D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[Oofta]

What do you mean mystically? That's a supernaturally charged word. Are psychologists mystics because they can affect the inner workings of your mind?

What about commercials?

What about the deception skill?

There's no physical, concrete, real world explanation to the power. People lie and deceive in the real world. They grapple and wrestle. They cannot force specific actions under any and all circumstances against any and all individuals or creatures.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

You literally do not see the difference between physically grabbing someone and mystically forcing them to choose from specific actions based on nothing other than your desire that they do so?

If you like the style of game that has powers like this that's fine. I just don't see how you can day that something that approximates real world wrestling is exactly the same.

Is there a check to see if a creature is affected by the ability or not?

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

There's no physical, concrete, real world explanation to the power. People lie and deceive in the real world. They grapple and wrestle. They cannot force specific actions under any and all circumstances against any and all individuals or creatures.

Notice that it is perfectly possible to be non-magically frightened. Meaning that their behavior as frightened is compelled behavior just like my example (except being frightened is less of a restriction than being given the option of being frightened or suffering another consequence). Therefore it is possible to non-magically force a particular behavior.

 

[Clint_L]

So, I loved World of Warcraft back then. In fact, I played it in a raiding guild up until just a few years ago. However, I don't like it as a model for a TTRPG.

For me, this just comes down to the age-old game versus story debate. I found that 4e came down much heavier on the game side in ways that were obviously trying to be a TTRPG interpretation of WoW, with combat mechanics being the centre of the game (which is why classes were re-imagined in terms of MMORPG roles, like tank, striker, and so on). Not that you can't still RP in 4e, but the rules of that edition lead the games towards longer combats that put mechanics at the forefront, story optional. This is much like WoW, but WoW is a video game where you don't worry (or have time to worry) about the narrative of why your taunt works even on an opponent who can't understand you, you just worry about using it at the appropriate moment to maintain aggro.

Going back to what 2024 is trying to do with backgrounds, I like that it is leaning towards backgrounds being more logically tied to character abilities, displacing species to a certain extent. That makes narrative sense to me, because I think being good with, say, blacksmithing should have more to do with having a background as a blacksmith than with being a dwarf.

 

[Cadence]

Nevermind

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I answered previously but it the more I see and think about it…

I have not felt a compelling reason to make changes to all of the classes. Some proposed changes seem fun others, less so.

I have complained about the current DMG but so much of my problem is my own overlooking and missing things I have since rediscovered. I don’t like the organization…

I will likely do some piecemeal drop ins from the new books…I will buy adventure anthologies probably.

But I think books of lore and what I anticipate to come is probably a no go. I like classic stuff and a lot of 5e. In my view the old lore loses another tooth with each publication or statement from the designers…so lore will be a very likely pass…


(edited for spelling and typos)

 

[Lanefan]

How do you think the table is supposed to imagine the folk hero finding "a place to hide, rest, or recuperate among other commoners" without talking to them?

And how do you think the table is supposed to imagine the sailor getting free passage aboard a ship without convincing someone to give it to them?

The players and DM will all quickly realize these steps to merely be a go-through-the-motions process, as by RAW the outcome is already predetermined: the PC has to succeed.

Now if the rules were worded differently, so as to imply a chance that these background features don't always work as expected, then going through the RP process each time would be far more valid.

 

[Oofta]

I was going to respond to some of the 4E stuff and then I realized ... I don't give a furry rat's derriere. I'm not playing that version and never will again.

I do care that my game makes narrative sense to me and has certain "feel" to it is the best I can describe it. I want to emulate a world of action and daring do, but I want to keep it to action movie logic unless spells or other supernatural abilities are involved. If there's a barricade on the port we're in, I don't want t just declare as a player that it's okay because I know somebody. I don't want to walk up to a random serf and say "Hello fellow commoner, the sheriff is looking for us so you need to hide me in your barn" and have it automatically succeed with no question. When I play, the only thing I want to control is my PC, which means I don't introduce anything into play at the table other than what my character says and does.

 

[soviet]

The players and DM will all quickly realize these steps to merely be a go-through-the-motions process, as by RAW the outcome is already predetermined: the PC has to succeed.

Now if the rules were worded differently, so as to imply a chance that these background features don't always work as expected, then going through the RP process each time would be far more valid.

I suggest to you that there are lots of parts of the game where you play things out even when RAW the outcome isn't in question. Travel, perhaps, or conversation, or exploring a ruined house that isn't actually haunted. Some people say that the best parts of an RPG are when no-one even picks up the dice. It's only 'merely going through the motions' if the group makes it so.

Also, the rules say that these abilities work, but they don't say there are never any complications. Sometimes the only available space for the folk hero to hide might be in the leaky barn, or in the stable with the easily-spooked horses. Sometimes the townsfolk might expect the folk hero to try to heal cousin Mary who has a sickness, or to go and sort out the cattle rustlers that have been operating down to the east. You can honour the spirit of the abilities as written and grant the core success while still creating new adventure hooks and causes for interaction.

 

[Hussar]

I found that 4e came down much heavier on the game side in ways that were obviously trying to be a TTRPG interpretation of WoW, with combat mechanics being the centre of the game (which is why classes were re-imagined in terms of MMORPG roles, like tank, striker, and so on).

2007 called.

Sheesh. A grand total of FOUR martial powers, spread across different classes, could compel a target like Come and Get it. FOUR. Out of several HUNDRED powers.

But, apparently, somewhere around 1% of the game borrows from WOW and that's enough to be "much heavier on the game side in ways that were obviousoy trying to be a TTRPG interpretation of WOW"? Give me a break. The fact that you actually CAN'T do a 4e real time video game and still be true to the mechanics shows just how far wrong you are in this.

1%. That's all it took apparently. 1% is all it takes to make D&D into a tabletop video game. Who knew? Never minding that things like Come and Get It, ARE IN 5e.