The RAW debate nonsense I like makes the game unplayable. It’s what I argue online for. Though I suppose people probably debate RAW while playing and just don’t actually play that way.
I’ll admit, I’m coming from a very heartfelt and argumentative place. For instance, my brother and his friends complained that Warhammer 40k 2nd edition ruined the game because they made the rules clearer. It upended the whole dynamic by eliminating all the arguing.
As a DM, I use moments like this as a way to let the players help craft house rules; this is the flavor for our game and it just feels like DnD that way.
The RAW debate nonsense I like makes the game unplayable. It’s what I argue online for. Though I suppose people probably debate RAW while playing and just don’t actually play that way.
I’ll admit, I’m coming from a very heartfelt and argumentative place. For instance, my brother and his friends complained that Warhammer 40k 2nd edition ruined the game because they made the rules clearer. It upended the whole dynamic by eliminating all the arguing.
As a DM, I use moments like this as a way to let the players help craft house rules; this is the flavor for our game and it just feels like DnD that way.
BrikWars has a rule where if you disagree on the rules, you just roll to see who’s right.
I like this. That has “Roll for Shoes” energy behind it.