Reclaiming the DM's Throne

Part 2: How Does That Rule Work Again?

This is the second part of a series of articles regarding the conflict of who is in charge, the rules or the DM. Read the first part.

Sitting at the game table, I find myself asking my players for rules clarifications more often than you might think. I've always had a problem keeping the rules 100 percent straight in a session, even in the early days of 3rd Edition, when I was fresh off the design team and the books had just come out. The problem was, I remembered so many different ideas, different incarnations, different versions, different arguments about various rules, that I couldn't for the life of me figure out what the final rule actually turned out to be. I could tell you what Skip thought about a rule, or give you the kooky idea we rejected right away, or relate how Jonathan felt about an issue and why, but not the actual rule we'd decided on.

Now v. 3.5 has come along, and while not a lot of significant rules changes were made, it's enough to make me question myself even more. (I haven't adopted v. 3.5 fully in my game, but I use some things.)

So basically, I don't try anymore. It's not a tactic that I would always recommend to every DM. In many groups, it's important for the DM to be the most knowledgeable player at the table. This is usually because, if he's not, the players take advantage. In this case, in order for the DM to keep on top of things in his own game, he's really got to know the rules inside and out. Don't let the players interpret a rule. That's your job.

But if your players aren't the kind that will take advantage of you (thank goodness mine aren't), then you don't have to be the rules expert at the table. You've still got to know what you're doing, to be sure, but you can relax a bit and focus on more important things: describing the scene vividly, carrying out the gnoll chieftain's strategy, or checking to make sure that the basilisk down the hall isn't waking up because of all this noise.

See, while the DM is the final arbiter of the rules, in a way that's the least important of your jobs. The rules don't keep the game exciting, you do. They don't set the scene, keep the story going, or evoke the emotions of the players. That's the DM's real job.

I make my players look up a rule if it's in question. If the fighter wants to make an overrun attempt and neither of us can remember some aspect of the rule, the player looks it up, not me. I've got to keep the action moving and the other players interested. I can't stop to look up a lot of rules. Frankly, I'd rather get a rule wrong than let a dispute slow down the game.