|
Section Z posted:More rules on social interactions just mean more rules a GM will ignore or selectively interpret when you try to take advantage of them rather than being restricted by them, if it's not something they would already enjoy letting the player get away with in D&D or ANY system. A group with a GM that just ignores the rules because they want to railroad the PCs wouldn't benefit from these kinds of rules, true. But any game, regardless of system, with that kind of GM is going to suck. Why not have the rules for people who are going to use them instead of just saying "Well some people are going to be assholes to their players, don't bother"?
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
Having more "rules" for social interaction isnt precisely the request. The DMG should have lots of discussion on what rolls can mean; or, even better, the PHB should tell players what their rolls can accomplish. Instead there's a sort of perfunctory discussion about it. FF SW does an excellent job of giving you both specific and general rules to abjudicate rolls. That system has it's own problems but narrative adjudication isn't one of them. If you've never looked at it, i suggest that you do. I don't need combat, but for politics. A chapter on NPCs and how to navigate mechanical and nonmechanical interactions with them (and how those intersect) would be more useful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
And see I play with a bunch of actors so “less rules to guide specifics of what the roll does mechanically” just doesn’t matter that much to me as a need for a system to have. My reaction to FFGSW having more detail from the dice is “that’s neat,” and it’s something I’ve enjoyed when playing it, but I don’t feel like I need it. As a GM, I feel like I can interpret a dice roll of a failure appropriately for my player knowing what they like and what will suit the narrative moment best, without needing dice to tell me “it’s a failure with advantage” or “it’s a total failure.” It’s nice to have that, but I don’t see it as an inherent failure of a system if it doesn’t exist to the point that some people are insisting “it’s not inherently in the rules and therefore fails at what it sets out to do.” That’s ridiculous. There’s nothing wrong with WANTING that if it’s how you have fun, but there also nothing wrong with saying D&D in its current state serves my role paying needs exactly as I want it to and is very successful at it since my group is having a shitton of fun within the system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:51
|
|
|
Like it’s the equivalent of someone going “this spoon is great for helping me dig holes for my plants” and someone insisting you can’t suggest a spoon is good for digging because it wasn’t designed for that. Sure, but why?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:There’s nothing wrong with WANTING that if it’s how you have fun, but there also nothing wrong with saying D&D in its current state serves my role paying needs exactly as I want it to and is very successful at it since my group is having a shitton of fun within the system. Honest question, how much experience do you have with games that don't have Dungeons & Dragons written on the cover?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
I am admittedly sort of burnt out on "Hey let's see what the big deal about these more roleplay friendly systems are" turning out to be a shitshow for my friends and I wondering if our roleplaying our way through problems in 4th and 5th ed DnD is still doing it wrong. Checking out some GM looking for players, and welp. Back to our DnD where we can jury rig a ritual into a ghost trap for gith spies the module intends to escape because we think it's cool. Instead of a dozen more charts of roleplay options in Edge of the Empire only to result in "But the module says I'm supposed to charge you more than your entire party's bankroll combined even if you succeed on your social noncombat rolls!" "But a few more charts couldn't hurt, right?" is an understandable and just outlook. But if you really mean it about the whole roleplaying your way through problems thing, you can manage without that chart. While, apparently, it's just a waste of paper to anyone too constrained to let players do anything outside of the box with or without a sidebar. That said, totally use a system advertised to support more roleplay options if your group and GM are enthusiastic enough about those options to get the most out of em. But don't let it turn into a case of giving yourself enough rope to hang yourself with by being married to those charts either. Section Z fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 04:55
|
|
|
OutsideAngel posted:Honest question, how much experience do you have with games that don't have Dungeons & Dragons written on the cover? Most significant blocks have been when I GMed a Monster of the Week game for a few weeks, I was in an extended Pathfinder campaign, I have played in several games of Fiasco, and I own a shitton of books that I’ve read a lot of but haven’t played on the table yet. I also have had oneshots of D&D 4e and Encounters during that era, as well as other dabbles in Pathfinder and other D&D editions. And I also played exactly one session of original FATE. Quidthulhu fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:05
|
|
|
Section Z posted:Back to our DnD where we can jury rig a ritual into a ghost trap for gith spies the module intends to escape because we think it's cool. Instead of a dozen more charts of roleplay options in Edge of the Empire only to result in "But the module says I'm supposed to charge you more than your entire party's bankroll combined even if you succeed on your social noncombat rolls! But what if the DM says "No, you can't do that ritual?" They can do that regardless of the system, regardless of the rules if they want to ignore them and force the PCs on a certain path. Why should you worry about that kind of person when designing a game? It doesn't matter what you put down, they'll just make up a reason PCs can't do what they want to if it's not what the DM wants.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Section Z posted:I am admittedly sort of burnt out on "Hey let's see what the big deal about these more roleplay friendly systems are" turning out to be a shitshow for my friends and I wondering if our roleplaying our way through problems in 4th and 5th ed DnD is still doing it wrong. Checking out some GM looking for players, and welp. It's not asking for a few more charts thats not what people are saying. I'm saying I would like to be able to do something and have some control over the game as the player and not just hope the GM throws me a bone or lets my narrative go in a direction I enjoy. Having some codified thing lets me do that. I mean come on dude are you taking the piss, I don't understand what you're bringing up here. Like that the GM can just say 'nope' and ignore the rules no matter what they are? That modules are designed badly? Quidthulhu posted:Like it’s the equivalent of someone going “this spoon is great for helping me dig holes for my plants” and someone insisting you can’t suggest a spoon is good for digging because it wasn’t designed for that. Sure, but why? No, what I'm saying is 'hey I'd really like to dig a hole and I rolled well can I do that?' and the GM replies 'no, this isn't a hole digging game sorry' or alternatively 'hey I failed to dig a hole what happens?' and the GM replies 'nothing'. What I'm asking for in the first place is to be allowed to say as a player 'I got a spoon and I dig the hole'. Cause you dont get to do that in D&D. I mean I'm talking about Edge of the Empire, the game where the basic mechanic is designed to give an improv prompt as to what happens. kingcom fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
I dont know what these "charts" are you speak of in EotE. The core has mostly suggestions for what advantage and triumph do. If you're looking at module specific stuff, DnD is at least as restrictive. Also I said the solution isn't more rules, it's frank training and discussion for new DMs to figure how and when to interpret rules. DnD isnt the game for complex social rules, you're right, but it needs to give new DMs more tools than it does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
I was talking about a discussion thread for actual digging tools not a choice in the game 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:I was talking about a discussion thread for actual digging tools not a choice in the game lol my bad, I misinterpreted that. To rewrite that, it's like someone saying 'this spoon is really great at digging holes!' while someone is sitting there uncomfortably as he watches hundreds of people digging holes with spoons as he has holds a shovel. The original point was: tote up a bags posted:Sorry I should've been more clear. I enjoy combat in D&D, it's a lot of fun. I should've said I am not a super fan of hours upon hours of it if it boils down to rolling dice against enemies' AC over and over. I think D&D does a great job of offering narrative combat options, and what I'm trying to express to my players is that your options in combat are plentiful and can be really narrative. Just keen to get them out of the MMO mentality. That D&D does a great job at offering narrative combat options, and people responded that it doesn't really. Anyway the point is you're basically hoping the GM and the player are on the same page all the time, which kinda isn't true very often. I mean I'm not sure if you answered my question, if I roll well on your big villain, can I make him my long term ally? kingcom fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
kingcom posted:if I roll well on your big villain, can I make him my long term ally? That would depend entirely on your character, what you were trying to achieve, what had happened in the campaign up until that point, the type of story we were playing, the type of stories you liked to play, and a lot of other poo poo I’d take into account as a GM based on the group and the narrative we were creating. I just don’t see how you rulebook that type of moment, personally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:That would depend entirely on your character, what you were trying to achieve, what had happened in the campaign up until that point, the type of story we were playing, the type of stories you liked to play, and a lot of other poo poo I’d take into account as a GM based on the group and the narrative we were creating. I just don’t see how you rulebook that type of moment, personally. Because if the rulebook tells me what kinds of things I get to do if I roll well, both the player AND the GM know what type of game we are playing. And that is what this ultimately boils down to. As someone who is a forever GM I'm yet again game hunting for something I can be a player in and I've been seeing this over and over again. A session 0 can help but it won't stop this from happening like a system that is frank and honest to both the player and GM as to what kind of experiences are going to be happen. kingcom fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
But then you’re locked only into that type of game? Why is it bad to have a system where the narrative possibilities are endless rather than specifically defined? You can’t run a game with murderhobos in FFGSW, the game isn’t designed for it. By that logic I should could call that a weakness in the system, especially if that’s the type of game my party wanted to play. Why is it a weakness for D&D to offer more freedom? That’s the point I’m arguing against.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 05:42
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:But then you’re locked only into that type of game? Why is it bad to have a system where the narrative possibilities are endless rather than specifically defined? You can’t run a game with murderhobos in FFGSW, the game isn’t designed for it. By that logic I should could call that a weakness in the system, especially if that’s the type of game my party wanted to play. Why is it a weakness for D&D to offer more freedom? That’s the point I’m arguing against. If you wanted to go into dungeons and kill dragons, I would absolutely say thats something FFGSW can't do well and you definitely shouldn't play it if thats what you are after. Thats absolutely something you can point against. No system is flawless and I think you're pretty foolish if you think any system isn't. Quidthulhu posted:Why is it a weakness for D&D to offer more freedom? That’s the point I’m arguing against. Because its not freedom if not everyone gets to experience that freedom. What if the player wants the npc to be their long term ally because they think its appropriate and the GM doesnt. How does that play out? Why does the GM have to do the extra work to figure out of thats fair or not. What you are describing as 'freedom', I describe as passing the buck to someone else to solve that problem. Heres the classic problem with no answer. Two adventurers are in a dungeon and they come to a T-Intersection. One player wants to go Left, the other player wants to go Right. Neither will relent. How does this resolve? kingcom fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:But then you’re locked only into that type of game? Why is it bad to have a system where the narrative possibilities are endless rather than specifically defined? You can’t run a game with murderhobos in FFGSW, the game isn’t designed for it. By that logic I should could call that a weakness in the system, especially if that’s the type of game my party wanted to play. Why is it a weakness for D&D to offer more freedom? That’s the point I’m arguing against. The thing is they aren't endless, they're just ill-defined. First, your social skills are still there (along with your exploration skills) but they don't really tell you what they can do or how to interpret the tea-leaves that are your d20 roll. Hypothetically the DM can team up with his players to shape that experience into whatever they want. But, first of all, you can't, for some reason, do that with the combat portion of the game; and any place where your hypothetical omnigame intersects with the immutable combat rules, you're going to have a problem. Second, the game gives you very little guidance about how to cobble the empty spaces into a game you want to play. That's kind of where I'm at here; my compromise would be, give me the tools to create my own social/exploration pillars! Tell DMs how they can use the existing rules to craft the experience they want. I don't really need that; most people in this forum don't need that kind of help because they've been playing D&D since the earth was a molten sponge. But new DMs need that training. "There are no social rules; therefore, you can make any game you want" is really great if you're a game designer with a couple dozen hours on their hands and real bad otherwise. Also it's worth noting social systems in say, EotE, don't really have hard rules on what can happen or what roll results mean. Advantage is just 'a non-success bonus'; triumph is just a thing that deescalates tension, something that radically advances the scene in favor of the players, or a long-term benefit. Those are jumping off points, they are things for players to hang their creativity on. Wishing for something similar from D&D isn't asking for rules, it's asking for an equivalent level of interactivity from the system. "I prefer to freeform, so I'm glad there aren't more detailed rules" is well and good but you can't teach that to a new DM and besides, if you are 'supposed' to freeform why the gently caress do we have all these skills?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
kingcom posted:Heres the classic problem with no answer. Two adventurers are in a dungeon and they come to a T-Intersection. One player wants to go Left, the other player wants to go Right. Neither will relent. How does this resolve? If your players don’t fundamentally understand that D&D is a team game and that digging your heels in means the game doesn’t work, I don’t see how well laid out mechanics are going to solve that problem for you. Ultimately, I don’t disagree with what y’all are saying, but the way my group works with the rules works very well with us and we have a lot of fun telling any kind of story we want. Occasionally we can’t tell the story we want and we go play a different system. None of what y’all are saying to me inherently makes me feel like 5e is the unclear hot mess of ineptitude that you’re insisting it is, but I hope you all find systems that do exactly what you want them to because, as I said before, it doesn’t really sound like any of you guys are have a lot of fun with D&D from the posting you’re making.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 06:57
|
|
|
In cool news it appears we going to get some news about two settings next monday. (Which two is not known right now.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:03
|
|
|
Quidthulhu posted:If your players don’t fundamentally understand that D&D is a team game and that digging your heels in means the game doesn’t work, I don’t see how well laid out mechanics are going to solve that problem for you. Look if you enjoy D&D, more power to you I guess, I can't tell you what is badwrongfun and this isn't about that, you can enjoy the hell out of free form roleplay if you want and if everyones clicking and on the same page, great you're probably having a great time. Honestly this argument is making me miserable. I'm running a dnd 5e game at the moment so I'm not trying to come from a place where I don't play this game but to enjoy myself I've basically completely ripped out the resting mechanics. I'm kind of a forever GM or else I'll never get to see the types of games I'll enjoy unfortunately. For many people, me included, its kind of a miserable experience and it's really soul crushing that D&D is the only thing anyone will ever play because its the first thing people try. Hell I had to fight an uphill battle just to get someone to consider that sometimes some mechanics or narrative guidance to a decision when attached to social system can actually make the experience more enjoyable. Why is it some giant ask to say that I'd like for the game I have to run for the rest of my life to just provide some real basic tools for more interesting narrative consequences, or fail forward mechanics, or something to help GMs see and recognise that there is a lot of interesting design space to work in. That the worst possible result of a roll is 'nothing happens' I would like to play in a game, just once in my life, where I get to have some narrative input and help drive the narrative in some way. Like I said I'm game hunting again at the moment and my favourite guessing game at the moment is whether i'll get play a bard as a warlord, using his voice as an instrument. Out of 5 games I've jumped into, only 1 has allowed 'giving commands and inspiring people' as a valid option for my instrument choice. Like the big reason that D&D gets picked on over others is you either play D&D or you play nothing. There is no other option because D&D has sold itself as 'it doesnt anything you want!' This is straight up not true because as I've just said, the experiences it sells does not work for me, so either I'm lying or the 'freedom' that D&D is selling is not true. kingcom fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:In cool news it appears we going to get some news about two settings next monday. (Which two is not known right now.) I mean if its Eberron I can get excited but idk, I'm going on 'something is coming up eventually' at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
Mearls will never allow them to acknowledge Eberron beyond that UA.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
kingcom posted:I mean if its Eberron I can get excited but idk, I'm going on 'something is coming up eventually' at this point. It's seems to be hinted that it's setting books of some kind. But yeah it's not really exciting until it's known what it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:22
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:It's seems to be hinted that it's setting books of some kind. But yeah it's not really exciting until it's known what it is. Its going to be Greyhawk isnt it 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:26
|
|
|
it's going to be Mystara and Points of Light I would also like a pony
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:27
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:it's going to be Mystara and Points of Light Oh gently caress you're right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 07:33
|
|
|
Mystara + a standalone Hollow World or get off my lawn. (More likely it'll be two new brand new and exciting settings set in the Forgotten RealmsTM with maybe a nod to another setting by having the most overplayed boring part show up two days walk from waterdeep).
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 09:03
|
|
|
Goddamnit I want to see Chaos Beholders, Giant Klingons and Scorrows Bros getting involved in Dragon scams again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 10:47
|
|
|
Sigil and Darksun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 11:21
|
|
|
Sion posted:Sigil and Darksun. It's obviously greyhawk and blackmoor
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 11:45
|
|
|
It’s Magic: The Gathering: The Setting
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 13:05
|
|
|
Hearthstone Realms and PLAYERUNKNOWN’S Black Moor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 14:03
|
|
|
I started to read through this thread in February, having just developed an interest in RPGs and D&D after listening to The Adventure Zone and Dragon Friends, and have finally caught up. I got a group of my friends together, none of whom have played any tabletop RPGs, and we've been very, very slowly going through LMOP (although I'm heavily modifying the story to hopefully make it a little more interesting given what my friends are into). Unfortunately we meet very infrequently due to other life commitments, so I doubt that we'll ever actually finish LMOP, much less do anything else. I just wanted to say, though, that this thread was incredibly helpful to me in figuring out how to get everyone started. None of the players in the game have read the rules or own a PHB, so I created all the characters with their input on what types of things they wanted to be able to do. Reading the criticism of the rules in this thread was really useful and helped me to avoid some of the traps in the system, and has hopefully made me DM in a positive fashion. It seems like everyone has enjoyed our two sessions so far. They even managed to befriend the wolves (although the wolves wouldn't fight with them because I presented them as being very well taken care of and satisfied with their goblins), and I haven't had to lay out my no torturing policy yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 14:09
|
|
|
Giodo! posted:I started to read through this thread in February, having just developed an interest in RPGs and D&D after listening to The Adventure Zone and Dragon Friends, and have finally caught up. I got a group of my friends together, none of whom have played any tabletop RPGs, and we've been very, very slowly going through LMOP (although I'm heavily modifying the story to hopefully make it a little more interesting given what my friends are into). Unfortunately we meet very infrequently due to other life commitments, so I doubt that we'll ever actually finish LMOP, much less do anything else. I just wanted to say, though, that this thread was incredibly helpful to me in figuring out how to get everyone started. None of the players in the game have read the rules or own a PHB, so I created all the characters with their input on what types of things they wanted to be able to do. Reading the criticism of the rules in this thread was really useful and helped me to avoid some of the traps in the system, and has hopefully made me DM in a positive fashion. It seems like everyone has enjoyed our two sessions so far. I really hope you and your friends enjoy yourselves, and its genuinely good to hear my argument starting is doing whats its supposed to and helping people. I really hope it goes well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
I don't want them touching Planescape they would do it bad. Mystara would actually be dope.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
God, I love the lovely 5e Facebook group:quote:I hate alignment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:God, I love the lovely 5e Facebook group: That's some wild stuff there. If every single game he's been in turns into a horror show if alignment is gone, what does that say about the people he games with? What does that say about him?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Hey I'm in a Hoard of the Dragon Queen game, as a player not a DM. I heard people complaining about HotDQ at some point but I don't remember why exactly. Could anyone explain their problems with it (preferably spoiler-free since I am actively playing in it).
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
Glagha posted:Hey I'm in a Hoard of the Dragon Queen game, as a player not a DM. I heard people complaining about HotDQ at some point but I don't remember why exactly. Could anyone explain their problems with it (preferably spoiler-free since I am actively playing in it). The start is a horrible meat grinder that people are mostly destined to fail. Dunno beyond that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
I had to tell someone at the last 5e session I played that "well, I'm chaotic neutral" is not a good justification for anything and an alignment is not a replacement for a character. Alignment can be useful, but it should be at most a category your character fits into rather than the sole descriptor of your character's mindset. They basically neutered alignment in 5e, so the game loses almost nothing if you just leave the box empty on your character sheet. also anyone who plays CN just wants to play a sociopath with no repercussions in a campaign where the DM banned evil alignments
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:30
|
|
