't completed their actions.
I hear you. Pacing is so important for a quality game. You don't have to be an expert on your turn, but its important to be engaged, so the pace flows. Thanks for your comment.
Great tips! I always recommend players follow the “fun to camp with” rule
Absolutely!
Music is too loud as it ramps up. I keep not understanding what you are saying once the music gets louder.
Still working on me editing game. I’ll adjust the sound design accordingly. Thanks for the feedback 👍
Very good list, I think you hit on all my session 0 rules. I have a few don'ts thrown in too.
Good stuff! Thanks for the work you do.
right back at you my friend :-)
The problem I have is the entire concept of dnd is outside of my comfort zone. I decided to step outside of my comfort zone because my comfort zone is unhealthy. If I stuck to what was comfortable I'd self isolate forever.
Thanks for your comment. And I 100% understand. The important thing is to try, as it can help you grow. And that's what a good group is there for, to help you the person even above and beyond your character, see success. Please let me know if there are any topics you'd like me to address for a future video to help out.
Agree with everything but the backstory. Create as much backstory as you like, have fun with it. You may only have a few sentences to express that backstory in any given game, but I'd much rather have a player with a well thought out character who can give a quick answer as to their motivation or interaction as opposed to asking a player about their character and having them stare at you like a deer into headlights.
Thanks for your comment Rick. Good stuff for people to think about here. 👍👍
I would agree, but if you have a big backstory its probably good to have a little 5 to 8 sentence summary
@@gorlaxss I run a lot of Adventurer's League games. So each session starts off with a character introduction. It is exceptionally rare that I have someone talk backstory for more than a minute. Like maybe twice in decades of gaming. Even folks who I know have gone on insomniatic journeys through the bowels of their character's history.
I do try to pull out some extra little bits from people. This week it was my continuation of Dragons of Stormwreck Isle, so everyone had to share what their character was doing to enjoy the island now that all the threats had been dealt with.
In my Autumn Harvest module there is a puzzle box that can only be opened by the characters sharing something they are ashamed of. I've had some great stories and interactions come from that one.
Litter Patrol has an Astral Fishing scene where the characters can share stories of their youth or answer some of my probing questions. I've always been partial to asking "The charges were all dismissed, but what was it that you were arrested for?" :D
I love getting players to get into their character's heads and share what's ticking.
Think like a GM who's trying to find ways of letting an individual character shine. Understand what your fellow characters are best at and use those skills. Don't make that tracking roll just because you thought of it, call over the Ranger and ask their expert opinion on the nature of the scat you found. Stuff like that.
I like your style Dane. :-)
I agreed with everything you were saying, up to the last one. Idk how long you've been playing d and d, but there are SOOOOO many rules and rulings by Jeremy Crawford that I've had maybe one DM my whole life not need a bit of help here and there. It's like the "Umm Actually," game and Matt Mercer. He smokes them as he knows more but still doesn't know EVERYTHING. For the things that they can't remember off hand, it takes time out of the game to look it up. But if you have a rules lawyer it cam be faster. Plus in many games I've played in people like to push the boundaries of what's allowed because of what's not specified. For example, a player I was at the table with wanted to use his familiar to scout the layout of the tunnels ahead and stop every 40-60 feet to perceive and investigate. Claimed that because the familiar can give the help action, he gets advantage on perception AND investigation checks. The DM didn't know, but it specifies they can only grant advantage on attack rolls and only certain creatures like the owl have advantage on perception checks. No advantage on investigation. Things are worded weirdly in the game, especially with certain multiclasses. I have a 3 echo knight fighter/ 3 armorer artificer. So as an echo knight I can make an echo copy of myself somewhere nearby. So the next round, if the echo survives, I use my action to hit the enemy with my thunder gauntlets, then bonus action to switch places with my echo 30 ft away. So the echo isn't TECHNICALLY me, but a COPY of me. But when I hit with the thunder gauntlets, they impose disadvantage on attack rolls against anyone other than me, so the echo being a copy of me could mean no disadvantage but it'd not me but a copy so disadvantage? It can get complicated and rules lawyers can help it run quicker is my point. Yes some can be snobby and act like know it all but some just want a good game experience where people follow the rules and dont try to get away with things
I appreciate your response. I think we have slightly different perspectives/definitions on this. I’m always in favor of players advocating for what their character can do. And as a GM, I absolutely don’t know all the rules. And…the key to a great game is pacing. So if it expedites the game, I’m all for it. One last consideration: I don’t approach D&D as a miniature war game with hard and fast rules, but a social experience. Some approach it from a strict RaW, which is great, everybody does it their own way. I’m glad you’re here and your comment is great for giving people something to think on.😀👍
Kinda depends on what you're classifying as a rules lawyer tbh. On one hand you have the players who are neck deep in the system, know the majority of rules inside and out, and like to refer to official rulings whenever they're unsure of something. On the other you have those who look for loopholes and flaws within the system so they can exploit the gaps between rulings. The first example is an asset to the table, the second example is a liability.
In either case, the rules themselves specify that the DM is the final arbiter of the game at their table, so you can be as book-exact as you like and still be 'wrong' for the table you're at if the DM concerned wants to do something differently. I've been running games since 2e, spent the majority of my DM life using 3e and 3.5e, and recently transitioned to 5e. In all that time I've learned most of the rules pretty thoroughly but in my games there are a rather large number of 'house rulings' and alternative rules which have evolved over the years to help cover some of the shortfallings and oddities within the system. Beyond those though, are the 'rule of cool' changes I've made. Ultimately the game is a cooperative storytelling device, and only when everyone is engaged and enjoying themselves does this truly shine, so I will sometimes state simply that the rules are WRONG for a given situation, or perhaps just irrelevant to the moment.
This was best illustrated when I decided to create a concept character in 3.5e who was specifically designed to exploit the most ridiculous loopholes of the system, he used a glass tower shield, messed about in shadowy illumination constantly, had a bucket of endless water for the drowning silliness and had a bunch of ridiculous tricks he could pull in game (not to mention the maxed ranks in truenaming, just to hammer the problems home). I've never met a DM who would allow me to play him, but he's 100% rules legal. Stupid as all balls, but legal.
A good DM knows the rules of DnD, a great DM know when to bend them in favour of having a great time. I don't mean that as in "to be good you need to know everything", but the game master should have a basic understanding of the core system and the players should as well understand that dm has final say on implementing said rules or adapting to their own game and table. To meticulously adhere to everything a guy says online, someone who's never been at your table playing with you and argue your DMs final say on a ruling 'cause this stranger said something on twitter about what can or cannot happen on a ttrpg is crazy, and a little bit parasocial if I might say so. Crawford isn't your friend, he doesn't know who you are or what's up with your home games, but your DM and fellow players hopefully are, so you should always consider and respect the thoughts on the game of the real people at the table before a virtual person who you don't even know.
To give you an example, I had the weirdest rules lawyering about using the shape water cantrip to FLY. That's right, you're reading this correctly, he wanted to freeze a puddle, stand on top of it, and move it around with his character on top so he could fly, so he could skip an entire mountain. I explained that a cantrip isn't powerful enough to work as an already existing second level spell called levitate and that he was welcome to try something else, but he argued for minutes of in-game time, reading the spell aloud to DM and players, and saying that he should be able to do it, yada yada yada. Not a single other person there enjoyed that, no-one liked playing with That Guy, eventually we booted him because he was problematic ad infinitum, and the rules lawyering was a big part of the issue.
So no, knowing the system is one thing, a great thing for sure, but being annoying and arguing with the DM is rules lawyering. Don't be a rules lawyer, nobody enjoys an actual rules lawyer at their table. Ever.
@@claire3614 well I agree with you that people absolutely try all the time to push the boundaries of what is possible with spells, especially cantrips and those rules are there for that specific reason. I'm not saying when I DM that EVRRYTHING is RAW and Jeremy Crawford has final say in everything at the table. But when no one seems to have the answer, an answer from the guy who writes the game is a good guideline. But everyone's game is different so no one has to follow everything RAW. That's not what I'm saying. I was saying IF you want to play a game as close to rules as possible but changing some things, and you get stuck on something and have 17 other things going on like most DMs, sometimes someone assisting and saying this is what it does. When a player casts a spell and they're like alright what's the save or what's it do, someone can help explain. Yes there are rules lawyers out there that are snobby know it alls and it can be annoying I've been in games with those people, but also been in games where the players helped the DM rules lawyering themselves and still all had a great time. It honestly depends on the group
@@Veklim you're absolutely right sbout that