D&D 5E Legends & Lore 4/21

[Argyle King]

Uhm... yes they are Simple is the opposite of complex. "Work as intended" is a separate thing, although clearly the more complex the game, the higher the chance of something not working as intended, in general.

In the context of rpgs, I'm not convinced it works out that way in general. Games which are described as 'rules-light' aren't always less complex than games which are described as 'rules-heavy.' Likewise, I don't think more complexity in games always leads to more cracks in a system. For example, while I'm sure there are many people who would argue that D&D 3.5 is/was a lighter game than something like BRP, GURPS, or HERO, I do not believe the former has less problems than any of the latter mentioned items.

On the same token, as far as D&D goes, I'd say that 4th Edition is a fairly light game; much lighter than 3.5 or Paizo's Pathfinder product, yet -in play; once the game starts moving forward- I feel (though I'm aware many disagree with me that) it can at times be much more complex to keep track of for some groups than the games I mentioned above.

 

[Fobok]

<...> but overly repetitive mechanics for the sheer sake of simplicity doesn't usually make for a good game IME. You fit the mechanic to the needs of the game, not vice versa.

I don't find that it hurts a game, either. Look at Star Wars D6. It's considered a classic by many, but it uses the same basic mechanic for pretty much everything. (Not to say that it's a perfect game system, but repetitive mechanics didn't hurt the fun of it at all.)

 

[Ichneumon]

This is strange, but I assume d4s, d6s and so on are still in the game, right? Are there rolls for anything that isn't linear 1d20? I like how they are using language that doesn't refer to "checks" anymore (not ostracizing old school players), but overly repetitive mechanics for the sheer sake of simplicity doesn't usually make for a good game IME. You fit the mechanic to the needs of the game, not vice versa.

Going by the latest playtest documents, most non-d20 dice are used to calculate damage for both weapons and spells. A few non-damage uses exist, though.

d4s are used in some spells (e.g. bless, guidance) as a roll booster. They're also used to calculate how many hours it takes an unconscious, stabilized PC to wake up.
d6 is occasionally used to select an effect from a table or when 2-3 possibilities can occur.
d8 is similarly used to d6 as an effect selector in some spells.
d10 is nearly always used for damage, but is used as an effect selector in confusion and teleport.
d12 seems to have no uses outside weapon damage.
d100 is used in teleport.

So aside from the d4's newfound niche as a roll result modifier, almost all non-d20 rolls players make are to calculate damage or select a result from a small list. Teleport's d100 roll just about stands alone as a non-d20 success determiner. I think non-d20 rolls of this sort have a place when PC skill is not a factor (e.g. teleport's success depends entirely on existing circumstances)

 

[JeffB]

Good article. Glad to see them embracing both methods- I am most definitely in the 4E/13th Age camp when it comes to Monster design, stat blocks, and encounter building, but on occasion, I do like to build a more detailed 3E-esque major NPC.

Now what will official adventures look like? I suspect just like what I have described for my own tastes. I hope so anyway.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I learned so much from the Appendices of the original DMG. Even though I never rolled randomly, I used the tables extensively. It made me look intelligent to my players to be able to describe what was on the alchemist's table--even if I didn't really know what half the stuff was. "Uh, it's like a beaker, only triangular."

As it currently look, 5e looks to be relatively lean when it comes to rules, so instead of filling the books with rules, they fill them with content that help a DM create and run adventures/campaigns.

That would be wonderful, IMHO.

Would be slick, fully integrated digital aides available at launch...

Dream big my friend.

d12 seems to have no uses outside weapon damage.

 

[Ichneumon]

I learned so much from the Appendices of the original DMG. Even though I never rolled randomly, I used the tables extensively. It made me look intelligent to my players to be able to describe what was on the alchemist's table--even if I didn't really know what half the stuff was. "Uh, it's like a beaker, only triangular."
That would be wonderful, IMHO.

Dream big my friend.

View attachment 61356

It does show what one of the five classical solids looks like.
Which are, of course: tetrahedron, hexahedron, octahedron, dodecahedron, and d20.

 

[jrowland]

It does show what one of the five classical solids looks like.
Which are, of course: tetrahedron, hexahedron, octahedron, dodecahedron, and d20.

Icosahedron = d20

 

[nomotog]

EDIT: Also, tables are to be built by the DM for specific campaign use. D&D's "official" temperate forest table of monsters might be nice, but each territory in a sandbox game would get their own. And my "Emerald Forest" has a table as part of its stats so I can determine wandering monsters as well as alter populations as the game is played. (So says Snurgly, scourge of the kobolds in a duchy where kobolds no longer exist)

They could include table modifiers in the DMG itself. Something like rules for mixing two tables like forest and hills to make a hilly forest. You can make templates for tables like a hunted template that you can slap on the forest table. Maybe even table modifications can come from including a particular monster. It could be something like if this forest has an orc chieftain in it, then it has more oc encounters and different terrain as the orcs set up forts and watch towers. You could put all that along with the table rules.

 

[Ichneumon]

Icosahedron = d20

Heck, that's awkward to say. No wonder it got changed to d20.

 

[oxybe]

I very much want these random tables. Indeed, I find them significantly more useful in the long term than the stuff you wish they'd put in there instead. I'll give you an example: the Vorheim city kit (which is an excellent book from the author of Lamentations of the Flame Princess) is full of random tables for the city he describes in that handy book, and I get massive use out of those tables. Indeed, the tables enhance the fluff of that city, rather than detracting from it. If my players decide to go off in some random unexpected direction in a city, I can easily and quickly roll what they see and can interact with, and I know (from experience) that whatever comes up will be believable and work well and will likely lead to something very interesting.

The idea that you never want random tables baffles me actually. If you play any kind of sandbox style adventuring rather than railroading, you will at some point want some good tables. You cannot possible prep for everything your players will come up with - they WILL mess with your well laid planning at some point, and unless you want to pause the game a random table is one good option to turn to when that happens, at least for instant inspiration if nothing else.

So yes, for me, bring on the random tables!

i never plan things out so carefully that if the players go left instead of right I call it a night and lose some sleep over it. i prepare things by simply taking notes on player actions, knowing the area the players are in and what is happening in the area. between that and keeping things consistent, little more then that is required as i'm well prepare to react to their actions. that you think the options are "tables" or "railroading" is what baffles me. there is more to preperation then laying down a railroad.

also, there is quite a bit of difference between what you and I are talking about though. namely, that you're talking about a VERY specific st of tables built for a VERY specific purpose: one town. i even said so in the post you quoted "I can see a few random tables being helpful when used sparingly and judiciously" but the page-filling and bad-parenting "random item nature/creator" serves little purpose to me... to me that's just filler.

If i know the campaign setting well enough, and the area the PCs are in well enough, i can probably create a handful of items (magic or otherwise) with a much richer flavor then what is randomly generated as the items i'm making are, quite like the tables in the kit you mentioned, created within the context of the campaign and then place them where appropriate in game when the players do things.

that is the discussions and concepts i'm talking about: actual world-building advice focused on the concept at hand, in to name a few examples "unique items and how to tie them to the campaign world and why one would do that" or "hey, if you know the game world well enough you can probably bull-hokey your way through most unprepared actions the players do".

it might not be useful for you or me as i'm sure you also have quite a few years on either side of the screen accrued, but remember that this is content for the DMG. a DMG should be teaching the reader how to be a better DM as it is the "dungeon master's guide" after all. leave the tables for web enhancements or applications so the people who really want them can get them with little hassle, but let the DMG focus on making better DMs, especially the newbies who just need a nudge or two in the right directions to get them started and excited.