I want my actions to matter

[innerdude]

Most posters online, like most gamers in real life, think basicaly all the same things about everything.

Of all of the unsubstantiated, baseless assertions ever uttered on the internet, this ranks up there pretty highly.

I walk a different path.

What @Maxperson said above --- There are plenty of people in this world who "walk to the beat of a different drummer" who ultimately, in perfect syncopated rhythm, walk over a cliff.

You're not going to have success discussing issues and finding solutions until you can find the commonalities between what you and your group are doing, and how those things adhere or deviate to what "most people" would consider to be a "mostly successful" tabletop roleplaying campaign.

Sure, point out details of how what you do is "different" and "innovative" versus "the norm." But recognize that normative play styles are a "thing," and that most of the time, rules and playstyles adhere to norms because they're proven over time.

I'm not as much a fan of "trad" / GM-led D&D games as I used to be, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize that it has absolutely held up as a valid, successful mode of TTRPG play for four decades plus, and that some techniques for certain kinds of situational and structural play work better than others.

And of course, If you're dead set on continuing to run your games using your current modus operandi, it's unlikely to reveal anything new to you.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Of all of the unsubstantiated, baseless assertions ever uttered on the internet, this ranks up there pretty highly.



What @Maxperson said above --- There are plenty of people in this world who "walk to the beat of a different drummer" who ultimately, in perfect syncopated rhythm, walk over a cliff.

You're not going to have success discussing issues and finding solutions until you can find the commonalities between what you and your group are doing, and how those things adhere or deviate to what "most people" would consider to be a "mostly successful" tabletop roleplaying campaign.

Sure, point out details of how what you do is "different" and "innovative" versus "the norm." But recognize that normative play styles are a "thing," and that most of the time, rules and playstyles adhere to norms because they're proven over time.

I'm not as much a fan of "trad" / GM-led D&D games as I used to be, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize that it has absolutely held up as a valid, successful mode of TTRPG play for four decades plus, and that some techniques for certain kinds of situational and structural play work better than others.

And of course, If you're dead set on continuing to run your games using your current modus operandi, it's unlikely to reveal anything new to you.

Yeah, I think that thinking everyone here in this thread, and on the broader ENW fora in general, all having one monolithic view is pretty silly. Even if the same can actually be said for one pool of players, assuming the same of everyone here on this site? It shows a willful obstinance and little willingness to engage with what people actually say.

 

[tetrasodium]

Ah PHB.

Going beyond the dmg reasons noted above... Here is why your PHB section is being misapplied to the point of being just wrong as it was applied to the discussion. It's only there to give players a spitball of an idea and by focusing exclusively on just the entry you think fits while omitting the rest of the list you are dramatically underselling the action being taken. You mentioned climb & escape artist with page numbers, the tables for those two are in the spoiler below

Spoiler

• 0 A slope too steep to walk up, or a knotted rope with a wall to brace against.
• 5 A rope with a wall to brace against, or a knotted rope, or a rope affected by the rope trick spell.
• 10 A surface with ledges to hold on to and stand on, such as a very rough wall or a ship’s rigging.
• 15 Any surface with adequate handholds and footholds (natural or artificial), such as a very rough natural rock surface or a tree, or an unknotted rope, or pulling yourself up when dangling by your hands.
• 20 An uneven surface with some narrow handholds and footholds, such as a typical wall in a dungeon or ruins.
  25 A rough surface, such as a natural rock wall or a brick wall.
  25 An overhang or ceiling with handholds but no footholds. — A perfectly smooth, flat, vertical surface cannot be climbed.
  
  
• Ropes Binder’s Use Rope check at +10
• Net, animate rope spell, command plants spell, 20
  • control plants spell, or entangle spell
• Snare spell 23
• Manacles 30 (Psst... this is take 20 with 10 points from skill points & attribute mods)
• Tight space 30
• Masterwork manacles 35
• Grappler Grappler’s grapple check result

If you look at the dc0-15 climb entries you will see that the dungeon wall that you reference is A: not a slope or similar. B: does not have a rope or similar. C: does not have ledges to hold or stand on D: does not have "adequate handholds". What you are talking about is straight up spiderman style wall crawling & given the context of a wall in a dungeon or ruins lets be honest & admit that it's probably climbing over a trap encounter or whatever.

With escape artist checks... you've already failed at something to wind up restrained by manacles (probably badly too). after going through prior events occurred you were tricked captured or otherwise unable/unwilling to resist being put in manacles by someone. We know that they are properly affixed & of at least reasonable quality because they are not spelled out as loose weak rusty or similar. Obviously it should not be trivial to squirm out of the resulting manacles on your wrists. You would be better served with one of the stronger PCs working to break the manacles or chain as breaking an object (phb165/166) is not that tough since someone just needs to deal ten or so points of damage to the hardness 10* manacles before getting caught by guards or similar noticing the noise without needing the taking 20** on a dc20+ strength check

On the DM side of things when it comes to setting the DC those tables you cite are rather meaningless because the DM uses a different method of assigning DCs. The first thing the GM does is decide "who could do [this thing]" & pick an example individual that seems a pretty good match for what they think. Keep in mind that "who could do it" is completely different from "who is trying to do it", the PC might be a mid level whatever, but an awful lot of challenges in the world are intended to be. After that they look at the DCs & pick one they like. That DC may or may not be adjusted up or down as the situation calls for by the GM using bonus types & DM's best friend (+2/-2). If the first attempt fails the players themselves can put their heads together in order to stack the deck by taking additional steps that individually add extra +/-2's to the next check as a result of that teamwork & creative problemsolving.


*basically DR10/GM's call for this but the dmg describes how to use hardness more detail for the GM.
** it's not a big deal if you fail a strength check to break them & need to keep trying till you get it... if you fail a climb check & want to keep trying, that sudden stop after the fail usually makes repeated attempts a problem.

 

[bloodtide]

Of all of the unsubstantiated, baseless assertions ever uttered on the internet, this ranks up there pretty highly.

I mean, what more do you need?

Go ahead and post something you think about RPGs. Lets see how many posters just agree with you. Some how I think I will disagree.

Lets take an "easy" one: I think RPGs should be all about the player doing things , solving things and taking actions....not the imaginary character. When things happen in the game, the player must figure them out. Not the character. The character can have a 100 INT and a +100 to clever ideas, but the player still has to figure out things for real.

What @Maxperson said above --- There are plenty of people in this world who "walk to the beat of a different drummer" who ultimately, in perfect syncopated rhythm, walk over a cliff.

If my choice is Cliff or joining the Collective.....well, bet you can't guess my choice....

Sure, point out details of how what you do is "different" and "innovative" versus "the norm." But recognize that normative play styles are a "thing," and that most of the time, rules and playstyles adhere to norms because they're proven over time.

Only for the people that want the same things and agree with you though.

I want a fast paced game. I give players three seconds to state their actions when needed. If a player does not for any reason, their character stands confused for that time. Or you can leave the game. End of Line.

And of course, If you're dead set on continuing to run your games using your current modus operandi, it's unlikely to reveal anything new to you.

Well, I'm not really looking to change my game and life to be like everyone else. That is not what I'm asking.

Yeah, I think that thinking everyone here in this thread, and on the broader ENW fora in general, all having one monolithic view is pretty silly. Even if the same can actually be said for one pool of players, assuming the same of everyone here on this site? It shows a willful obstinance and little willingness to engage with what people actually say.

Hummm....wonder what would happen if I was to make a 'Do you agree?' type thread? Would everyone have a unique viewpoint and opinion? Or would everyone just agree on the same basics?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Hummm....wonder what would happen if I was to make a 'Do you agree?' type thread? Would everyone have a unique viewpoint and opinion? Or would everyone just agree on the same basics?

Have you read this site? Do you actually pay attention to the things people say?

Like your comments about player skill... you realize there's a whole subsection of games devoted to testing player skill, right? That there are many, many people who like to play that kind of game? Then there are folks like myself who like that kind of game some of the time, and another kind of game at others?

The only thing that you are uniting people around is the idea of either playing with people who you don't like or thinking that players all suck unless they're these perfect little automatons who do exactly what you want. It's not surprising that everyone disagrees with you about that stuff.

But when it comes to games? No, your views are not unique.

 

[Maxperson]

If my choice is Cliff or joining the Collective.....well, bet you can't guess my choice....

You've already joined it. The "collective" eats, breathes and sleeps. Oh, and talks on the internet. I look forward to you giving all of those things up in order to leave the collective.

On a more serious note, you've lost any discussion you enter before you enter it. If you refuse to talk on ground common enough for us to understand what you are saying, what you are saying is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[mamba]

Well, I'm not really looking to change my game

when why did you start this thread? Only to figure out what it means when your players talk about their actions mattering?

 

[pointofyou]

when why did you start this thread? Only to figure out what it means when your players talk about their actions mattering?

Mr "I'd rather walk off a cliff" feeds on attention. Shocking.

 

[aramis erak]

This is close to the heart of the problem: players that played in two casual goof around games and watched some Critical Roll thinking they are D&D experts.


Well, as a Forever DM I mostly only see the problem players.

Then, perhaps, it's time to hang up the GM screen, because if the ratios are that bad for you, the odds are really high that YOU are the problem, not the players.

I've had plenty of bad players in the last 43 years... but never have they been most of the playerbase at any time...

Excepting the one paid gig with a group so toxic it wasn't worth the money.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mr "I'd rather walk off a cliff" feeds on attention. Shocking.

Mod Note:

Can we not make things personal, please?