Quote:
Originally Posted by Daigoro
Just as an off-the-wall suggestion for the rules arguments issue- what about borrowing the "player challenge" rule from tennis? If you don't know it, a player can challenge a line call (i.e. was it in or out?) and the video judge is referred to. The players have unlimited challenges, but are only allowed 3 wrong challenges.
|
It's an interesting suggestion, but the problem is that it assumes there is a clear right or wrong based on objective evidence. In tennis, either the ball touches the line or it doesn't, and the video can show that. In RPGs, at least one and maybe both of those assumptions are false. First, aside from clerical errors like misreading a table, there isn't usually a clear right or wrong. Second, there's not objective evidence: the GM needs to interpret the situation. The rules lawyer metaphor is actually pretty apt, because the better parallel is a judge who needs to decide which rules apply to the situation, and that's an inherently subjective process even with objective guidance like case law, Congressional testimony, etc.
The other issue is that a single challenge can potentially take a huge chunk of time as players flip through dozens of rulebooks trying to remember that one sentence that the rules lawyer is certain supports his or her. While some groups may enjoy that, the vast majority of players don't, and would far prefer to spend their time moving on with the adventure. When you think about a rules challenge, it's helpful to use the concept of people-minutes to think about the burden of the challenge. Looking up a rule doesn't just cost five minutes--it costs five minutes times the number of people who have to wait. In a group of 5 people, a rules challenge gives one person 5 minutes of showboating while the others waste a collective 20 minutes. Compare that with a scenario in which the group moves on immediately and after stewing for a few minutes the rules lawyer gets back into enjoying the game. Now it's 2 minutes of time lost to disappointed stewing vs 23 minutes of collective enjoyment. That's a massive swing.