I think of the rule of cool as being like the difference between Hedonists and Epicureans. Hedonists focused on maximizing immediate pleasure in every moment, even if drinking all that wine would lead to a hangover the next day. Epicureans were more concerned with total happiness over a lifetime, and often wouldn't indulge as much as a hedonist so as to attain more long term happiness. When it comes to the rule of cool, be an Epicurean, not a Hedonist!
That's not very nerdy at all. Would you call your grandfather a nerd for giving you some wisdom he learned over the years? If you want actual nerd shit try reddit
It's okay to say "no" sometimes. Important lesson for life not just D&D. Also, to address that "mother-may-I" DMing you spoke about later in the video. I teach a lot of new players the game frequently, and this is a common thing for them for some reason. They will constantly make sure they can do the most mundane things such as; "DM, may I twirl my dagger and look angry while in this bar?". Some people take forever to understand the social structure and contract of this game, but I'm proud to say that every player I've taught has become a good player in their own rights.
I wonder if since most new players have been introduced to DND by the internet, they get stories of a DM asking for an intelligence check to open the tavern door. A 1 is rolled, and their character dies in a humiliating way.
@@kylethomas9130 I think it has layers of variables, and that is probably one of them. I think the biggest thing is the unfamiliarity of the situation. Here they are, presumably the only new player and in most cases unacquainted with most the party IRL, and they know that the DM is the proprietor of the narrative and rules. They just want to not mess up and try to get along with everyone, so they make sure they are doing everything correctly, i.e; Asking if they can do literally everything they want to do. It's mostly harmless, and most people fall out of the habit after a handful of sessions.
@@clarenceyax8117 the nearest I get is asking which stat/skill do I roll for a desired task. Another variable could be DMs being spacrce with description. DM: okay you enter the tavern. PC: okay. DM:... PC:.... DM: ... PC: I sit on an empty chair? DM: it eats you, was a mimic, roll new character.
@@kylethomas9130 Not to take the conversation off course, but personally, when the session is getting into its 4th or even 5th hour, my descriptions will start to go to the way side out of exhaustion, so those sort of questions are very nice and encouraged from me. However, I will say that it's usually experienced players that will ask such questions as, "How big is the room?", "What is the material used for the walls and floors?", "Where is the chandelier in conjunction with the markings on the floor?", etc. So if you're a new player and you're asking those questions, then that's good.
@@clarenceyax8117 that's understandable, I would expect experience to dictate asking better questions, as opposed to building a crematorium in every village because that one time with the necromancer. There's a lot of bad habits that could be chalked up to "one time a DM/PC did x" and they've adjusted behavior.
Well said, Jim. All too often "Rule of Cool" is used as a cover for rules ignorance, even outright disregard of the rules. Or cover for disruptive nonsense that would turn the game into a joke if allowed. I'd say one thing I'm receptive to as a DM is a player who's willing to _risk_ - or even outright _trade_ - something in return for their implausible plan. The death-defying leap off the balcony to plunge a spear into the Beholder's central eye, willing to forgo doing HP damage and then fall - perhaps to their death - in return for taking the central eye's antimagic out of the fight.
Why give up hp damage? That to me seems even more implausible than the stunt. Any successful hit should do damage AND, not damage OR, I think. Plus a guaranteed fall seems a bit harsh, how about the chance to fall on a failed athletics check or something? Otherwise I do very much agree with risk and sometimes trade to allow for actions not supported by the rules system. Although the very fact that this is debatable is a failing of the system of the game being played, and is why I don't play d&d or pathfinder anymore. They are too restrictive, or perhaps limited as written, rather.
@@bharl7226 You'd essentially be nullifying one of the Beholder's most powerful features. Absent some feature of your own that allows something like a called shot (ie. the Battlemaster's Trip and Disarm maneuvers), the closest analogy in the rules is the default disarming rules that require you sacrifice damage for the desired effect. There are also some pretty obvious knock-on consequences should your players get the idea that attacking an opponent's eye(s) is something they can do without cost. One of the most common unintended consequences of the RoC is exactly this: you allow something once because it seems cool and all of a sudden the players are using it in every fight. Which is why I'd require a "throw caution to the wind" kind of attempt that does not allow for any attempt to save oneself from falling and trades HP damage for the special effect: the PCs _sole focus_ needs to be on getting that eye out of commission otherwise it's a no-go.
I would allow that at my table, but I wouldn't be the one to say it outloud. I hope my players would be able to verbalize it first. Out of game, my players are more relaxed and come up with weird ideas about combat (we work together at a hardware store), and I try to push them to be more Inspired by the rules rather than Hindered by the rules. Also, don't forget about Obeying The Laws Of Comedy. That beholder, now enraged, hits a minion with Flesh To Stone, who then falls onto another minion with horrible, squishy results. The PC sees this and cheers, and a piece of the minion's spleen falls into his mouth. "Make a CON save DC 12 or spend the next 1d3 rounds puking." Most of my games can easily feature a Bruce Campbell/Evil Dead level of goofy horror.
@@paulcoy9060 Yeah, the player would have to suggest it. Be careful of that Rule of Comedy though: it can do just as much damage to your game as the Rule of Cool. Remember, funny isn't always fun.
With the whole asking permission for too many things style of play, I've replaced my "can I do this..." With "I'd like to do..." Which turns it from asking permission into a statement of what you're going to do, and unless the DM stops me, I just keep going. I've found the DM takes a moment, then says either "yeah sure, you do that." Or they make a minor adjustment or tell me what PART of that action I can't do. Makes things flow more instead of halting things with the "mother may I...?" That Jim mentioned.
I'd add to this by saying that players should be declaring actions by expressing an intention (what they're trying to do) and an approach (how they're trying to do it). It's the approach that DMs are going to use to decide if the action needs rules to adjudicate and if so what rules. Player: "I take a runup and try to jump the chasm." DM: "Okay, make a STR (Athletics) check." Player: "I throw my grappling hook and try to swing over the chasm." DM: ""Okay, make a DEX (Acrobatics) check." Player: "I seduce the chasm!" DM: "Its not into you." Player: "I'm just going to use the bridge you said was there when you described the cavern." DM: "Okay, you're on the other side."
My lvl 2 drow rogue attempted to slide down the smooth slope of a pyramid to escape an animated suit of armour charging up the other side. "Roll an acrobatics check", said the DM. "Alrighty ... oh a 1." "Ah!.... er...make an ... er Dex save" "Okay ... oh... 5." "How much Hp do you have?" "21" "Yeah, no - you fall to death. It was cool though. Take a point of inspiration." My shattered and broken body which had slid to a badly folded heap at the foot of the pyramid was recovered by the druid who polymorphed into a dire wolf and carried me away then fed me health potions.
Another thing to offer when negotiating a really cool action would be to take a point of exhaustion after completing it. It can build tension if the party then has to escape or use ability checks in some way.
When players start overplanning or coming with implausible plans that will not work, I usually tell them to make either an Intelligence or a Wisdom check (AD&D) or a Wisdom Save (5E) during the planning. If the check or save succeeds, I tell them something like "the moment the plan leaves your lips, you realize how implausible it sounds and recognize that it would bring your more problems than solutions" or "As your companion continues to lay out all the possible complications and their myriad solutions, you realize that time is passing and most of this planning is likely unnecessary." Adding a roll to the process (1) usually means the players will listen and (2) tends to make the players feel like I am helping them make decisions based on their characters' stats rather than their own, sorta like allowing an awkward player to leverage Charisma checks when attempting to influence other characters rather basing NPC reactions entirely on what the player says. It's always worked out well.
The rule of cool is perfect for a game like Star Wars Tabletop, because the force points allow the party to try for "impossible" stuff but it's also a way for the DM to be malicious in a fair way.
At my table, I let the players use a mechanic we call "Just Crazy Enough it Might Just Work" which fills in what a lot of the current wave of fresh players think the Rule of Cool covers. It's a simple roll off, with all the players involved required to have unanimous consent. A representative of the party rolls a D20, while I roll a D30. If they win, they pull off some ridiculous feat like jumping a wagon over a gorge, and if they lose, well, they knew it was unlikely to succeed and gravity happens to be unforgiving.
This might be simple and obvious. But for me as a DM the rule of cool works like this. I let the players come up with their plan or action. (My players do a lot of elaborate schemes) I tell them how to roll, i.e. what skills, and I ask them for details how they intend to accomplish their actions. If a plan is very risky or unlikely to succeed I say, "this is going to be hard" or "this is very unlikely to succeed". Then I let them roll. If their plan was impossible and they crit, I let them kinda succeed but attempting an impossible task there is something that goes wrong with the plan. But I try to be clear to state if they try something that is basically impossible. (Like successfully impersonate a very specific person using disguise self, when they haven't even talked to the guy they pretend to be and know nothing about him.) My players have so far appreciated my honesty, even if all of them weren't always 100% happy with the outcome.
one thing I've wanted to try out is letting players do more elaborate plans or actions in combat, but having to devote 2 or 3 rounds to the action to pull it off, such as climb on to a dragon and stab it while on its back. The first round action would be used to climb on and get a firm hand hold, then after that on your next turn you can attack away.
"We're not really playing a game, we're just sort of playing pretend where we describe really awesome scenes at each other." That is the absolute best way I've heard this type of D&D style explained and I thank you for it. If people want to do that, no skin off my nose, but I haven't been interested in that style of play since I was about 13. I prefer to DM in a way that forces cool stuff to happen through adversity and limitations. If I say "Yes" to 100 crazy shenanigans my players come up with, the game becomes unexciting. But If I say "No" to 99 crazy shenanigans and "Yes" to one far-fetched plan that could maybe sort of be cobbled together and pulled off with enough good dice rolls, it's an incredibly memorable moment that the players will talk about for months or even years to come. I know it because I've made it happen.
My table spent a couple years with the Mouse Guard RPG as our go-to game. The most useful concepts I harvested for my other games were the rules around failed tests/checks: A player can be allowed to succeed on a roll they would have otherwise failed, but at a DM-determined cost. One of my go-to costs is a level of Exhaustion: "Well, you find what you wanted in the library, but it took an extra 5 hours and you're tuckered out." I find that it's a nice way to keep the pace up without sacrificing a sense of tension and consequence.
This is actually in the DMG for D&D 5th Edition as well; page 242 "Success at a Cost": When a character fails a roll by only 1 or 2, you can allow the character to succeed at the cost of a complication or hindrance. And then it lists some examples of how you could implement that. Obviously as a DM you could always decide to widen that margin beyond just "1 or 2", and increase the complication accordingly.
Well, this is the thing. An awesome, Hail-Mary moment where "it's crazy, but it just might work" is great. A table full of players who start thinking, "It's crazy, therefore the DM _has_ to let it work." is a disaster.
This was a far more nuanced discussion of 'rule of cool' than I was expecting, thanks guys! If I could add something, I find the inclusion of advantage/disadvantage into 5th ed. is a real boon to the 'rule of cool' fitting within the rules of the game. If your players describe a Cool action you (as DM) approve of, you can award advantage to the roll. If they want to try something you find dubious, you can still allow the roll... with disadvantage. It's comical how hard I've seen players hit the brakes on an action once they know they're going to be doubling the odds of rolling that Dreaded 1. Inspiration, and the fact that it's transferable, is another tool that I find underused, both as a DM's reward for creative play within the rules and as a way for other players to do the same.
Funny aspects to rule of cool.. one DM allowed me to use Druidcraft to blow up a flour mill, then told me I couldn't use construction to rebuild a bridge.
I have a pretty solid idea of actions, but I tend to ask my DM for things like collecting dust/gravel, attaching it to the tip of an arrow or projectile and firing it at an enemy for a 1st turn blindness (advantage setup for other characters). Our tables rule of cool is keep it within the realm of possibility, however... if you can justify it logically, the DM may give you a DC to beat. Though I'll always respect if my DM says nah.
Wow, this was very helpful! Not the first time I heard/read about the rule of cool but you covered a lot of nuances that I never tought about before. Realy liked the "tell me why your char wants to do this" thing allowing for memorable milestones in a character developement as well as the "what are you willing to pay for that stunt" approach.
everyone was looking too deep into this yesterday thinking it was about ice dragons and cold magic; anyway, despite the fact ive just started, this is your best video this week :)
As someone who's running a high difficulty eldritch horror themed 5E campaign I still like to empower my players with the "rule of cool" if they can at the very least logic their way through an explanation to me of why they should be able to go "off book" in that instance and it can potentially come with a cost. And as a player I also tend to leverage things like a level or levels of exhaustion. I feel that's a pretty big trade off, but it's also rare and only if I know it could actually kill a fellow PC (such as grabbing an unconscious PC when she was falling off a cliff into lava cost me exhaustion because my rogue dislocated his shoulder saving them).
My main caveat when players suggest some kind of cool action that goes outside of the normal limits of the game (assuming it is a reasonable extension of the rules and isn't wildly implausible) is that in order to make the attempt, the player has to agree to a potential hazard that would come from failure. In my games, those actions all have a risk of failure that can backfire against the players more than a normal action ever would, and the more impressive the cool action would be, the more hazard the player has to agree to before they decide to try it - either because the odds are worse (aka the DC of whatever skill check they need to do for it to succeed will be higher) or because the downside is more dramatic. That way, if a rule-breaking action succeeds, it feels more like they earned it, and if it fails then they knew what they were getting into when they decided to fight the odds.
My basic approach has always been, if you give me a good rule of cool description, I'll allow it or maybe even provide a bonus on the roll; HOWEVER if you fail, then your failure will be a spectacular as you envisioned your success.
5:38, yeah I've heard that wise old saying. "You know what they say about assumptions: They make an ass out of you... and umption" -- Samuel L Jackson in the movie The Long Kiss Goodnight.
Get 50% off Dropout, with the Unsleeping City and tons more exclusive COLLEGE HUMOR content: a2.adform.net/C/?bn=31620848 and using the code ROLL50 Watch Dimension 20 on RUclips: ruclips.net/channel/UCC8zWIx8aBQme-x1nX9iZ0A Get Web DM's podcast: patreon.com/webdm Get D&D Beyond: bit.ly/WebDMDnDBeyond
You guys need to play Shadowrun with these personas. Play Wiz Kid Elf Poser Folk Rockers. Annoy the other players to the point of insanity. One of the char should live at home. The Char's Mom sells Avon & Vitamins. She is allways recruiting.
@@chasebalcziunas4289 you need a bit more than rogue 4 bard 4 to gain proficiency in all skills, that's only like 4 from rogue and 3 from bard. You need some knowledge cleric, warlock 3 with the beguiling influence invocation, and the skilled feat to get all of them, I know because I've used this NPC in one of my games lol
Evan Gregory if you take a half elf sage, scout rogue subclass, the skilled feat and 3 levels of lore bard, you get the same thing without being MAD. Just have to be very particular in the order you pick the skills. I know this because I’ve played one.
The main issue I've experienced with my group is that making a rule of cool ruling often leads to the players seeing a house rule being established which in turn gets abused.
Honestly, if they do stuff like that often enough that it's abused, just talk to your players after the game, or before the next. Tell them; _"Hey guys, I love when you try crazy shit, and I don't mind rule-of-cooling that, but if you're going to then turn that into some sort of legal precedent and abuse that ruling in future, I'm going to have to stop doing it."_
One of my most meorable annoying ones was a player who wanted to be a werebear, I said ok. Then as the game went on he kept adding cool things about being a were bear, while saying why his lycanthropy shouldnt have to follow the rules. My favorite was in west end games Star Wars, where the players wanted a Klingon Bird of Prey.
Nothing wrong with rule of cool if it's part of your expectations. I ran a campaign where it opened with a giant lizard chariot "car chase" across a desert. Can't do that with base rules and that was both awesome and unexpected.
Just want to say that you guys have been such a great help. As a DM youre guy's advice and input has made me a better DM and my players have benefited greatly due to you guys . Thank you
Such a great point: "You don't need my permission to attempt something your character can just do." Wish some popular streaming D&D groups would watch this show.
I'm curious as to who you're referring to. The dozen or so shows I keep up with (i have a job where i can listen to podcasts) it's nor a huge issue, that i can recall.
I think that a lot of this depends on where you land on the game as drama vs game as mechanics spectrum. Every player and GM has a different opinion about how much the game should be narrative driven and how much of the game should be mechanically limited. A RPG system acts as a grounding for what would otherwise be a free-form improv experience. Some players are more interested in internal world consistency than either, which the rules help with. If you land farther on the drama side than the mechanics side, you'll often favor the rule of cool. You'll often create exceptions to the rule or allow for interesting things if you believe that it helps the narrative. If you land farther on the mechanics side than the drama side, you'll usually stick to the rules. You won't allow exceptions, even if they might be dramatically interesting, because of how it might harm the logic and immersion of your world.
@@lowaimnobrain Yes, and there are certainly ways GMs can undermine that by using the rule too much. However, the GMs who use the rule of cool are probably going to apply similar logic to the world itself, where even goblins can also do mechanically invalid stuff. In my experience, GMs who use the rule of cool often spice their world with similar shenanigans.
@@endlessxaura You've nailed it. Every table, sometimes every session, is a bit different, and as GM you have to "read the room". A couple of tables I ran were after-work groups, and there were days where clearly the need for an emotional pick-me-up was more pressing than absolute rules-fidelity. With experience - of the game, and of the players - you get a sense of when and how to bend the rules without breaking the game.
@@lowaimnobrain - Claiming that the 'rule of cool' is somehow equal to 'allowing anything without downside/possibility of loss' is ridiculous. If someone wants to use a skill or ability to try something that's not quite how it works RAW, you can invoke the rule of cool and say; _"Sure I'll allow that, roll [insert relevant skill or DC check or whatever]"._ Like, something of the top of my head, suppose the party need to get someone on top of a 10' obstacle, and the Druid says; "I want to use my Thorn Whip and have it lash me and yank me on top of the obstacle." That's not how the spell works, technically. But you could say; "Sure, that's silly, go ahead and roll Acrobatics to see if you can manage that." And if they roll below whatever you decided the DC was, you can say: "Oof, nope. The vine wraps around your ankle, thorns painful pierce your skin as it pulls you off balance and smacks you against the obstacle. You take [roll 1d6] 4 damage, and another 2 as you fall back down on the ground." See how that's already created a comedic moment players can laugh about, and gives opportunities for people to roleplay on further. Consider how much more interesting that sequence is than the other option; "No Druid, you can't, that's not how the spell works." ...and that's it. Wow, such fun. 🤷♀️ Rule of cool also isn't unlimited. You can still say no. If instead the party is standing by a 50' ravine and the Druid says: "I want to make a Thorn Whip vine on the other side of the ravine and get pulled across." You can obviously just say no. That's taking things too far. Long story short, I want to reward creative thinking at my table. Even if that means you slightly bend the rules, or ignore them for a sec. Because when you don't allow it, people will stop trying, they'll not come up with crazy stunts because they'll (rightfully) think: "Nah, the DM is going to not allow it anyway." And then nobody does cool shit. I'd rather have a campaign where people can tell stories about Legolas skating down the stairs on a shield while shooting 3 orcs with his bow, as opposed to a very neat and dull campaign where at the end you can only say: "Good job everyone, we stuck to the RAW for the whole campaign. Aren't we great."
Super on point about action economy. Also really good job talking about a concept I talked about in another video's comments. Rule of Cool must be tempered with normal rules and used sparingly.
When it came to Rule of Cool and making sure it didn't get too crazy, I had a very specific house rule involving it called "Cool Tokens" (I am accepting suggestions for better names btw). To do something that falls under Rule of Cool, you had to first roll a skill check relevant to what you're trying to do, and if it's a success you spend the token. If you fail you keep the token and instead of something awesome happening it instead ends up being embarrassing for the character. The higher your level, the more tokens you're able to have, and they'd refresh upon every level up or once after a certain amount of in-game time (anywhere between a week to a few months, depending on the campaign and use of time skips). Also using the Lucky feat to try and force it will double the number of tokens needed.
We call them Pimp Points, you get one for every Nat 20. You can burn them for rerolls or Bonus Mod. If you want to do something wacky, spend them in increments of five'
An example of resource expenditure that I saw was a 20th level cleric using his channel divinity to ensure a paladin with stone skin could become a meteor and get the final blow on the boss. We all had to scatter and it was awesome.
The difficulty I have as a DM is remembering that losing well can be cool. I hesitate too much to smash my player characters for their choices, and end up putting them against insufficient danger for their abilities. - In short, I need to be willing to let them lose or die for their choices.
I remember back in Exalted first edition, there were Stunt rules and it was basically codifying the Rule of Cool. If the player made actions more interesting for the table, they got a bonus die for the attempt. It always made things more fun. After that, those of us who dm'd would adapt the rule to other games. Lower difficulty, a bonus die, positive modifiers, it depended on the game. Someone tried bonus xp for a little while, but that got out of hand and made things drag on. Essentially, reward extra somehow, it's really helped newer players ease into role-playing and imagining what was going on.
One thing that I think a lot of people that watched the Matt Mercer video about the Rule of Cool must have tuned out of the video when he was talking about how the Rule of Cool moments needs to still have a sense of challenge to them. For a Rule of Cool moment to be cool, there has to be an application of difficulty. The bending of the rules is to allow the roll in the first place. The further the rules are bent or the more challenging the act is, the higher the risk and penalties for failure are. "Most RPGS are designed to forge a heroic story, showing feats of legend. So let the players *try*. Let them fail, and occasionally succeed... *Occasionally*"
The mismatched player ideology hit me hard. I ran Strahd when the 5E module came out for a group of nine. I had eight players take the gothic horror seriously, and 1 who played a gnomish glitter wizard.
@@nickwilliams8302 we did session zero, and they promised they would just try to be light occasional comic relief. This player has a history of crazy stuff, but I was naive and okayed it. And our group was at a total of 13 chairs at one point. It's kind of attritioned down to 7 now which is better.
I really like some of the rule of cool stuff in DCC. The fighter has to get a certain number on their attack die and other characters have to spend luck. I think that's a good way of doing it and I've been thinking about how to translate that to D&D 5th
If a player wants to do same crazy sword spin on top of the monster’s head, I my job is to make it require athletics check and maybe a hit negative, but an awesome effect
I've never really had an issue with players abusing "rule of cool" but I did really like what you had to say about resource expenditure. I've told my players many times that I love shenanigans and creative thinking and if they are willing to offer a resource in exchange (spell slots, sorcery points, hit dice, action surges etc) I am far more likely to say yes. I have a sister rule of "equivalent exchange". You want something a little extra on your attack? Little extra something on your spell? Sure, but you make whatever roll you need to make with disadvantage, or maybe the target rolls their save with advantage. I'd rather say yes than no, but I don't have an issue with saying the latter, but if you are willing to put an anti on the table I will mostly likely play along.
what they were talking about at 24:30 with the describing of something that was cool at the start of each encounter reminded me of a what one of my players used to do in one of my more recent campaigns. For reference in the campaign setting, there is no such thing as Warforged and the player wanted to play one so I allowed him to play an Iron golem construct that some gnomes built to be sentient. He was also a paladin so once he could he took the greater steed spell and would always summon a griffin. So since we were ruling him as a large construct that had a flying mount he got the idea one combat session with a group of Cyclops that he could just drop from his mount on top of the cyclops and pin them to the ground. He told me this plan and I had him roll some competing checks with the cyclops to see if it worked. It didn't go exactly to the player's plan do to low rolls on his end and high ones for the cyclops but the fall damage that was split between the two of them did take a large chunk away from the Cyclops health so the player didn't complain too much. The player then began to open up almost every combat encounter after this way to varying degrees of success. I allowed him to go with it these times because the creatures he was doing it to were around the same size as him and it made logical sense for this to work. It wasn't until they were up against an Ancient Black dragon and he decided to misty step thirty feet above the dragon to try to grapple it to the ground that I decided that I decided that he was just trying to take advantage of my allowing things like this to trivialize all the encounters I had set up. Which I am fine with to a degree. But this is an Ancient black dragon and was two sizes larger than him and was a boss fight that I had been building up to for a few weeks now. so when he fell and only managed to grab onto the neck of the dragon by barley passing the check I had him do, and not pinning the dragon to the ground beneath him. He got upset with me because of this and practically threatened to rage quit the session. He is fine now and continues to enjoy the campaign, but he has not dive bombed any more monsters since.
I would also like to add that I did spoil this player a bit by allowing him to go with a character build that gave him around 25 Ac before the party had even reached level 10 so barely anything could hit him for a while. So I do take fault in how he acted in some way.
I was recently playing a game where the party was fighting between 2 airships, and one of the PCs failed their jump to get from the one that was about to be destroyed. My character was a Barbarian who wields a chain as a weapon, and the DM let me use my reaction to make an attack against the character who failed the jump in an attempt to catch them. I thought it was a reasonable example of the Rule of Cool.
I love the tensers floating disc example. Perfect use of spell research I agree! I'd go one step further and let the player choose in the moment. Either they can research it later and not cast it now, OR, they can cast it as they want to but can no longer cast the original spell ever again as the spell is altered to the new version they made. Actions meet consequences
As a dm I like to give xp to represent further in developing your characters personality, he goes out does x and x quests, gets so much xp, kills mobs with creative ways, and spells, and gets so much xp, discovers new location meets new people in a new town, gets so much xp, etc
I like the idea of the Rule of Cool, and I certainly am into rewarding my players for creativity, BUT the Rule of Cool is something for ME to invoke as the DM - not for my players to use to make me say “yes”. I am the one person at my table who has put the time into learning the rules set forth in the PHB, MM, and DMG. When I have been asked to give them X pet or whatever, I have said 1) not at your current level, but I will think about it 2) possibly but it will require some research, locating and tracking that creature, followed by some sort of attempt to tame or gain favor of the creature. In an early adventure, they tied rope to a suit of leather armor, and the first person to ascend made an athletics check to hold it down when they got the top of a steep incline. I didn’t let it negate the climb for the rest of the party, but I told them before hand that if they succeeded having the rope to hold would lower the DC to climb for the rest. Good thinking is helpful, but it should not be allowed to negate the encounter.
I think a lot of the complications caused by rule of cool comes from people who don't understand the purpose for rules in TTRPGs. There's a discussion to be had about Rules as Tools vs Rules as Laws. Rules in traditional competitive games, and in sports, are designed to ensure a level playing field and enforce fairness. Rules in TTRPGs are like musical scales, they're designed to generate a specific experience. We choose to play in certain systems because of those expectations. We don't follow rules in TTRPGs because it's some objective moral imperative, but because if we don't use them, the system breaks down and fails to deliver the expected experience. Rule of Cool is like jazz... knowing how the rules work lets you intentionally bend and stretch them without everything falling to pieces. You can push the explicit limits of a TTRPG ruleset to enhance the experience the game is designed to deliver, but you have to understand what the game is trying to do first.
Sorry for commenting on an older video but I wanted to share my rule of cool experience. I was at my LGS for drop in D&D, and the one shot session we were in culminated in a fight with a demon. It was a tough battle but in the end, after using all our resources, we emerged victorious. Cheers and high fives were exchanged. But then the guy who had been DMing mentioned that he hadn't really been keeping track of the demon's HP - he just knew in his head that he wanted the fight to last a certain number of rounds and then just gave the killing blow to whoever he thought the fight's MVP was, citing the rule of cool as his reason for doing it. I remember feeling pretty deflated, since after all, if the end of the fight was pre-determined, what had been the point of the last hour of rolling dice? Ever since then, rule of cool stuff has left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth and I'll admit to being slightly prejudiced against DMs that don't play by the books. No real point to this story, just thought I'd share.
Playing a DnD 3.5 campaign set in Ancient Rome (extremely low magic, required much more crafting skill checks) Through a series of checks we took a broken down hovel and created a fortified garrison within a few hours which almost had a moat, but the DM decided that we didn't have enough time to complete the trench.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head with this video. Rule of cool is an awesome thing to recognize and appreciate...In small doses, and if you use it too much recognize that it is you that messed something up, not the game. I've seen so many posts on different forums about bards "bards are so OP. My player rolled a 23 on a persuation check so I told him that the entire city pledged themselves to him, and now he has an army at his disposal and the game is SO BROKEN. I'm never letting bards play in my games again." No. Bards didn't ruin your game. YOU ruined your game by not thinking through what is appropriate to give to your players in exchange for an arbitrary number rolled on a 20 sided piece of plastic.
One thing I'll say about the spells, is that you should be prepared to have a player expect to able to use a spell in the allowed way on multiple subsequent occasions, or be prepared to formulate a rationale why they were able to bend the spell's use in a particular edge case instance. I'm more for the former, but I always let my players get too powerful. Using upcasting, I think, is a good option that preserves the specialties of other classes. Most I will give for "Description as an auto-success" is a roll with advantage, or a change in ability check as they are taking a novel or particularly effective approach.
The shift from detailed hard rules like Pathfinder to simpler rules like 5e has made the rule of cool and similar things important. People are still used to that harder edged play style, and 5e needs a bit of Pat Rothfuss bullshit.
Our party had a dark-ish knight with ornate armor with skulls on the shoulders. Our magic users decided to have a little fun with it. They would go into stealth or cast Invis on themselves, make the eye sockets light up, and then they spoke through the skulls discussing all the dif ways the Knight and his ghost army could destroy the target. They would also use it to discuss strategy and such. The DM decided to go along with it and made it like a fear/confusion spell, gave it a DC, and sometimes made npc/monsters roll a save against it or run away/be paralyzed for x amount of rounds. And don't get me started on all the fun we had with the "Flask of Infinite Ales/Liquor" he gave my Arcane Archer lol. It was a hip flask that with the recitation of a simple cantrip could produce any kind of alcoholic beverage....fun times fun times...:D
Hey guys I absolutely LOVE alll your videos. You are by far the best D&D channel out there, just with the awesome story ideas. Anyways my players are going into the Abyss to rescue a trapped soul. I looked through your videos but didn't see one on layers of the abyss. Can you talk about that in an episode? :)
I feel like this video - especially the resource-expenditure portion - would benefit from remembering that Inspiration exists. When someone asks about non-standard stuff that I'm iffy on, having a meta-mechanical resource that everyone acknowledges is a hard-mechanics exemption on hand can be really useful.
@Colin Deal I probably could have made my point more clear: This video discusses expending resources beyond the ordinary to allow for players to take actions beyond the ordinary. I was positing Inspiration as a handy resource to use for that occasion. One reason that it is suited to that particular purpose is that Inspiration is granted at the DM's discretion for reasons that the DM can choose for themselves and their game (the usual case described is good, characterizing role-play, but the text allows for the DM to determine criteria for awarding Inspiration whole-cloth). In my experience, spanning multiple DMs and multiple styles, resulted in an understanding around tables that Inspiration is a soft rule. So, if you're looking to expend a resource to soften the rules up for a given play-instance, Inspiration - within the culture of the table - tends to work well within that space. Using it can implicitly communicate that this thing you're doing is non-standard, not a reliable use of the rules, and is the result of you - as a player - having done something that jived with what the DM is trying to do with the game. There's some more unpacking that can be done to further explain why Inspiration works well, but I hope that at least clarifies my point. Assuming that it has, I'm a bit unclear on what your point was, I'm afraid. The initial purpose of my comment was to add to the list of resources described in the video. Your criticisms seemed to have been: 1. That inspiration can't be used for anything more than a Advantage RAW. And 2. That what I was describing wouldn't work in your game. Given that what I was describing was meant to build on a discussion of doing non-RAW things by expending resources in a non-RAW way, I don't know why criticism 1 applies to what I was saying. You could maybe argue that it applies to the discussion as a whole, but if you want to argue that, then you might want to make a comment directed at the Web DM folks. As for criticism 2, my read on Web DM is that they aren't trying to give you a list of things that will definitely work in your game or tell you *the* way to run D&D, and neither am I. I think Web DM is more about giving options to try in your game or mutate for your game or think over, discard, and replace with something that works better for your game. In-line with that vision, I laid out an option to expand on their list of options. The fact that it wouldn't work for your game in particular is immaterial to whether it's a worthwhile consideration. It's fine that it doesn't work for you; I wasn't saying it would. I still think it's worth putting out there. Maybe I'm missing some aspect of your position; I'm interested in hearing back from you.
One thing I do when applying the Rule of Cool is make little changes, like announce the DC beforehand, where I might not otherwise (say, against a monster or hazard the party is unfamiliar with). Just the small act of you presenting that information, and a party member saying "ok" to that before they roll makes it more contractual, and less like antagonistic "DM Magic" behind the screen.
When it comes to action economy, when it comes to the players determining what they do (specifically new players) I make a point to remind them “your turn is approximately 6 seconds, you can do this thing, but what you’re telling me won’t fit in one turn” if they still want to do it then they’re locking themselves into spending multiple turns doing that thing
Interesting point about the "Say yes or roll the dice" come from Burning Wheel and Adam Koebels thoughts on it. The big thing is that it is actually "Roll the dice or say yes." First resort is, you roll the dice, or if you cant think of a meaningful roll, then say yes. Also, big love for The Unsleeping City and Dimension 20 in general. Fantasy High is hilarious and great fun. Escape from the Bloodkeep is a refreshing change of pace and a nicely packaged mini-season.
Yes, Adam's perspective is interesting! Right there with you on the love for Unsleeping City and Dimension 20. We think it's really well done and we're thrilled to rep them!
Use the often linsided mechanic of dm "rollyplay" points, used for rewarding seting the corect tone, to pay for amount of times you can roll for a 'rule of cool' D.C. possible derailing.
I had a dwarven thief with boots of striding and springing attempted a backstab on the orge general after jumping off the Castle wall. My DM gave me a severe penalty to hit, but I rolled a nat 20 and "rule of cool" I one hit killed the general. It was awesome!!
I don't remember exactly when they added it, but 'improvise' is now on the official list of "actions/actions in combat/other actions" sections of the phb and dmg so antagonistic dm's can't pull the "you're only allowed to take listed actions" now it IS a listed action xD "Improvise: Your character can do things not covered by the actions in this chapter, such as breaking down doors, intimidating enemies, sensing weaknesses in magical defenses, or calling for a parley with a foe. The only limits to the actions you can attempt are your imagination and your character's ability scores. See the descriptions of the ability scores in chapter 7 for inspiration as you improvise. When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure."
I prefer to think of it as more like the ‘Tool of Cool,’ not a strict rule, but any time a player has an amazing idea that makes everyone happy you can bring it out.
My favorite way to teach new players action economy is present it in the 6 seconds format. An action takes 6 seconds, a bonus action is something you could do while doing that action (talking, simple quick action) and movement that you could do while performing that action. The more I can get them to visualize the logical possibilities of themselves as a person the quicker they seem to understand the rules so we can all attempt our cool hero moments. I try to give movie examples so we all stay on the same page. "My Legolas ranger character runs forward firing his bow twice, while yelling to the other party members" awesome and cinematic, while still within the rules. Doing all that while riding a shield down a set of stairs...now that's going to need a pretty difficult roll but sure give it a shot, I'll enjoy describing the failure just as much haha. However having that shield fly off and kill an orc...that's where I would cut off the rule of cool or at the very least that had better be a natural 20 acrobatics roll and make it a d4 of damage, something nearly impossible and also restrict the actual impact of that cool move. Which is often how I make judgement calls for rule of cool. You can do the awesome thing, in the end it might not win the battle but at least you get the satisfaction of doing it, which is it's own victory. Cool but make a line that everyone can visualize so everyone can try to stay on the same page and it doesn't overwhelm your game.
I've been a DM/player for three weeks. On Saturday. I've been watching you guys for quite some time though, and most of your advice seems to boil down to three things. Know the rules, so you can know when to break them. Don't go to extremes unless everyone else is on board. Don't be a dick. So far, these three things have been extremely successful guidelines. Seems like good real life advice as well, now that I think about it. I really appreciate your content. Keep up the good work gents.
@@JKM395 Check out Dungeon Dudes on RUclips. Between that channel and this one I've really gotten back into D&D after a 30 year gap. They've really helped me understand this 5e version. So different from AD&D! (Thinking about the nightmare of THAC0!)
The other thing they didn't cover that I'd like to keep in mind is that using the Rule of Cool to allow people do things that are the specialty of another class ability or feature or spell. For instance, Tenser's Floating Disc is called that because that's what it does. If a player has the Catapult spell, sure, they can cast disc, then cast catapult on it, but then there's the appropriate falling damage and any collateral damage as the disc crashes to the ground before it rights itself. I'm not saying that a non-rogue cannot try to pick a lock. But I'm just careful to keep all players feeling special, useful, and a vital part of an adventuring team, and granting player B something that player A has to spend spell slots or feature selection or anything to do just doesn't sit well with me.
I think that's less about 'rule of cool' and just more about play etiquette. Playing nicely with your table. For instance there's no reason why lock picking is/should be a rogue-only thing. If you're playing a Monk with the Criminal background (and thus have Thieves' Tools proficiency) there's no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to pick locks. It has more to do with the rule of allowing other players their moment to shine. If you know you have that Criminal Monk in your party and encounter a locked door, maybe let them do the lock picking, instead of you as a warlock coming up with some weird plan and stealing their time to shine.
When I DM, I try to let my players try the awesome thing once, and even am willing to let it be a little bit OP as long as it makes sense within the action economy, but as you said in the video, if they try to turn it into a regular tactic, it's time to put together a balanced rule that is repeatably fair.
One take muthaf- *intro plays*
Lol
That was perfect
Shut yo Mouf,...................what im just talking bout Web DM
I think of the rule of cool as being like the difference between Hedonists and Epicureans. Hedonists focused on maximizing immediate pleasure in every moment, even if drinking all that wine would lead to a hangover the next day. Epicureans were more concerned with total happiness over a lifetime, and often wouldn't indulge as much as a hedonist so as to attain more long term happiness. When it comes to the rule of cool, be an Epicurean, not a Hedonist!
Nice way of putting it!
This is the single nerdiest thing I've ever read
That's not very nerdy at all. Would you call your grandfather a nerd for giving you some wisdom he learned over the years? If you want actual nerd shit try reddit
Balance is key. It's easy to put off pleasure seeking forever, and never get around to taking time to feel good
@@Leto_0
"Hedonism is gay" - Nerds
It's okay to say "no" sometimes. Important lesson for life not just D&D. Also, to address that "mother-may-I" DMing you spoke about later in the video. I teach a lot of new players the game frequently, and this is a common thing for them for some reason. They will constantly make sure they can do the most mundane things such as; "DM, may I twirl my dagger and look angry while in this bar?". Some people take forever to understand the social structure and contract of this game, but I'm proud to say that every player I've taught has become a good player in their own rights.
I wonder if since most new players have been introduced to DND by the internet, they get stories of a DM asking for an intelligence check to open the tavern door. A 1 is rolled, and their character dies in a humiliating way.
@@kylethomas9130 I think it has layers of variables, and that is probably one of them. I think the biggest thing is the unfamiliarity of the situation. Here they are, presumably the only new player and in most cases unacquainted with most the party IRL, and they know that the DM is the proprietor of the narrative and rules. They just want to not mess up and try to get along with everyone, so they make sure they are doing everything correctly, i.e; Asking if they can do literally everything they want to do. It's mostly harmless, and most people fall out of the habit after a handful of sessions.
@@clarenceyax8117 the nearest I get is asking which stat/skill do I roll for a desired task.
Another variable could be DMs being spacrce with description.
DM: okay you enter the tavern.
PC: okay.
DM:...
PC:....
DM: ...
PC: I sit on an empty chair?
DM: it eats you, was a mimic, roll new character.
@@kylethomas9130 Not to take the conversation off course, but personally, when the session is getting into its 4th or even 5th hour, my descriptions will start to go to the way side out of exhaustion, so those sort of questions are very nice and encouraged from me. However, I will say that it's usually experienced players that will ask such questions as, "How big is the room?", "What is the material used for the walls and floors?", "Where is the chandelier in conjunction with the markings on the floor?", etc. So if you're a new player and you're asking those questions, then that's good.
@@clarenceyax8117 that's understandable, I would expect experience to dictate asking better questions, as opposed to building a crematorium in every village because that one time with the necromancer. There's a lot of bad habits that could be chalked up to "one time a DM/PC did x" and they've adjusted behavior.
Every episode is Jim apologizing for hating everything at the beginning lol
Well said, Jim. All too often "Rule of Cool" is used as a cover for rules ignorance, even outright disregard of the rules. Or cover for disruptive nonsense that would turn the game into a joke if allowed.
I'd say one thing I'm receptive to as a DM is a player who's willing to _risk_ - or even outright _trade_ - something in return for their implausible plan. The death-defying leap off the balcony to plunge a spear into the Beholder's central eye, willing to forgo doing HP damage and then fall - perhaps to their death - in return for taking the central eye's antimagic out of the fight.
Excellent point. Related to the 'yes, but...' tactic
Why give up hp damage? That to me seems even more implausible than the stunt. Any successful hit should do damage AND, not damage OR, I think.
Plus a guaranteed fall seems a bit harsh, how about the chance to fall on a failed athletics check or something?
Otherwise I do very much agree with risk and sometimes trade to allow for actions not supported by the rules system. Although the very fact that this is debatable is a failing of the system of the game being played, and is why I don't play d&d or pathfinder anymore. They are too restrictive, or perhaps limited as written, rather.
@@bharl7226
You'd essentially be nullifying one of the Beholder's most powerful features. Absent some feature of your own that allows something like a called shot (ie. the Battlemaster's Trip and Disarm maneuvers), the closest analogy in the rules is the default disarming rules that require you sacrifice damage for the desired effect.
There are also some pretty obvious knock-on consequences should your players get the idea that attacking an opponent's eye(s) is something they can do without cost. One of the most common unintended consequences of the RoC is exactly this: you allow something once because it seems cool and all of a sudden the players are using it in every fight.
Which is why I'd require a "throw caution to the wind" kind of attempt that does not allow for any attempt to save oneself from falling and trades HP damage for the special effect: the PCs _sole focus_ needs to be on getting that eye out of commission otherwise it's a no-go.
I would allow that at my table, but I wouldn't be the one to say it outloud. I hope my players would be able to verbalize it first. Out of game, my players are more relaxed and come up with weird ideas about combat (we work together at a hardware store), and I try to push them to be more Inspired by the rules rather than Hindered by the rules. Also, don't forget about Obeying The Laws Of Comedy. That beholder, now enraged, hits a minion with Flesh To Stone, who then falls onto another minion with horrible, squishy results. The PC sees this and cheers, and a piece of the minion's spleen falls into his mouth. "Make a CON save DC 12 or spend the next 1d3 rounds puking."
Most of my games can easily feature a Bruce Campbell/Evil Dead level of goofy horror.
@@paulcoy9060
Yeah, the player would have to suggest it.
Be careful of that Rule of Comedy though: it can do just as much damage to your game as the Rule of Cool.
Remember, funny isn't always fun.
Johny P auto crits all his charisma checks
He's never had to perform a charisma check. Others perform the checks when they talk to him.
Johnny P and JD are absolutely da coolest cats dis side of da city of Dis 😎🔥
Cool of you to say so!
With the whole asking permission for too many things style of play, I've replaced my "can I do this..." With "I'd like to do..." Which turns it from asking permission into a statement of what you're going to do, and unless the DM stops me, I just keep going. I've found the DM takes a moment, then says either "yeah sure, you do that." Or they make a minor adjustment or tell me what PART of that action I can't do. Makes things flow more instead of halting things with the "mother may I...?" That Jim mentioned.
I'd add to this by saying that players should be declaring actions by expressing an intention (what they're trying to do) and an approach (how they're trying to do it). It's the approach that DMs are going to use to decide if the action needs rules to adjudicate and if so what rules.
Player: "I take a runup and try to jump the chasm."
DM: "Okay, make a STR (Athletics) check."
Player: "I throw my grappling hook and try to swing over the chasm."
DM: ""Okay, make a DEX (Acrobatics) check."
Player: "I seduce the chasm!"
DM: "Its not into you."
Player: "I'm just going to use the bridge you said was there when you described the cavern."
DM: "Okay, you're on the other side."
The Law of Awe.
The Trope of Dope.
The Theme of Dream.
The Maxim of Action.
@@270z would go the maxim of maximum
Or the reaction of action
My lvl 2 drow rogue attempted to slide down the smooth slope of a pyramid to escape an animated suit of armour charging up the other side.
"Roll an acrobatics check", said the DM.
"Alrighty ... oh a 1."
"Ah!.... er...make an ... er Dex save"
"Okay ... oh... 5."
"How much Hp do you have?"
"21"
"Yeah, no - you fall to death. It was cool though. Take a point of inspiration."
My shattered and broken body which had slid to a badly folded heap at the foot of the pyramid was recovered by the druid who polymorphed into a dire wolf and carried me away then fed me health potions.
Wait what. Polymorph or wildshape? Also what lvl is that druid hahaha
@@IDAWKYI
I think I meant Wildshape.
@@IDAWKYI he's a rouge, man... Knowing all the names of druid spells is meta gaming -_- ... He's just staying in character xP
Another thing to offer when negotiating a really cool action would be to take a point of exhaustion after completing it. It can build tension if the party then has to escape or use ability checks in some way.
I always forget about exhaustion as a mechanic. Having it become a resource will be soo much better as a balance mechanic.
It can be used for so many things!
-bleeding out
-sicknesses
-curses
-gritty death saves
-result for a crit fail
-and so much more!
"It's a DC 30 check. You can pass that in no time"
*Rogue with a +5, expertise, guidance, bardic inspiration, and a luckstone* : Oh yeah, EASY!
When players start overplanning or coming with implausible plans that will not work, I usually tell them to make either an Intelligence or a Wisdom check (AD&D) or a Wisdom Save (5E) during the planning.
If the check or save succeeds, I tell them something like "the moment the plan leaves your lips, you realize how implausible it sounds and recognize that it would bring your more problems than solutions" or "As your companion continues to lay out all the possible complications and their myriad solutions, you realize that time is passing and most of this planning is likely unnecessary."
Adding a roll to the process (1) usually means the players will listen and (2) tends to make the players feel like I am helping them make decisions based on their characters' stats rather than their own, sorta like allowing an awkward player to leverage Charisma checks when attempting to influence other characters rather basing NPC reactions entirely on what the player says.
It's always worked out well.
The rule of cool is perfect for a game like Star Wars Tabletop, because the force points allow the party to try for "impossible" stuff but it's also a way for the DM to be malicious in a fair way.
How to be cool: Leather jackets, no pants. Got it!
Shorts are pants!!!
@@WebDM touche ;)
@@WebDM I disagree with this statement.
And turn this on ruclips.net/video/4ifRslHXh7Q/видео.html
There’s a rule of cool webcomic that’s 100% complete. It’s called “Dr. McNinja.”
WisdomThumbs I’ve gone 14 years of my life not knowing about that webcomic. Thank you for correcting my foolish ways!!😄
At my table, I let the players use a mechanic we call "Just Crazy Enough it Might Just Work" which fills in what a lot of the current wave of fresh players think the Rule of Cool covers. It's a simple roll off, with all the players involved required to have unanimous consent. A representative of the party rolls a D20, while I roll a D30. If they win, they pull off some ridiculous feat like jumping a wagon over a gorge, and if they lose, well, they knew it was unlikely to succeed and gravity happens to be unforgiving.
I may just borrow this, sounds fun!
Yeah, I love the opposed roll mechanic with a decent chance it'll fail or v succeed.
This might be simple and obvious. But for me as a DM the rule of cool works like this.
I let the players come up with their plan or action. (My players do a lot of elaborate schemes)
I tell them how to roll, i.e. what skills, and I ask them for details how they intend to accomplish their actions.
If a plan is very risky or unlikely to succeed I say, "this is going to be hard" or "this is very unlikely to succeed". Then I let them roll.
If their plan was impossible and they crit, I let them kinda succeed but attempting an impossible task there is something that goes wrong with the plan. But I try to be clear to state if they try something that is basically impossible. (Like successfully impersonate a very specific person using disguise self, when they haven't even talked to the guy they pretend to be and know nothing about him.)
My players have so far appreciated my honesty, even if all of them weren't always 100% happy with the outcome.
one thing I've wanted to try out is letting players do more elaborate plans or actions in combat, but having to devote 2 or 3 rounds to the action to pull it off, such as climb on to a dragon and stab it while on its back. The first round action would be used to climb on and get a firm hand hold, then after that on your next turn you can attack away.
"We're not really playing a game, we're just sort of playing pretend where we describe really awesome scenes at each other."
That is the absolute best way I've heard this type of D&D style explained and I thank you for it. If people want to do that, no skin off my nose, but I haven't been interested in that style of play since I was about 13. I prefer to DM in a way that forces cool stuff to happen through adversity and limitations. If I say "Yes" to 100 crazy shenanigans my players come up with, the game becomes unexciting. But If I say "No" to 99 crazy shenanigans and "Yes" to one far-fetched plan that could maybe sort of be cobbled together and pulled off with enough good dice rolls, it's an incredibly memorable moment that the players will talk about for months or even years to come. I know it because I've made it happen.
My table spent a couple years with the Mouse Guard RPG as our go-to game. The most useful concepts I harvested for my other games were the rules around failed tests/checks:
A player can be allowed to succeed on a roll they would have otherwise failed, but at a DM-determined cost. One of my go-to costs is a level of Exhaustion: "Well, you find what you wanted in the library, but it took an extra 5 hours and you're tuckered out." I find that it's a nice way to keep the pace up without sacrificing a sense of tension and consequence.
This is actually in the DMG for D&D 5th Edition as well; page 242 "Success at a Cost": When a
character fails a roll by only 1 or 2, you can allow the character to succeed at the cost of a complication or hindrance.
And then it lists some examples of how you could implement that. Obviously as a DM you could always decide to widen that margin beyond just "1 or 2", and increase the complication accordingly.
Thanks for making my days better, I love wacky plans. Specifically when I show my players why they’re stupid instead 😂
Well, this is the thing. An awesome, Hail-Mary moment where "it's crazy, but it just might work" is great.
A table full of players who start thinking, "It's crazy, therefore the DM _has_ to let it work." is a disaster.
@@nickwilliams8302 well said
Nick Williams, absolutely!
Oh snap. I didn't know they had a second RUclips channel where they actually play D&D. I wish I knew this sooner, I can't wait to go check it out
This was a far more nuanced discussion of 'rule of cool' than I was expecting, thanks guys!
If I could add something, I find the inclusion of advantage/disadvantage into 5th ed. is a real boon to the 'rule of cool' fitting within the rules of the game. If your players describe a Cool action you (as DM) approve of, you can award advantage to the roll. If they want to try something you find dubious, you can still allow the roll... with disadvantage. It's comical how hard I've seen players hit the brakes on an action once they know they're going to be doubling the odds of rolling that Dreaded 1.
Inspiration, and the fact that it's transferable, is another tool that I find underused, both as a DM's reward for creative play within the rules and as a way for other players to do the same.
Johnathan... are you taking some levels in barbarian next to your monk routine? *eyeing dem biceps*
Judo I think...
Funny aspects to rule of cool.. one DM allowed me to use Druidcraft to blow up a flour mill, then told me I couldn't use construction to rebuild a bridge.
I have a pretty solid idea of actions, but I tend to ask my DM for things like collecting dust/gravel, attaching it to the tip of an arrow or projectile and firing it at an enemy for a 1st turn blindness (advantage setup for other characters).
Our tables rule of cool is keep it within the realm of possibility, however... if you can justify it logically, the DM may give you a DC to beat. Though I'll always respect if my DM says nah.
Wow, this was very helpful! Not the first time I heard/read about the rule of cool but you covered a lot of nuances that I never tought about before. Realy liked the "tell me why your char wants to do this" thing allowing for memorable milestones in a character developement as well as the "what are you willing to pay for that stunt" approach.
everyone was looking too deep into this yesterday thinking it was about ice dragons and cold magic; anyway, despite the fact ive just started, this is your best video this week :)
Fastball specials are something I'll always allow, even in my most grimdark campaigns.
As someone who's running a high difficulty eldritch horror themed 5E campaign I still like to empower my players with the "rule of cool" if they can at the very least logic their way through an explanation to me of why they should be able to go "off book" in that instance and it can potentially come with a cost. And as a player I also tend to leverage things like a level or levels of exhaustion. I feel that's a pretty big trade off, but it's also rare and only if I know it could actually kill a fellow PC (such as grabbing an unconscious PC when she was falling off a cliff into lava cost me exhaustion because my rogue dislocated his shoulder saving them).
Realistically cool
Awesome strategy!
My main caveat when players suggest some kind of cool action that goes outside of the normal limits of the game (assuming it is a reasonable extension of the rules and isn't wildly implausible) is that in order to make the attempt, the player has to agree to a potential hazard that would come from failure.
In my games, those actions all have a risk of failure that can backfire against the players more than a normal action ever would, and the more impressive the cool action would be, the more hazard the player has to agree to before they decide to try it - either because the odds are worse (aka the DC of whatever skill check they need to do for it to succeed will be higher) or because the downside is more dramatic.
That way, if a rule-breaking action succeeds, it feels more like they earned it, and if it fails then they knew what they were getting into when they decided to fight the odds.
My basic approach has always been, if you give me a good rule of cool description, I'll allow it or maybe even provide a bonus on the roll; HOWEVER if you fail, then your failure will be a spectacular as you envisioned your success.
5:38, yeah I've heard that wise old saying. "You know what they say about assumptions: They make an ass out of you... and umption" -- Samuel L Jackson in the movie The Long Kiss Goodnight.
Sam Jackson's favorite role :) Great little movie
I’m always frank and earnest with the ladies. I’m frank in chicago and earnest in new york.
Get 50% off Dropout, with the Unsleeping City and tons more exclusive COLLEGE HUMOR content: a2.adform.net/C/?bn=31620848 and using the code ROLL50 Watch Dimension 20 on RUclips: ruclips.net/channel/UCC8zWIx8aBQme-x1nX9iZ0A
Get Web DM's podcast: patreon.com/webdm
Get D&D Beyond: bit.ly/WebDMDnDBeyond
Man am I glad I discovered you guys. Seriously you two a huge source of valuable info and inspiration and I absolutely love your intros.
Thanks Creed!!!
So foster players in a vanilla environment so I don't fuck other dms crunch grit fests? Isn't that what pathfinder was for
You guys need to play Shadowrun with these personas. Play Wiz Kid Elf Poser Folk Rockers. Annoy the other players to the point of insanity. One of the char should live at home. The Char's Mom sells Avon & Vitamins. She is allways recruiting.
DC 30 check you say *Rouge smiles in Expertise*
Nothing like that rogue 4/bard 4 that’s proficient in everything and expertise in like 7 or 8 skills...lol
Realizes DM asked for Str check
@@chasebalcziunas4289 you need a bit more than rogue 4 bard 4 to gain proficiency in all skills, that's only like 4 from rogue and 3 from bard. You need some knowledge cleric, warlock 3 with the beguiling influence invocation, and the skilled feat to get all of them, I know because I've used this NPC in one of my games lol
Evan Gregory if you take a half elf sage, scout rogue subclass, the skilled feat and 3 levels of lore bard, you get the same thing without being MAD. Just have to be very particular in the order you pick the skills. I know this because I’ve played one.
The main issue I've experienced with my group is that making a rule of cool ruling often leads to the players seeing a house rule being established which in turn gets abused.
This.
Honestly, if they do stuff like that often enough that it's abused, just talk to your players after the game, or before the next. Tell them; _"Hey guys, I love when you try crazy shit, and I don't mind rule-of-cooling that, but if you're going to then turn that into some sort of legal precedent and abuse that ruling in future, I'm going to have to stop doing it."_
One of my most meorable annoying ones was a player who wanted to be a werebear, I said ok. Then as the game went on he kept adding cool things about being a were bear, while saying why his lycanthropy shouldnt have to follow the rules. My favorite was in west end games Star Wars, where the players wanted a Klingon Bird of Prey.
Nothing wrong with rule of cool if it's part of your expectations. I ran a campaign where it opened with a giant lizard chariot "car chase" across a desert. Can't do that with base rules and that was both awesome and unexpected.
I had a warlock drop a goblin on top of their boss’ head with mage hand and I let it happen because it was creative not an exploit
Just want to say that you guys have been such a great help. As a DM youre guy's advice and input has made me a better DM and my players have benefited greatly due to you guys . Thank you
Such a great point: "You don't need my permission to attempt something your character can just do."
Wish some popular streaming D&D groups would watch this show.
I'm curious as to who you're referring to. The dozen or so shows I keep up with (i have a job where i can listen to podcasts) it's nor a huge issue, that i can recall.
I think that a lot of this depends on where you land on the game as drama vs game as mechanics spectrum. Every player and GM has a different opinion about how much the game should be narrative driven and how much of the game should be mechanically limited. A RPG system acts as a grounding for what would otherwise be a free-form improv experience. Some players are more interested in internal world consistency than either, which the rules help with.
If you land farther on the drama side than the mechanics side, you'll often favor the rule of cool. You'll often create exceptions to the rule or allow for interesting things if you believe that it helps the narrative.
If you land farther on the mechanics side than the drama side, you'll usually stick to the rules. You won't allow exceptions, even if they might be dramatically interesting, because of how it might harm the logic and immersion of your world.
@@lowaimnobrain Yes, and there are certainly ways GMs can undermine that by using the rule too much. However, the GMs who use the rule of cool are probably going to apply similar logic to the world itself, where even goblins can also do mechanically invalid stuff. In my experience, GMs who use the rule of cool often spice their world with similar shenanigans.
@@endlessxaura You've nailed it. Every table, sometimes every session, is a bit different, and as GM you have to "read the room". A couple of tables I ran were after-work groups, and there were days where clearly the need for an emotional pick-me-up was more pressing than absolute rules-fidelity. With experience - of the game, and of the players - you get a sense of when and how to bend the rules without breaking the game.
@@lowaimnobrain - Claiming that the 'rule of cool' is somehow equal to 'allowing anything without downside/possibility of loss' is ridiculous. If someone wants to use a skill or ability to try something that's not quite how it works RAW, you can invoke the rule of cool and say; _"Sure I'll allow that, roll [insert relevant skill or DC check or whatever]"._
Like, something of the top of my head, suppose the party need to get someone on top of a 10' obstacle, and the Druid says; "I want to use my Thorn Whip and have it lash me and yank me on top of the obstacle." That's not how the spell works, technically. But you could say; "Sure, that's silly, go ahead and roll Acrobatics to see if you can manage that."
And if they roll below whatever you decided the DC was, you can say: "Oof, nope. The vine wraps around your ankle, thorns painful pierce your skin as it pulls you off balance and smacks you against the obstacle. You take [roll 1d6] 4 damage, and another 2 as you fall back down on the ground."
See how that's already created a comedic moment players can laugh about, and gives opportunities for people to roleplay on further. Consider how much more interesting that sequence is than the other option; "No Druid, you can't, that's not how the spell works." ...and that's it. Wow, such fun. 🤷♀️
Rule of cool also isn't unlimited. You can still say no. If instead the party is standing by a 50' ravine and the Druid says: "I want to make a Thorn Whip vine on the other side of the ravine and get pulled across." You can obviously just say no. That's taking things too far.
Long story short, I want to reward creative thinking at my table. Even if that means you slightly bend the rules, or ignore them for a sec. Because when you don't allow it, people will stop trying, they'll not come up with crazy stunts because they'll (rightfully) think: "Nah, the DM is going to not allow it anyway."
And then nobody does cool shit.
I'd rather have a campaign where people can tell stories about Legolas skating down the stairs on a shield while shooting 3 orcs with his bow, as opposed to a very neat and dull campaign where at the end you can only say: "Good job everyone, we stuck to the RAW for the whole campaign. Aren't we great."
Me being a Ninja and using the Trick "Acrobatic Master" which gives me +20 on Acrobatics skill on my next turn: The rules are rules
That intro gave major Jay and Silent Bob vibes.
Amazing video as always, very entertaining and informative.
I'm gonna be real Pruit actually looks pretty fucking cool with that jacket.
You guys may be cool but not as cool as me rocking that Web DM merch. 😎😎
Heck yeah! Show us a pic on social media!!
Tldr; Being Legolas in LotR is okay; being Legolas in the Hobbit trilogy is not okay.
Being Legolas in any of those film is not okay. His player clearly knew the DM was unfaithful to his wife and blackmailed the DM to rule in his favor
That intro alone was worth the extra day of waiting haha
😎
Super on point about action economy. Also really good job talking about a concept I talked about in another video's comments. Rule of Cool must be tempered with normal rules and used sparingly.
When it came to Rule of Cool and making sure it didn't get too crazy, I had a very specific house rule involving it called "Cool Tokens" (I am accepting suggestions for better names btw). To do something that falls under Rule of Cool, you had to first roll a skill check relevant to what you're trying to do, and if it's a success you spend the token. If you fail you keep the token and instead of something awesome happening it instead ends up being embarrassing for the character.
The higher your level, the more tokens you're able to have, and they'd refresh upon every level up or once after a certain amount of in-game time (anywhere between a week to a few months, depending on the campaign and use of time skips).
Also using the Lucky feat to try and force it will double the number of tokens needed.
We call them Pimp Points, you get one for every Nat 20. You can burn them for rerolls or Bonus Mod. If you want to do something wacky, spend them in increments of five'
An example of resource expenditure that I saw was a 20th level cleric using his channel divinity to ensure a paladin with stone skin could become a meteor and get the final blow on the boss. We all had to scatter and it was awesome.
The difficulty I have as a DM is remembering that losing well can be cool. I hesitate too much to smash my player characters for their choices, and end up putting them against insufficient danger for their abilities. - In short, I need to be willing to let them lose or die for their choices.
Ah. Forgot to say. This is all in Rolemaster.
Yes, this is a sometimes difficult but important lesson!
I remember back in Exalted first edition, there were Stunt rules and it was basically codifying the Rule of Cool. If the player made actions more interesting for the table, they got a bonus die for the attempt. It always made things more fun. After that, those of us who dm'd would adapt the rule to other games. Lower difficulty, a bonus die, positive modifiers, it depended on the game. Someone tried bonus xp for a little while, but that got out of hand and made things drag on. Essentially, reward extra somehow, it's really helped newer players ease into role-playing and imagining what was going on.
So glad you guys support the unsleeping city. I came across it the other day and it's my favourite playthrough other than your stuff
Yes! We've been watching a lot lately and we're so happy to work with them! Great show!
I love the dichotomy of the dnd books on one side and the expanse, Coriolanus and star wars books on the other!
I really like the idea of higher level slots for allowing spells to flex their usage. Could even add a role on the wild magic table too sometimes.
One thing that I think a lot of people that watched the Matt Mercer video about the Rule of Cool must have tuned out of the video
when he was talking about how the Rule of Cool moments needs to still have a sense of challenge to them. For a Rule of Cool moment to be cool, there has to be an application of difficulty.
The bending of the rules is to allow the roll in the first place. The further the rules are bent or the more challenging the act is, the higher the risk and penalties for failure are.
"Most RPGS are designed to forge a heroic story, showing feats of legend. So let the players *try*. Let them fail, and occasionally succeed... *Occasionally*"
Yep. As a basic rule of thumb, impossible actions don't _get_ a roll. They just fail. Because that's what "impossible" _means._
The mismatched player ideology hit me hard. I ran Strahd when the 5E module came out for a group of nine. I had eight players take the gothic horror seriously, and 1 who played a gnomish glitter wizard.
Session Zero, man. This is what Session Zero is for.
And nine players? Nine? Jesus wept, I thought I had my hands full running it for six.
@@nickwilliams8302 we did session zero, and they promised they would just try to be light occasional comic relief. This player has a history of crazy stuff, but I was naive and okayed it.
And our group was at a total of 13 chairs at one point. It's kind of attritioned down to 7 now which is better.
I really like some of the rule of cool stuff in DCC. The fighter has to get a certain number on their attack die and other characters have to spend luck. I think that's a good way of doing it and I've been thinking about how to translate that to D&D 5th
If a player wants to do same crazy sword spin on top of the monster’s head, I my job is to make it require athletics check and maybe a hit negative, but an awesome effect
I've never really had an issue with players abusing "rule of cool" but I did really like what you had to say about resource expenditure.
I've told my players many times that I love shenanigans and creative thinking and if they are willing to offer a resource in exchange (spell slots, sorcery points, hit dice, action surges etc) I am far more likely to say yes.
I have a sister rule of "equivalent exchange". You want something a little extra on your attack? Little extra something on your spell? Sure, but you make whatever roll you need to make with disadvantage, or maybe the target rolls their save with advantage.
I'd rather say yes than no, but I don't have an issue with saying the latter, but if you are willing to put an anti on the table I will mostly likely play along.
what they were talking about at 24:30 with the describing of something that was cool at the start of each encounter reminded me of a what one of my players used to do in one of my more recent campaigns. For reference in the campaign setting, there is no such thing as Warforged and the player wanted to play one so I allowed him to play an Iron golem construct that some gnomes built to be sentient. He was also a paladin so once he could he took the greater steed spell and would always summon a griffin. So since we were ruling him as a large construct that had a flying mount he got the idea one combat session with a group of Cyclops that he could just drop from his mount on top of the cyclops and pin them to the ground. He told me this plan and I had him roll some competing checks with the cyclops to see if it worked. It didn't go exactly to the player's plan do to low rolls on his end and high ones for the cyclops but the fall damage that was split between the two of them did take a large chunk away from the Cyclops health so the player didn't complain too much. The player then began to open up almost every combat encounter after this way to varying degrees of success. I allowed him to go with it these times because the creatures he was doing it to were around the same size as him and it made logical sense for this to work. It wasn't until they were up against an Ancient Black dragon and he decided to misty step thirty feet above the dragon to try to grapple it to the ground that I decided that I decided that he was just trying to take advantage of my allowing things like this to trivialize all the encounters I had set up. Which I am fine with to a degree. But this is an Ancient black dragon and was two sizes larger than him and was a boss fight that I had been building up to for a few weeks now. so when he fell and only managed to grab onto the neck of the dragon by barley passing the check I had him do, and not pinning the dragon to the ground beneath him. He got upset with me because of this and practically threatened to rage quit the session. He is fine now and continues to enjoy the campaign, but he has not dive bombed any more monsters since.
I would also like to add that I did spoil this player a bit by allowing him to go with a character build that gave him around 25 Ac before the party had even reached level 10 so barely anything could hit him for a while. So I do take fault in how he acted in some way.
Love that you guys mention Exalted, totally awesome lore complete trash mechanics. It was one big glorious mess.
We love it but... You're not wrong
One of the most useful videos you guys have ever done, for me personally.
When he said the cartoony part I just remembered the meta gaming squire, goose, and pigeon that was introduced into my game this Friday.
I love the barter system idea to do something cool!
I'll give you x,y,z ... for this cool action
Totally going to use this!
I was recently playing a game where the party was fighting between 2 airships, and one of the PCs failed their jump to get from the one that was about to be destroyed. My character was a Barbarian who wields a chain as a weapon, and the DM let me use my reaction to make an attack against the character who failed the jump in an attempt to catch them. I thought it was a reasonable example of the Rule of Cool.
I love the tensers floating disc example. Perfect use of spell research I agree! I'd go one step further and let the player choose in the moment. Either they can research it later and not cast it now, OR, they can cast it as they want to but can no longer cast the original spell ever again as the spell is altered to the new version they made. Actions meet consequences
As a dm I like to give xp to represent further in developing your characters personality, he goes out does x and x quests, gets so much xp, kills mobs with creative ways, and spells, and gets so much xp, discovers new location meets new people in a new town, gets so much xp, etc
I like the idea of the Rule of Cool, and I certainly am into rewarding my players for creativity, BUT the Rule of Cool is something for ME to invoke as the DM - not for my players to use to make me say “yes”. I am the one person at my table who has put the time into learning the rules set forth in the PHB, MM, and DMG. When I have been asked to give them X pet or whatever, I have said
1) not at your current level, but I will think about it
2) possibly but it will require some research, locating and tracking that creature, followed by some sort of attempt to tame or gain favor of the creature.
In an early adventure, they tied rope to a suit of leather armor, and the first person to ascend made an athletics check to hold it down when they got the top of a steep incline. I didn’t let it negate the climb for the rest of the party, but I told them before hand that if they succeeded having the rope to hold would lower the DC to climb for the rest.
Good thinking is helpful, but it should not be allowed to negate the encounter.
I think a lot of the complications caused by rule of cool comes from people who don't understand the purpose for rules in TTRPGs. There's a discussion to be had about Rules as Tools vs Rules as Laws. Rules in traditional competitive games, and in sports, are designed to ensure a level playing field and enforce fairness. Rules in TTRPGs are like musical scales, they're designed to generate a specific experience. We choose to play in certain systems because of those expectations. We don't follow rules in TTRPGs because it's some objective moral imperative, but because if we don't use them, the system breaks down and fails to deliver the expected experience. Rule of Cool is like jazz... knowing how the rules work lets you intentionally bend and stretch them without everything falling to pieces. You can push the explicit limits of a TTRPG ruleset to enhance the experience the game is designed to deliver, but you have to understand what the game is trying to do first.
I have a Sorcerer in that plays in my game and she uses levitate on objects to drop them on enemies. I usually allow it.
Sorry for commenting on an older video but I wanted to share my rule of cool experience. I was at my LGS for drop in D&D, and the one shot session we were in culminated in a fight with a demon. It was a tough battle but in the end, after using all our resources, we emerged victorious. Cheers and high fives were exchanged. But then the guy who had been DMing mentioned that he hadn't really been keeping track of the demon's HP - he just knew in his head that he wanted the fight to last a certain number of rounds and then just gave the killing blow to whoever he thought the fight's MVP was, citing the rule of cool as his reason for doing it. I remember feeling pretty deflated, since after all, if the end of the fight was pre-determined, what had been the point of the last hour of rolling dice? Ever since then, rule of cool stuff has left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth and I'll admit to being slightly prejudiced against DMs that don't play by the books.
No real point to this story, just thought I'd share.
Playing a DnD 3.5 campaign set in Ancient Rome (extremely low magic, required much more crafting skill checks) Through a series of checks we took a broken down hovel and created a fortified garrison within a few hours which almost had a moat, but the DM decided that we didn't have enough time to complete the trench.
Pretty much hit the nail on the head with this video. Rule of cool is an awesome thing to recognize and appreciate...In small doses, and if you use it too much recognize that it is you that messed something up, not the game. I've seen so many posts on different forums about bards "bards are so OP. My player rolled a 23 on a persuation check so I told him that the entire city pledged themselves to him, and now he has an army at his disposal and the game is SO BROKEN. I'm never letting bards play in my games again." No. Bards didn't ruin your game. YOU ruined your game by not thinking through what is appropriate to give to your players in exchange for an arbitrary number rolled on a 20 sided piece of plastic.
One thing I'll say about the spells, is that you should be prepared to have a player expect to able to use a spell in the allowed way on multiple subsequent occasions, or be prepared to formulate a rationale why they were able to bend the spell's use in a particular edge case instance. I'm more for the former, but I always let my players get too powerful. Using upcasting, I think, is a good option that preserves the specialties of other classes.
Most I will give for "Description as an auto-success" is a roll with advantage, or a change in ability check as they are taking a novel or particularly effective approach.
The shift from detailed hard rules like Pathfinder to simpler rules like 5e has made the rule of cool and similar things important. People are still used to that harder edged play style, and 5e needs a bit of Pat Rothfuss bullshit.
Our party had a dark-ish knight with ornate armor with skulls on the shoulders. Our magic users decided to have a little fun with it. They would go into stealth or cast Invis on themselves, make the eye sockets light up, and then they spoke through the skulls discussing all the dif ways the Knight and his ghost army could destroy the target. They would also use it to discuss strategy and such. The DM decided to go along with it and made it like a fear/confusion spell, gave it a DC, and sometimes made npc/monsters roll a save against it or run away/be paralyzed for x amount of rounds. And don't get me started on all the fun we had with the "Flask of Infinite Ales/Liquor" he gave my Arcane Archer lol. It was a hip flask that with the recitation of a simple cantrip could produce any kind of alcoholic beverage....fun times fun times...:D
Hey guys I absolutely LOVE alll your videos. You are by far the best D&D channel out there, just with the awesome story ideas. Anyways my players are going into the Abyss to rescue a trapped soul. I looked through your videos but didn't see one on layers of the abyss. Can you talk about that in an episode? :)
Is it just me or does Jim’s sunglasses look like devils horns
I spent half the video thinking he had cats ears on before I suddenly made the connection to the intro.
I feel like this video - especially the resource-expenditure portion - would benefit from remembering that Inspiration exists. When someone asks about non-standard stuff that I'm iffy on, having a meta-mechanical resource that everyone acknowledges is a hard-mechanics exemption on hand can be really useful.
@Colin Deal I probably could have made my point more clear: This video discusses expending resources beyond the ordinary to allow for players to take actions beyond the ordinary. I was positing Inspiration as a handy resource to use for that occasion. One reason that it is suited to that particular purpose is that Inspiration is granted at the DM's discretion for reasons that the DM can choose for themselves and their game (the usual case described is good, characterizing role-play, but the text allows for the DM to determine criteria for awarding Inspiration whole-cloth). In my experience, spanning multiple DMs and multiple styles, resulted in an understanding around tables that Inspiration is a soft rule. So, if you're looking to expend a resource to soften the rules up for a given play-instance, Inspiration - within the culture of the table - tends to work well within that space. Using it can implicitly communicate that this thing you're doing is non-standard, not a reliable use of the rules, and is the result of you - as a player - having done something that jived with what the DM is trying to do with the game. There's some more unpacking that can be done to further explain why Inspiration works well, but I hope that at least clarifies my point.
Assuming that it has, I'm a bit unclear on what your point was, I'm afraid. The initial purpose of my comment was to add to the list of resources described in the video. Your criticisms seemed to have been: 1. That inspiration can't be used for anything more than a
Advantage RAW. And 2. That what I was describing wouldn't work in your game. Given that what I was describing was meant to build on a discussion of doing non-RAW things by expending resources in a non-RAW way, I don't know why criticism 1 applies to what I was saying. You could maybe argue that it applies to the discussion as a whole, but if you want to argue that, then you might want to make a comment directed at the Web DM folks. As for criticism 2, my read on Web DM is that they aren't trying to give you a list of things that will definitely work in your game or tell you *the* way to run D&D, and neither am I. I think Web DM is more about giving options to try in your game or mutate for your game or think over, discard, and replace with something that works better for your game. In-line with that vision, I laid out an option to expand on their list of options. The fact that it wouldn't work for your game in particular is immaterial to whether it's a worthwhile consideration. It's fine that it doesn't work for you; I wasn't saying it would. I still think it's worth putting out there.
Maybe I'm missing some aspect of your position; I'm interested in hearing back from you.
One thing I do when applying the Rule of Cool is make little changes, like announce the DC beforehand, where I might not otherwise (say, against a monster or hazard the party is unfamiliar with). Just the small act of you presenting that information, and a party member saying "ok" to that before they roll makes it more contractual, and less like antagonistic "DM Magic" behind the screen.
When it comes to action economy, when it comes to the players determining what they do (specifically new players) I make a point to remind them “your turn is approximately 6 seconds, you can do this thing, but what you’re telling me won’t fit in one turn” if they still want to do it then they’re locking themselves into spending multiple turns doing that thing
Interesting point about the "Say yes or roll the dice" come from Burning Wheel and Adam Koebels thoughts on it. The big thing is that it is actually "Roll the dice or say yes." First resort is, you roll the dice, or if you cant think of a meaningful roll, then say yes.
Also, big love for The Unsleeping City and Dimension 20 in general. Fantasy High is hilarious and great fun. Escape from the Bloodkeep is a refreshing change of pace and a nicely packaged mini-season.
Yes, Adam's perspective is interesting!
Right there with you on the love for Unsleeping City and Dimension 20. We think it's really well done and we're thrilled to rep them!
Use the often linsided mechanic of dm "rollyplay" points, used for rewarding seting the corect tone, to pay for amount of times you can roll for a 'rule of cool' D.C. possible derailing.
Great video! Still eagerly awaiting the Exalted episode.
I had a dwarven thief with boots of striding and springing attempted a backstab on the orge general after jumping off the Castle wall. My DM gave me a severe penalty to hit, but I rolled a nat 20 and "rule of cool" I one hit killed the general. It was awesome!!
The unsleeping city is really giving me persona vibes
I don't remember exactly when they added it, but 'improvise' is now on the official list of "actions/actions in combat/other actions" sections of the phb and dmg so antagonistic dm's can't pull the "you're only allowed to take listed actions" now it IS a listed action xD
"Improvise:
Your character can do things not covered by the actions in this chapter, such as breaking down doors, intimidating enemies, sensing weaknesses in magical defenses, or calling for a parley with a foe. The only limits to the actions you can attempt are your imagination and your character's ability scores. See the descriptions of the ability scores in chapter 7 for inspiration as you improvise.
When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure."
idea: the roll of cool. "what you wanna do sounds ok, roll"
I prefer to think of it as more like the ‘Tool of Cool,’ not a strict rule, but any time a player has an amazing idea that makes everyone happy you can bring it out.
My favorite way to teach new players action economy is present it in the 6 seconds format. An action takes 6 seconds, a bonus action is something you could do while doing that action (talking, simple quick action) and movement that you could do while performing that action. The more I can get them to visualize the logical possibilities of themselves as a person the quicker they seem to understand the rules so we can all attempt our cool hero moments. I try to give movie examples so we all stay on the same page. "My Legolas ranger character runs forward firing his bow twice, while yelling to the other party members" awesome and cinematic, while still within the rules. Doing all that while riding a shield down a set of stairs...now that's going to need a pretty difficult roll but sure give it a shot, I'll enjoy describing the failure just as much haha. However having that shield fly off and kill an orc...that's where I would cut off the rule of cool or at the very least that had better be a natural 20 acrobatics roll and make it a d4 of damage, something nearly impossible and also restrict the actual impact of that cool move. Which is often how I make judgement calls for rule of cool. You can do the awesome thing, in the end it might not win the battle but at least you get the satisfaction of doing it, which is it's own victory. Cool but make a line that everyone can visualize so everyone can try to stay on the same page and it doesn't overwhelm your game.
Pruitt showing off the guns this episode. Lookin' good.
THAT INTRO WAS THE BEST!
You guys are actually super good at intros lol
I've been a DM/player for three weeks. On Saturday. I've been watching you guys for quite some time though, and most of your advice seems to boil down to three things.
Know the rules, so you can know when to break them. Don't go to extremes unless everyone else is on board. Don't be a dick.
So far, these three things have been extremely successful guidelines. Seems like good real life advice as well, now that I think about it.
I really appreciate your content. Keep up the good work gents.
Congrats on starting to play!!! Thanks for the kind words.
@@WebDM You're most welcome. Between you guys and Mercer, I'm trying to learn all I can.
@@JKM395 Check out Dungeon Dudes on RUclips. Between that channel and this one I've really gotten back into D&D after a 30 year gap. They've really helped me understand this 5e version. So different from AD&D! (Thinking about the nightmare of THAC0!)
@@pierowmania2775 I certainly will. Thanks for the recommendation. Have a great day!
At the end of the day it's a game and as long as everyone is comfortable and on board with shenanigans and having fun, it's good.
The other thing they didn't cover that I'd like to keep in mind is that using the Rule of Cool to allow people do things that are the specialty of another class ability or feature or spell. For instance, Tenser's Floating Disc is called that because that's what it does. If a player has the Catapult spell, sure, they can cast disc, then cast catapult on it, but then there's the appropriate falling damage and any collateral damage as the disc crashes to the ground before it rights itself.
I'm not saying that a non-rogue cannot try to pick a lock. But I'm just careful to keep all players feeling special, useful, and a vital part of an adventuring team, and granting player B something that player A has to spend spell slots or feature selection or anything to do just doesn't sit well with me.
I think that's less about 'rule of cool' and just more about play etiquette. Playing nicely with your table. For instance there's no reason why lock picking is/should be a rogue-only thing. If you're playing a Monk with the Criminal background (and thus have Thieves' Tools proficiency) there's no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to pick locks.
It has more to do with the rule of allowing other players their moment to shine. If you know you have that Criminal Monk in your party and encounter a locked door, maybe let them do the lock picking, instead of you as a warlock coming up with some weird plan and stealing their time to shine.
Definitely wish more games would include rules for stunts, like Exalted and old FASRIP Marvel Superheroes.
When I DM, I try to let my players try the awesome thing once, and even am willing to let it be a little bit OP as long as it makes sense within the action economy, but as you said in the video, if they try to turn it into a regular tactic, it's time to put together a balanced rule that is repeatably fair.