And don't get me started on some Fighter who is carrying into a Dungeon 3 Javelins, a Two-Handed Sword, Long Sword, a Short Bow, at least one Quiver of arrows, a Shield, and a Knapsack, plus a Cloak of Protection, all the while having two hands free to climb a rope.
I mean, if they have a two-handed sword they likely have considerable Str and the encumbrance rules aren't going to stop them.
You are missing the point. Can they carry all that weight? Sure, no question there. That is RAW.
But further to my above comment, this is where RAW does not go far enough. There is zero chance for any Medium creature to have all that placed on their back. There is simply not enough surface area. Encumbance should cover area, as well, not just weight. But the majority of players and DM's handwave or simply ignore that. Players keep talking about roleplaying and immersion, but if it gets complicated, or they don't like the results, they ditch it in a second. Roleplaying your char does not only include interactions with sentient beings, but also the physical world.
Your not carrying enough with 6 weapons a shield and a backpack.. nevermind surface area its not like the shield can't go OVER their greatsword bow n quiver
I am not sure if this parody picture is defending or debating my point. Want to guess how mobile and effective that guy is in distance combat, let alone melee?
Nice deflection you stated its not about weight its about how "There is simply not enough surface area" Uhm well yes there is evidently that doods carrying a ton, there doesnt seem to be a surface area problem
as for effectiveness? at str 12 probably not at all as he would be encumbered, at str 15? prolly be at his limits of what we'd consider free mobility. str 18-20? lol you can this a problem little man?
Your high strength characters don't care that the load might make it so a typical person could barely stand upright holding it all.
There's also a funny photoshop of Shad from Shadeversity holding a crap ton of weapons, it looks goofy but not beyond the realm of possbility, he has a 2 quivers, a halberd, 5 swords, 2 axes, a mace, a crossbow and a shield all stowed on his back and in his belt. than a few more in his hands and one or two under his arms that I wouldn't count for the sake of this since we're talking about having their hands free.
Like yeah its looks goofy but not impossible to carry and your gripe is against someone with 3 weapons a shield, some javelins and a quiver
Hey, you do you. I’m not going to judge you for it. However, given that DMs fill in blanks in the rules or make interpretations all the time, I’m not sure doing something that doesn’t immediately fall under an explicit rule should necessarily get the “rule of cool” label.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
How about hard no to gritty hard games?
Rule of cool is up to the GM to decide. Running a cool game is just as valid as running a gritty hard game. Why should you demand that others maintain RAW when you are not following RAW either anyways? Some people just want to have a beer and laughs when they play D&D. Not everyone wants to sign up for a second job keeping track of everything and stare death down the edge of their sword.
And as long as everyone is having fun, that is what RAW wants and intends anyways.
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
How about hard no to gritty hard games?
Rule of cool is up to the GM to decide. Running a cool game is just as valid as running a gritty hard game. Why should you demand that others maintain RAW when you are not following RAW either anyways? Some people just want to have a beer and laughs when they play D&D. Not everyone wants to sign up for a second job keeping track of everything and stare death down the edge of their sword.
And as long as everyone is having fun, that is what RAW wants and intends anyways.
So, let's go with that rule of cool game where level 6 chars are hurling CR 25 monsters into the sun. Exactly what does the DM do to keep his crew entertained at level 8 or 9, after they have defeated all the gods? Pray tell, what will be the "fun" the DM can dream up at that stage?
Some DMs can just improvise a completely off-the-wall plane-hopping adventure without a single attack roll. You can debate whether they're even playing 5e anymore, but it can be done.
So, let's go with that rule of cool game where level 6 chars are hurling CR 25 monsters into the sun.
Hold up. Let’s not. Extreme examples are pointless. They’re anecdotal and not representative of anything. Nobody on the other side is arguing that hard RAW games suck because they don’t let you do things like throwing a grappling hook over a wall since there’s no rule for it either.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
I have no idea where you found such a thread, but L6 PCs don't have the tools to throw that dragon 5 feet, let alone millions of miles at many times the speed of light, unless the DM has gone out of their way to provide them. That's not rule of cool, that's the DM providing some sort of homebrew artifact.
Besides, since the answer is zero damage, I'm not sure how cool it is. That same dragon would take a lot more damage being thrown into a rock at roughly 100 times the speed of light than it would into a star. Mind you, at that velocity, you're also throwing it pretty far into the past, so I hope you're prepared for a massive paradox.
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
Maybe the campaign is ending. Maybe the DM is already planning to throw gods at them at level 8. Either way, it's that DM's problem, not yours. If that's what's fun for them, what do you care? You're not in that game. I mean, could you even identify the continent on which that game is being played? (probably you can make a good guess, but you can't really be sure.) Why does the idea that one group having fun breaking the rules (assuming they even are) mean everyone else has to follow them to the letter?
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
I have no idea where you found such a thread, but L6 PCs don't have the tools to throw that dragon 5 feet, let alone millions of miles at many times the speed of light, unless the DM has gone out of their way to provide them. That's not rule of cool, that's the DM providing some sort of homebrew artifact.
Besides, since the answer is zero damage, I'm not sure how cool it is. That same dragon would take a lot more damage being thrown into a rock at roughly 100 times the speed of light than it would into a star. Mind you, at that velocity, you're also throwing it pretty far into the past, so I hope you're prepared for a massive paradox.
That's not rule of cool unless I'm missing something, it's a DM badly misinterpreting some mechanics - the entity flinging the dragon into a star is an NPC, using teleport.
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
There is another thread that is currently active. Someone is asking about the damage a star would do to an Ancient Gold Shadow Dragon, which is a minimum of CR 25, hurled into said star by a player in the group. Anyway, forgetting about all the logistics and physics of such an endeavour, a few answered the question, with some reasoned answers. Then I discover the party doing this are level 6 chars....
That is why RAW should be maintained. By level 8, that DM will have to throw gods at his group, because RAW is not fun and rule of cool is fun.
I have no idea where you found such a thread, but L6 PCs don't have the tools to throw that dragon 5 feet, let alone millions of miles at many times the speed of light, unless the DM has gone out of their way to provide them. That's not rule of cool, that's the DM providing some sort of homebrew artifact.
Besides, since the answer is zero damage, I'm not sure how cool it is. That same dragon would take a lot more damage being thrown into a rock at roughly 100 times the speed of light than it would into a star. Mind you, at that velocity, you're also throwing it pretty far into the past, so I hope you're prepared for a massive paradox.
It also gets better. The DM in that campaign announced that a Nat 20 on a Persuasion check by a 6th level char was all it took to change, and I quote, "the world view" of a being powerful enough to actually do this dragon hurling. Yeah, rule of cool is great.
It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.
It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.
Regardless, it's not rule of cool. Rule of cool is when a PC does something so cool you let it happen. This is the opposite of that - an NPC is violating the rules of the teleport spell (with no indication the DM in question understands this and is house-ruling the changes as they see fit) to make it more powerful than a Wish spell, and all to deal fire damage to a creature immune to fire damage. Even in a world where the teleport spell was house ruled to be as OP as that NPC seems to have access to, and even in a world where Gold Dragons were not immune to relevant damage type - i.e. in a world where all of this had actually been deliberately houseruled - this would not be Rule of Cool, because the NPC is doing all of the work. It's the equivalent of overcoming a battle by Persuading a local warlord to fight it for you (in one check, without needing to work for it or even be good at Persuasion), and then the whole fight happening off-camera. Completely antithetical to the Rule of Cool. If this was a tv show, you'd stop watching it.
It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.
Regardless, it's not rule of cool. Rule of cool is when a PC does something so cool you let it happen. This is the opposite of that - an NPC is violating the rules of the teleport spell (with no indication the DM in question understands this and is house-ruling the changes as they see fit) to make it more powerful than a Wish spell, and all to deal fire damage to a creature immune to fire damage. Even in a world where the teleport spell was house ruled to be as OP as that NPC seems to have access to, and even in a world where Gold Dragons were not immune to relevant damage type - i.e. in a world where all of this had actually been deliberately houseruled - this would not be Rule of Cool, because the NPC is doing all of the work. It's the equivalent of overcoming a battle by Persuading a local warlord to fight it for you (in one check, without needing to work for it or even be good at Persuasion), and then the whole fight happening off-camera. Completely antithetical to the Rule of Cool. If this was a tv show, you'd stop watching it.
Well, lucky you aren't watching then. A show that's too silly and absurd for you might be just the thing for someone else. Some people like Christian Bale Batman; some people like Adam West.
I feel like the terms “RAW” and “Rule of Cool” are both being used pretty loosely in this thread. Makes it near impossible to argue anything in a reasonable manner.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How about a hard no to rule of cool. It is way too subjective, and leads to players taking liberties with what their chars should be able to do. Those that want to follow the rules are outshone by those that toss the rule book aside. And don't say it is a co-operative game and when one player hogs the spotlight, everyone wins. The DM has to then up the encounter levels to match the new special off book abilities of some players, and those that don't play that rule of cool game, oh well, hope you get lucky and survive, or don't mind sitting back and watching all the cool kids do all the stuff.
That feels more like a charichature of Rule of Cool. While I am sure some DMs might be really liberal with it, it's something I'd apply with the following understandings:
It represents the exception, not the rule. This also means the conditions for the thing to happen also have to be somewhat exceptional.
I'm not going to introduce new mechanics for existing spells/ features/ abilities. Shocking Grasp isn't suddenly going to get a range of 15' just because you thought of something cool. Intimidation checks and persuasion checks aren't going to elevate to the level of charm spells just because you really went the extra mile and got a good effect out of them once.
Suspension of disbelief has limits.
I can balance things out with additional ability checks and/ or consequences for failure.
I can say no.
If it gets out of hand, that's my fault as a DM for not applying appropriate limits or understanding. If you allow game-breaking things, then the game is going to be broken. If you allow precedents to be set, you're going to potentially deal with disappointment if you have to contradict yourself later.
But used judiciously to reward creativity and allow for interesting, unexpected, and memorable moments is a good thing, imo.
I play a Scout Rogue in one game. I play it straight up, by the rules. In fact, I play by an even more restrictive set of rules for encumbrance, that I expect no one else to follow. However, there is a Light Cleric in the game, who at least 2 or 3 times per encounter does Acrobatics moves that are "cool", but totally outside of RAW. My Rogue (+10 in Acrobatics), would not even think of doing the nonsense that this player does. I am not geared to throw away the rule book, so my guy is penalized because this player has no issue tossing away the book.
That seems like a you problem. The other player and the DM like cool stunts. If you want everybody to play a strictly by the rules game, I think you need to find a like-minded group of players.
So, let's go with that rule of cool game where level 6 chars are hurling CR 25 monsters into the sun. Exactly what does the DM do to keep his crew entertained at level 8 or 9, after they have defeated all the gods? Pray tell, what will be the "fun" the DM can dream up at that stage?
There are plenty of fun to be had for the GM. It honestly is not that difficult to juice up your monsters with some homebrew on the spot and call the monster by a different name. The GM can allow the monster to react during every creature's turn, treat all their attack rolls and saving throws as rolling 20, have immunity to all conditions, etc. If Tiamat is too tame for the players, God Devourer can do what Tiamat does, have all the effects I mentioned in the previous sentence, and can cast any 9th level spell as a reaction or bonus action without using spell slots.
This is no different from making up arbitrary rules to make the game harder. In fact, homebrewing and beefing up monsters seems to be way more in line with what RAW encourages since it has a whole section devoted to calculating CR to help GMs gauge how difficult their monsters are.
If your players can handle your gritty hard game perfectly fine, a GM running the game should have no issue handling a group of PCs. The difference in scale of power is so cosmically imbalanced in the GM's favor that combat difficulty is not factor on the GM's side. If you can think of rules to make it harder on the PC, you can homebrew monsters and make them more challenging.
I am not geared to throw away the rule book, so my guy is penalized because this player has no issue tossing away the book.
Nope. First, the absence of a bonus does not equal a penalty. Second, what you are or are not geared for matters no more nor less than what other players are or are not geared for. Your opinion, and your fun, is worth exactly as much as anyone else’s. If you want the game played differently, get everyone else to come around to your point of view. If you won’t, you have no leg to stand on. If you can’t, then learn to live with it or walk away. Either way, applying stricter limit to your character than others have to abide by is your choice, nobody else’s.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I feel like the terms “RAW” and “Rule of Cool” are both being used pretty loosely in this thread. Makes it near impossible to argue anything in a reasonable manner.
When pavilionaire makes the statement "It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.", there is zero common ground for discussion. First part of the statement says "it is not RAW", last part of the statement says it is.
If you haven't noticed, that's a running gag on this thread.
I acknowledge that tongue-in-cheek sarcasm can make it hard to follow the serious debate on the thread, but I don't know about you, at this point I find the humor more interesting than the topic itself.
I feel like the terms “RAW” and “Rule of Cool” are both being used pretty loosely in this thread. Makes it near impossible to argue anything in a reasonable manner.
When pavilionaire makes the statement "It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.", there is zero common ground for discussion. First part of the statement says "it is not RAW", last part of the statement says it is.
If a person can't accept that Rule of Cool != RAW, there is nothing more can be discussed with that person.
When a DM or player badly misunderstands the mechanics of a spell, or a feature, or a base mechanic of the game, that can happen to anyone, at a RAW table or not.
When a DM or player fully understands the mechanics of said spell, feature, or base mechanic, and says "nope, I am not accepting that because it is too restrictive to what I want to do", that is rule of cool. No player EVER says "my rule of cool implementation is actually less powerful than RAW".
So, I want my physically not all that capable warlock to scale a wall, without suitable magic to help out. In order not to fall, I declare I’ll be using a grappling hook. There are no written rules for using a grappling hook, but my DM feels I should be able to so makes up some stuff. It’s clearly not RAW (even if some people in this thread think it is), but is it Rule of Cool? If yes, I don’t think it’s possible to have a decent game without. If no, then whatever rulesmongery the DM comes up with being Rule of Cool or not is subject to interpretation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
No, since if you are unaware of a RAW, you are not interpreting it, and you are not deciding whether to abide by it.
If you are a megamind who knows every iota of the rules, and then you choose not to abide by them, then you're playing by RAW I guess.
I was a bit curious and I figured I would do a little bit more digging to see if RAW has that covered. I did not have to dig very far though, as this was in the DMG introduction:
"Inventing, writing, storytelling, improvising, acting, refereeing — every DM handles these roles differently, and you’ll probably enjoy some more than others. It helps to remember that Dungeons & Dragons is a hobby, and being the DM should be fun. Focus on the aspects you enjoy and downplay the rest. For example, if you don’t like creating your own adventures, you can use published ones. You can also lean on the other players to help you with rules mastery and world-building."
If I am reading it right, RAW says that you can downplay RAW, which seems to strongly imply that it is okay to forget about RAW too and improvise on the spot to tell a better story, assuming the GM prefers improvisation and story telling.
That statement, whoever said it, is not false on its face.
By definition, a "House Rule" is a change to the rules-as-written. Even Wikipedia backs me up on this, quote, "House rules are unofficial modifications to official game rules adopted by individual groups of players." Unofficial modifications are not rules-as-written. They are changes to the rules as written (that's what a "modification" is).
After allI if you were following rules-as-written, you'd not need a house rule. By definition, a "House Rule" is a rule that is not normally used in a game, but is a rule played at your gaming table (i.e., in your "house," whether real or virtual). For example, when we played Monopoly as kids, my sister and I (and eventually, all of our friends, too) had a "house rule" that there was a $500 bill in a "pot" in the center of the board, and all taxes and feeds charged would go into the pot. When someone landed on "Free Parking," they got the pot (i.e., at least $500, and sometimes quite a bit more). After the pot was won, the bank put up another $500, and this went on throughout the game. This rule exists nowhere in the rules-as-written for Monopoly. Therefore, it is not RAW. But it was used "in our house," as kids (and eventually, in all the other houses), and therefore, it was a house rule.
No player EVER says "my rule of cool implementation is actually less powerful than RAW".
This is a key point, and a difference between a "house" rule and a "rule of cool" ruling. House rules are potentially neutral. There are probably just as many house rules that weaken aspects of RAW, as there are that strengthen it. This will depend very strongly on the "house" -- the gaming group and whether they want a "hardcore" experience or a "laid back" experience or what have you.
Rule-of-cool implementations are almost always done (at least any that I have seen) to allow the PCs to do things that are not normally allowed under the rules, and therefore almost always make the PC more powerful, have more abilities, be able to do things, that it doesn't say you can do in the rules. I just got done watching the finale of the Wildcards ETU game, and there was a moment when the GM, Jordan Callarman (who IMO, is the best GM I've ever seen on one of these shows), explains to a player that a rule doesn't quite work the way the player thought, but he says, "You know what, that is such a cool idea, I'm going to allow it." Now, again, Jordan's a great GM, the players are all very good players who mostly use RAW for Savage Worlds, and the finale was quite fun to watch. But it cannot be denied that what the player was doing, made the character more capable, more powerful, able to do more, than RAW for Savage Worlds technically said they are supposed to be. Jordan decided, it's the climax, it's the finale, people are watching, this is cool, I'll allow it. But it sure as heck didn't make the PC weaker than normal. Rule-of-cool almost never does, because "being cool" and "being powerful" are often synonymous in the players' minds
But either way -- if you are playing House rules, or playing Rule-of-cool rules -- you are not playing RAW. House rules are literally modifications to rules as written that are played only at your table. And Rule-of-Cool rulings are specific, often temporary, house rules that apply only to a certain situation, only this one time, because it is cool if they do. Neither thing is using RAW.
No, since if you are unaware of a RAW, you are not interpreting it, and you are not deciding whether to abide by it.
If you are a megamind who knows every iota of the rules, and then you choose not to abide by them, then you're playing by RAW I guess.
I was a bit curious and I figured I would do a little bit more digging to see if RAW has that covered. I did not have to dig very far though, as this was in the DMG introduction:
"Inventing, writing, storytelling, improvising, acting, refereeing — every DM handles these roles differently, and you’ll probably enjoy some more than others. It helps to remember that Dungeons & Dragons is a hobby, and being the DM should be fun. Focus on the aspects you enjoy and downplay the rest. For example, if you don’t like creating your own adventures, you can use published ones. You can also lean on the other players to help you with rules mastery and world-building."
If I am reading it right, RAW says that you can downplay RAW, which seems to strongly imply that it is okay to forget about RAW too and improvise on the spot to tell a better story, assuming the GM prefers improvisation and story telling.
I think you make a good case. I could argue that they stop short of saying that you are allowed to unknowingly break rules. Their examples are more own "players can help the DM follow the rules" and "some books are optional". But I think the intent is that you ignore rules if being a rules lawyer is not fun for you. So RAW, non-RAW is not RAW, but RAI, non-RAW is RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Nice deflection you stated its not about weight its about how "There is simply not enough surface area" Uhm well yes there is evidently that doods carrying a ton, there doesnt seem to be a surface area problem
as for effectiveness? at str 12 probably not at all as he would be encumbered, at str 15? prolly be at his limits of what we'd consider free mobility. str 18-20? lol you can this a problem little man?
Your high strength characters don't care that the load might make it so a typical person could barely stand upright holding it all.
There's also a funny photoshop of Shad from Shadeversity holding a crap ton of weapons, it looks goofy but not beyond the realm of possbility, he has a 2 quivers, a halberd, 5 swords, 2 axes, a mace, a crossbow and a shield all stowed on his back and in his belt. than a few more in his hands and one or two under his arms that I wouldn't count for the sake of this since we're talking about having their hands free.
Like yeah its looks goofy but not impossible to carry and your gripe is against someone with 3 weapons a shield, some javelins and a quiver
Hey, you do you. I’m not going to judge you for it. However, given that DMs fill in blanks in the rules or make interpretations all the time, I’m not sure doing something that doesn’t immediately fall under an explicit rule should necessarily get the “rule of cool” label.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How about hard no to gritty hard games?
Rule of cool is up to the GM to decide. Running a cool game is just as valid as running a gritty hard game. Why should you demand that others maintain RAW when you are not following RAW either anyways? Some people just want to have a beer and laughs when they play D&D. Not everyone wants to sign up for a second job keeping track of everything and stare death down the edge of their sword.
And as long as everyone is having fun, that is what RAW wants and intends anyways.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Some DMs can just improvise a completely off-the-wall plane-hopping adventure without a single attack roll. You can debate whether they're even playing 5e anymore, but it can be done.
Hold up. Let’s not. Extreme examples are pointless. They’re anecdotal and not representative of anything. Nobody on the other side is arguing that hard RAW games suck because they don’t let you do things like throwing a grappling hook over a wall since there’s no rule for it either.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I have no idea where you found such a thread, but L6 PCs don't have the tools to throw that dragon 5 feet, let alone millions of miles at many times the speed of light, unless the DM has gone out of their way to provide them. That's not rule of cool, that's the DM providing some sort of homebrew artifact.
Besides, since the answer is zero damage, I'm not sure how cool it is. That same dragon would take a lot more damage being thrown into a rock at roughly 100 times the speed of light than it would into a star. Mind you, at that velocity, you're also throwing it pretty far into the past, so I hope you're prepared for a massive paradox.
Maybe the campaign is ending. Maybe the DM is already planning to throw gods at them at level 8. Either way, it's that DM's problem, not yours. If that's what's fun for them, what do you care? You're not in that game. I mean, could you even identify the continent on which that game is being played? (probably you can make a good guess, but you can't really be sure.) Why does the idea that one group having fun breaking the rules (assuming they even are) mean everyone else has to follow them to the letter?
That's not rule of cool unless I'm missing something, it's a DM badly misinterpreting some mechanics - the entity flinging the dragon into a star is an NPC, using teleport.
It's not RAW that a Nat 20 ability check is an automatic success, but it is a popular house rule, and as we've established, house rules are RAW.
Regardless, it's not rule of cool. Rule of cool is when a PC does something so cool you let it happen. This is the opposite of that - an NPC is violating the rules of the teleport spell (with no indication the DM in question understands this and is house-ruling the changes as they see fit) to make it more powerful than a Wish spell, and all to deal fire damage to a creature immune to fire damage. Even in a world where the teleport spell was house ruled to be as OP as that NPC seems to have access to, and even in a world where Gold Dragons were not immune to relevant damage type - i.e. in a world where all of this had actually been deliberately houseruled - this would not be Rule of Cool, because the NPC is doing all of the work. It's the equivalent of overcoming a battle by Persuading a local warlord to fight it for you (in one check, without needing to work for it or even be good at Persuasion), and then the whole fight happening off-camera. Completely antithetical to the Rule of Cool. If this was a tv show, you'd stop watching it.
Well, lucky you aren't watching then. A show that's too silly and absurd for you might be just the thing for someone else. Some people like Christian Bale Batman; some people like Adam West.
I feel like the terms “RAW” and “Rule of Cool” are both being used pretty loosely in this thread. Makes it near impossible to argue anything in a reasonable manner.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
That seems like a you problem. The other player and the DM like cool stunts. If you want everybody to play a strictly by the rules game, I think you need to find a like-minded group of players.
There are plenty of fun to be had for the GM. It honestly is not that difficult to juice up your monsters with some homebrew on the spot and call the monster by a different name. The GM can allow the monster to react during every creature's turn, treat all their attack rolls and saving throws as rolling 20, have immunity to all conditions, etc. If Tiamat is too tame for the players, God Devourer can do what Tiamat does, have all the effects I mentioned in the previous sentence, and can cast any 9th level spell as a reaction or bonus action without using spell slots.
This is no different from making up arbitrary rules to make the game harder. In fact, homebrewing and beefing up monsters seems to be way more in line with what RAW encourages since it has a whole section devoted to calculating CR to help GMs gauge how difficult their monsters are.
If your players can handle your gritty hard game perfectly fine, a GM running the game should have no issue handling a group of PCs. The difference in scale of power is so cosmically imbalanced in the GM's favor that combat difficulty is not factor on the GM's side. If you can think of rules to make it harder on the PC, you can homebrew monsters and make them more challenging.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Nope. First, the absence of a bonus does not equal a penalty. Second, what you are or are not geared for matters no more nor less than what other players are or are not geared for. Your opinion, and your fun, is worth exactly as much as anyone else’s. If you want the game played differently, get everyone else to come around to your point of view. If you won’t, you have no leg to stand on. If you can’t, then learn to live with it or walk away. Either way, applying stricter limit to your character than others have to abide by is your choice, nobody else’s.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
If you haven't noticed, that's a running gag on this thread.
I acknowledge that tongue-in-cheek sarcasm can make it hard to follow the serious debate on the thread, but I don't know about you, at this point I find the humor more interesting than the topic itself.
I'll see myself out if this gets no likes.
So, I want my physically not all that capable warlock to scale a wall, without suitable magic to help out. In order not to fall, I declare I’ll be using a grappling hook. There are no written rules for using a grappling hook, but my DM feels I should be able to so makes up some stuff. It’s clearly not RAW (even if some people in this thread think it is), but is it Rule of Cool? If yes, I don’t think it’s possible to have a decent game without. If no, then whatever rulesmongery the DM comes up with being Rule of Cool or not is subject to interpretation.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I was a bit curious and I figured I would do a little bit more digging to see if RAW has that covered. I did not have to dig very far though, as this was in the DMG introduction:
"Inventing, writing, storytelling, improvising, acting, refereeing — every DM handles these roles differently, and you’ll probably enjoy some more than others. It helps to remember that Dungeons & Dragons is a hobby, and being the DM should be fun. Focus on the aspects you enjoy and downplay the rest. For example, if you don’t like creating your own adventures, you can use published ones. You can also lean on the other players to help you with rules mastery and world-building."
If I am reading it right, RAW says that you can downplay RAW, which seems to strongly imply that it is okay to forget about RAW too and improvise on the spot to tell a better story, assuming the GM prefers improvisation and story telling.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
That statement, whoever said it, is not false on its face.
By definition, a "House Rule" is a change to the rules-as-written. Even Wikipedia backs me up on this, quote, "House rules are unofficial modifications to official game rules adopted by individual groups of players." Unofficial modifications are not rules-as-written. They are changes to the rules as written (that's what a "modification" is).
After allI if you were following rules-as-written, you'd not need a house rule. By definition, a "House Rule" is a rule that is not normally used in a game, but is a rule played at your gaming table (i.e., in your "house," whether real or virtual). For example, when we played Monopoly as kids, my sister and I (and eventually, all of our friends, too) had a "house rule" that there was a $500 bill in a "pot" in the center of the board, and all taxes and feeds charged would go into the pot. When someone landed on "Free Parking," they got the pot (i.e., at least $500, and sometimes quite a bit more). After the pot was won, the bank put up another $500, and this went on throughout the game. This rule exists nowhere in the rules-as-written for Monopoly. Therefore, it is not RAW. But it was used "in our house," as kids (and eventually, in all the other houses), and therefore, it was a house rule.
This is a key point, and a difference between a "house" rule and a "rule of cool" ruling. House rules are potentially neutral. There are probably just as many house rules that weaken aspects of RAW, as there are that strengthen it. This will depend very strongly on the "house" -- the gaming group and whether they want a "hardcore" experience or a "laid back" experience or what have you.
Rule-of-cool implementations are almost always done (at least any that I have seen) to allow the PCs to do things that are not normally allowed under the rules, and therefore almost always make the PC more powerful, have more abilities, be able to do things, that it doesn't say you can do in the rules. I just got done watching the finale of the Wildcards ETU game, and there was a moment when the GM, Jordan Callarman (who IMO, is the best GM I've ever seen on one of these shows), explains to a player that a rule doesn't quite work the way the player thought, but he says, "You know what, that is such a cool idea, I'm going to allow it." Now, again, Jordan's a great GM, the players are all very good players who mostly use RAW for Savage Worlds, and the finale was quite fun to watch. But it cannot be denied that what the player was doing, made the character more capable, more powerful, able to do more, than RAW for Savage Worlds technically said they are supposed to be. Jordan decided, it's the climax, it's the finale, people are watching, this is cool, I'll allow it. But it sure as heck didn't make the PC weaker than normal. Rule-of-cool almost never does, because "being cool" and "being powerful" are often synonymous in the players' minds
But either way -- if you are playing House rules, or playing Rule-of-cool rules -- you are not playing RAW. House rules are literally modifications to rules as written that are played only at your table. And Rule-of-Cool rulings are specific, often temporary, house rules that apply only to a certain situation, only this one time, because it is cool if they do. Neither thing is using RAW.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think you make a good case. I could argue that they stop short of saying that you are allowed to unknowingly break rules. Their examples are more own "players can help the DM follow the rules" and "some books are optional". But I think the intent is that you ignore rules if being a rules lawyer is not fun for you. So RAW, non-RAW is not RAW, but RAI, non-RAW is RAW.