Talk:Rules lawyers

Category? --Anonykota 23:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

hmmm, on one hand I'd say "Roleplaying" since, in a way, it's where you're most likely to run into a rules lawyer. But there are such in all tabletop games. I'd say "game mechanics" could fit. Or just put it under RAGE since that's what Rules Lawyers cause anyway. --Rodwell 05:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Why was faust changed to pact-ee?--99.160.164.162 05:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I disagree with the rules lawyers are a sub-type of munchkin outlook that this page has adopted in the change dated at. 02:06, 12 February 2014‎. --99.160.164.162 05:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay. You wanna talk, fair enough. Rules lawyer is an entirely derogatory term. No one is ever complimented for being a rules lawyer, nor is it reflective of a healthy playstyle. A normal gamer who plays the game and follows the rules isn't a rules lawyer, he or she's just a normal gamer playing a game. If someone mixes up the turn phases in a wargame because you're new, or tries a trick in an RPG that doesn't work because you misinterpreted a rule, a quick, gentle correction is not rules lawyering. It only becomes rules lawyering when you bring the game to a crashing halt, ignoring any and all attempts to just quickly resolve the situation now and sort out the full rules later so that you can whine and moan about what this that or the other page of the rulebook says. There is no such thing as a "good" rules lawyer, because he only becomes a rules lawyer by being an insufferable prick about it. --71.226.98.222 04:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

That isn't to different from what the page says now. The change I got rid of said "Also, it's probably conveniently only a problem if he stands to gain or lose from his rules lawyering, so he's a hypocritical little bitch on top of everything else." It implied that the rules lawyer only did it when it was his perceived benefit in the game. The page linked to munchkins which implied there was some sort of correlation. Munchkin isn't just a miscellaneous derogatory term, it has a meaning (basically a power gamer, but worse because munchkins are willing to cheat, if they think they can get away with it). I could see a munchkin claiming to be a rules lawyer, but I think that the munchkin is misrepresenting himself to help his case. --99.160.164.162 00:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

It is different. That entire "A Wargamer Speaks" section implies that the rules lawyer is just a normal guy with a legitimate grievance who wants to play the game and stop cheating. I'm willing to drop the "hypocrite" bits, but the fact that "rules lawyer" is a derogatory term that does not describe a normal or healthy playstyle precludes any possible defense. Re-wrote it to address your concerns. --71.226.98.222 04:58, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Ever have a DM play Rules Lawyer in favor of a player? My last DM wanted it both ways. Lawyer FOR monsters and FOR players. If I did something in my round, he'd correct me even if what I did was within the rules (i.e., 5 foot steps, free action, round action, full action, pee action, wank action, everything). It was rare I made my own decisions, including choosing Feats and Skills. Gee, D&D has shore changed since I was a kid.

Derka Der (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds unpleasant, what was it like when you were a kid?--99.160.164.162 00:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

When I was a kid we had to walk 5 miles, up hill in a snow storm and a video game was an electronic contraption with LED lights that beeped.

My first encounter with D&D was when I was 17 and in the military. I walked by a group of guys gathered around a bunk in our barracks and they were talking about killing something. It kinda made me look twice. They asked me to try out the game so I rolled a character and he died within 5 minutes. Actually, my first 3 chars died by walking up to a walled city and demanding to enter, after which, I'd be filled with crossbow bolts. My fourth char decided to ask to enter so I could buy food and clothes, so they let me in. He was a Fighter whose only redeeming quality was a 17 Constitution. Otherwise, he was dumb as a bag of dirt and I played him that way since I was new to role playing. I didn't even wear armor until third level but survived because I kept rolling 8's and above when it came time to level. The other players didn't think I'd survive long but I did. So, a dumb Fighter with high HP's, low stats and no armor and I fell in love with my Two-Handed Sword (Great Sword). Them's was the days. Derka Der (talk) 14:05, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

(English is not my first language) Well, I understand how many of you could annoyed by some Rules Lawyers but I have to admit that with the time I became one. Let me told you why. Tl;dr I became it because players/GM were so "munchkin Rules Lawyer" I could block them with their own game. So let's begin 15 years ago, I discover with my friends D&D3. I'm somehow very imaginative and I launched my campaign very soon. We had great fun yeah, but there was always some things that annoyed me as a player and DM. The rogue moving godlike with one acrobatic roll in order to place himself for sneak attacks, aoe spells in the melee, steps that could always move one character out of fight, ... well you see what I mean, the descriptive things that let players/GM getting away easily. I managed to get out of this horror of "I do this by rolling a dice"(or not even) by introducing battle maps. The fights became more interesting and strategic. And I was introduced to "DM, the rules master of I'm gonna explose your ass because I can and it's said in the book it's balanced". I like hard games and I never challenged him to show me how those monsters were created or challenging for our level. The way out in order to avoid rape every game I saw this was to became the rules and play his game like he wanted us to play. I became a Rules Lawyer. Nowadays, I can found some obscur rules saying why and where you use 1,5xStrenght when you use 2 handed-weapons. I could continue with some stories for the defense of the Rules Lawyers but as a player I always side with the GM when I do shit or a player do shit in a game but if that bastard of a GM try to stick a rule out of his ass, you must believe that he must say "Shut up, I'm GM" or I won't let him do this. Example of yolo style rule : Wall of Ice casted on a player, as you can imagine, it build a wall of ice; in his play, you are petrified and can't play until one player come to break the ice. Oh and you take damage too. Well I hope this convince you a little about not all RL are bastards that keeps GM from playing. I like RPG and living adventures, I like surprises, even with a "Shut up, I'm the DM", but I don't like anymore to be ganked by a That Guy that thinks he is the GM so he's right in every way. And yes you could answer easily, "stop playing with thoses players". Many of them are my friends, and introducing new poeple to rpgs are hard. Chika (talk) 14:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)