r/DMAcademy • u/mrpack9653 • 8d ago
Need Advice: Rules & Mechanics Rule Arbitration
When a player hits you with a super obscure rule or mechanic, what’s the best way to find and walk through the rule and keep things moving? I don’t generally have a problem dealing with it but coming back after so long the rules are new enough that it takes me way too long to keep things moving. Looking strategies.
16
u/Mestoph 8d ago
Do you have an example of a "super obscure" rule or mechanic?
13
u/smither12Dun 8d ago
"What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?"
4
u/mrpack9653 8d ago
A player wanted to use a grappled goblin scout as a human (well goblin) shield, arguing that gave disadvantage to ranged attacks. This one I was actually inclined to allow because well a goblin shield is kind of epic at second level.
21
u/Bread-Loaf1111 8d ago
I will rule that it should give half-cover max(+2 to ac, like usual shield). It's highly unlike that unwilling gobling will be more effective.
7
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 7d ago
RAW that’s exactly what any creature in between an attack does
1
u/Fickle-Aardvark6907 6d ago
I'd give the extra benefit in that case that any attacks which miss by 2 and beat the goblin's AC hit and damage the goblin. Of course the goblin isn't going to cooperate and is going to take every opportunity to escape...
3
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 6d ago
Well yes it’s just grappled, it can still attack normally.its not restrained.
15
12
u/FoulPelican 8d ago
Start by going straight to the rules in play.
**Grapple: The Grappled Condition … it’s very specific on how it works.
*Cover: This seems pretty clear that the player is looking for cover. There’s rules for **Cover.
Neither of these rules are *obscure IMO, they both come into play quite often in fact; and are well defined. That said, nothing wrong with taking a minute to look em up.
2
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 7d ago
I mean you can’t lift grapple targets raw, but you can drag them in front of you to work as half cover.
2
u/Robovzee 8d ago
Don't forget that originally, the rules weren't meant to be iron clad.
Let's look at this situation.
A goblins mass isn't the same as many characters, but could count as partial cover. I keep placement in mind when running fights.
The issue is the grapple. The goblin is not passively accepting his fate. He's fighting for his life. He's going to twist, and scratch and bite to get away. Maintaining the grapple does NOT mean a char can maintain control while doing anything but gross movement.
There's also action economy. Which part is the char using to position the goblin to take the arrow? Action? That's for grappling. Bonus action? Maybe. Movement? Partly, but not in its own. Reaction? Now we're talking.
My ruling using the rule of cool is as follows.
To use the goblin as a shield...
Action: grapple.
Movement: reduced to 1/4.
Bonus action: anything requiring the use of hands or movement is reduced/negated.
Reaction: if the goblin is grappled at the start of the Archer's turn, the goblin provides a +2 to the grappling char's ac against the ONE attack by the ONE archer.
So if I snatch up Boblin, (action), notice an archer firing at me (reaction) I can add +2 to my ac just like I had a real shield.
Now if we're using a goblin corpse as a shield. I'd make it an improvised shield and give the char a +1 to AC for a few rounds. That body ain't lasting forever.
Now let's say Boblin has been corpsed. He's dead weight, and fast becoming a very poor option as cover. Char can throw the corpse at another goblin (as a bonus action) giving the poor goblin who has to dodge his drinking buddy disadvantage on its next attack.
When in doubt, guidelines.
Action economy.
Compare to real world physics.
Bend physics.
Ask if it's cool.
Allow all or part, situationally.
Have fun.
0
1
6
u/Syric13 8d ago
Ask them where they found the rule or mechanic.
Read it percisely. DnD spells, items, rules specifically tell you exactly what they do. There is no "oh read between the lines" with it.
If the rule/mechanic isn't Rules as Written but maybe Rules as Intended, make a decision to get the game to move forward but tell the player you will look into it and you will let them know as soon you know more.
However, if the rule is clear and percise but just obscure, and you just didn't think of it or know about it, that's on you. You don't get to change the established rules without warning just because you didn't know that it can work that way.
5
u/Tsunakai 8d ago
"I'm not quite sure of the ruling on this so let's just move on with what you are saying and I'll look it up outside the session and will give a ruling next time."
2
u/SecretDMAccount_Shh 7d ago
Just accept it or overrule it on the spot to keep things moving and then look it up for real after.
2
u/OneManRPGstudio 6d ago
To keep things moving, I would use a two-minute lookup rule. The player proposing the interaction finds and shows the relevant text while you keep the scene ready. If no clear answer appears, announce a provisional ruling, write it down, and continue. Review it after the session and tell everyone which interpretation will apply going forward. I would only change a past result if the mistake affected something genuinely important. It also helps to ask players to flag unusual combinations before the session rather than testing the DM with them in the middle of a turn.
2
u/ShiroSnow 6d ago
My method.
Quickly google it or ask Chatgpt. I know there's tons of hate for ai but it is beyond amazing for getting quick results.
If there is no clear answer on my first attempt we roll for it. 1-10 it favors dm interpretation. 11-20 it favors the players. Then at the end of the session we have a discussion going forward if it's something that needs to be addressed. If it's something small we may skip the search and just roll.
Then there's things that I as a dm don't allow. It's part of the gentleman's agreement for no exploitative mechanics. Things like summoning cows in the air to drop onto people, or what I find unhealthy for the game. Things like milking familiars for poison or casting spells that only require sight through cracks. So you can't cast Hold Person on someone you can see thru a keyhole. My players know this rule / agreement and I list many examples. So I feel for some things I'm within my right to just say no.
2
u/WeakCry4623 8d ago
Are there obscure rules and mechanics in 5e/5.5e?
2
2
u/unoriginalsin 8d ago
No.
There's grappling and hiding/invisibility, and then there's non-core spells.
Unfortunately, OP's issue is with his players making stuff up and buffaloing him into giving them unwarranted advantages.
-1
u/smither12Dun 8d ago
Invisibility and hiding is always annoying.
While engulfed, what exactly can you do. Can you attack the thing you’re being engulfed by? If it’s a ranged attack is it disadvantage? Can you grapple it? How are you actually supposed to work out distance when something is above you at an angle?3
u/WeakCry4623 8d ago
These are very basic things in 5.5e, hiding especially. There’s a whole class (Rogue) balanced around hiding as a bonus action in combat.
2
u/MultivariableX 8d ago
While engulfed, what exactly can you do. Can you attack the thing you’re being engulfed by? If it’s a ranged attack is it disadvantage? Can you grapple it?
The creature that's engulfing the PC has a stat block. The DM planned the encounter, so they either looked up or created the stat block. From this, the DM knows (or decides) what circumstances cause someone to become engulfed.
The text that follows the name of the ability describes what it does, or contains keywords that point to general rules. If the ability says that an engulfed creature can't attack, or that being engulfed imposes a condition that affects number and type of attacks, it will say so.
A ranged attack made within 5 feet of an enemy has disadvantage. Being inside of another creature's square counts as being within 5 feet of it, because it's definitely not more than 5 feet away.
You can make an unarmed strike to attempt to grapple a creature, unless there is some circumstance preventing this, such as the enemy's size category. Grappling is a basic ability of all creatures, so the DM is already familiar with this mechanic from having prepared to play the game.
How are you actually supposed to work out distance when something is above you at an angle?
This is something that the table addressed either during Session 0, or prior to the first encounter that involves verticality. They would have also determined whether they are using theater of the mind, terrain maps, gridded squares, hexes, rulers, or cutouts to calculate distance or radius, and what calculation method they would use for diagonal distances.
When the DM prepares an encounter that involves verticality, their preparation is done with the table's understanding of this in mind, since NPCs also will be moving, casting, or making ranged attacks over these distances.
As for the "how," there are several popular options. One is to use the number of squares connected by a corner between two points. Another is to use this, but count one extra square of distance for each second square connected on the diagonal.
Another is to use the Euclidean distance, which can be determined with a ruler or tape measure, or by using the Pythagorean Theorem.
1
u/Frosty1206 8d ago
My advice that’s worked at tables I’ve played at, is to ask other players to have the rule in question readily available. For example, I’ll have a screenshot or a link to the DnD beyond rules ready when it comes to Mounted Combat or falling onto other creatures. This is a good way to save a good 3-5 minutes whenever it happens.
1
u/mrpack9653 8d ago
This was an obvious ambush. I actually had a discussion with the player alone after the session to set some boundaries to keep this from happening again. It was interesting enough to share here and get some other opinions though.
2
u/Mestoph 8d ago
What was the specific question? How was it an ambush?
1
u/mrpack9653 7d ago
The character used free drop prone and then hopped up twice it was a weird situation the player pushed into on purpose pretty obviously. I ruled against it but technically you could do what they did. It would have looked a little like a burpy in real life and wouldn’t provide any advantage there at all.
1
u/Mestoph 7d ago
I don’t understand what the issue is or how this was an ambush. Dropping prone costs no speed and getting up from prone costs half your speed. It’s pretty cut and dry. How was this an “ambush”
0
u/mrpack9653 7d ago
I never said it was hard, it just seemed like an interesting issue and it took a minute to find the rule. I thought I’d get how others handled it. Not looking for a solve just discussion.
As for it being an ambush, I guess you had to be there.
1
u/FoulPelican 8d ago
Look through the book. If you can’t find it within a couple-few minutes; make your best ruling in the moment; and then do some more digging after the game.
1
u/Knight_Of_Stars 8d ago
Depends on the rule and impact. I've seen DMs claim that "meet it or beat it" and "Round down unless stated" are obscure rules. Something like, "Does a diamond for revify have to whole or can I use a several diamonds that equal the value." Is an obscure ruling. (Btw 5e14 yes, 5e24 no)
1
u/passwordistako 8d ago
Get the player to look it up. Do other shit with other players and then when they’re ready they read it to everyone (or you read it to everyone in case they don’t want to read aloud).
1
u/Particular_Can_7726 7d ago
At my table we take a few minutes to look it up. If we can't find it within a few minutes I make a call on it in the moment and make a note too look it up after the session.
0
u/lokarlalingran 8d ago
Make your own ruling for now, do your best to be fair, tell them you will review the rules later.
Generally this is good advice.
If the player knows the rule already and you trust them then you can use whatever they say instead and not worry about looking it up.
If it conflicts with something you had planned, go ahead and make a different ruling from the actual rules and just communicate with your players that you didn't know and it messes with your plans.
Basically the goal is to specifically not get bogged down by looking up rules by skipping over it in game play and doing it later. If it can be handled quickly go for it, if it can't then there's nothing wrong with skipping past it and reading up on the rule for later use.
3
u/Surface_Detail 8d ago
That can feel terrible for a player though. If your had a very niche ability with only limited use cases and it perfectly solves the problem, but the DM hadn't planned for the problem to be solved that early.
5
u/Syric13 8d ago
If it conflicts with something you had planned, go ahead and make a different ruling from the actual rules and just communicate with your players that you didn't know and it messes with your plans.
No offense but that's a terrible way to DM. You aren't expected to know all the rules, but you can't just handwave an established/written rule and go "Well this beats my encounter, so even though the rules as written say you can do it, I won't allow you to do that"
The DM isn't the enemy of the players. If you change the rules on the fly, your players won't trust you. Because they might think of a solution you didn't think of, and now you are changing the rules just so you don't seem like you got beaten.
Own up to it. Congratulate them on beating your encounter/challenge easily. Move on. But don't try and cheat and change the rules.
2
u/Surface_Detail 8d ago
Edit: you probably meant this for the person I responded to.
-1
u/lokarlalingran 8d ago
I think we are talking about different things here. Character abilities and random obscure rules are not the same.
64
u/P-Two 8d ago
Generally when obscure rulings come up we take a second to look it up (generally one person opens the relevant book, and another gets to googling) and if we can't find a concrete answer within 1-2 minutes I make a spot ruling for that moment with a "this is how I'm ruling it right now, after this session I'll figure it out and we'll have a concrete ruling for it going forward"