Opt-in or Opt-out?

[Olgar Shiverstone]

This is a rather fundamental design quandary. If the basic design of 5E is modular, should the basic assumption be you have to "opt-in" to select modular components, or "opt-out" to deliberately delete modules?

D&D has historically been a mix, but mostly "opt-out", especially with 4E's "everything is core" philosophy. Some of the more basic starting points discussed on these boards (four basic races, four basic class roles) focus more on an "opt-in" approach.

What do you think? I'm generally of the "opt-in" opinion -- let me make most of the decisions, and don't automatically sign me up for things (Google & Facebook, I'm looking at you ). But then I'm not hard-over, either.

Edit: Another way to think of this -- should you be have to add or subtract a module if you want (or don't want) to use it in play?

 

[Storminator]

I like Opt-in. I think it's easier to think about adding things and how they would work together than it is to think about removing things and figuring out who misses them.

PS

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Opt-in should be the rule, I believe.

Cheers,

 

[keterys]

Almost has to be opt-in for their stated design goals.

 

[kitsune9]

Opt-in for me.

 

[BluSponge]

It really comes down to the monster stat-block, doesn't it?

But yeah, I'm generally in favor of the opt-in.

Tom

 

[nnms]

If it's anything other than a clear opt-in, then they won't repair the rift with alienated players. If the default is 4E, and then you opt out of stuff to make it into a different play experience, then they probably won't attract many more players than 4E already does.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Opt-in.

If the base game is going to draw in new players and please old geezers like me, it needs to be simple and old-school in its approach, with more toppings added on as you go.

When one orders pizza, one does not start with a supreme and remove toppings to get a nice pepperoni pie. Software companies that offer "lite" versions of their packages don't make you order the $2000 version and deselect install options to get down to a the free version. DELL does not offer you a $9000 ALIENWARE gaming rig you have to strip down until you get a Dimension 8000 with an i3, four gigs of RAM, IGP and a 500gb HD.

Opt-in. That's the way.

 

[Li Shenron]

This is a rather fundamental design quandary. If the basic design of 5E is modular, should the basic assumption be you have to "opt-in" to select modular components, or "opt-out" to deliberately delete modules?

D&D has historically been a mix, but mostly "opt-out", especially with 4E's "everything is core" philosophy. Some of the more basic starting points discussed on these boards (four basic races, four basic class roles) focus more on an "opt-in" approach.

What do you think?

It should definitely be opt-in.

Ruling something out very often puts the DM in a bad light, there is always players immediately thinking that it's DM's fault not being able to make the rules work as-is.

Also, it should be easier for designers, to design add-ons rather than add-offs. You know like, add one more brick to the house and in the worst case the extra brick falls off, take away any one brick and you don't know what else may fall down

 

[Desdichado]

I prefer opt-in.

But I also think the basic 4x4 model is a big mistake. Four classes and four races with everything else opt-in (i.e., spend more money before you can use it) would feel like a very impoverished, "incomplete" experience to me.

Rather, I think the opt-in is going to be important if we're talking about significant playstyle alternative ways of playing the game being inherent in the design. That means rules modules that are going to have to be largely incompatible with each other, I'd presume, which makes opt-in much better than opt-out.