Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Matt Colville on adventure length
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9323410" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Precisely. I would never have played <em>early-edition</em> D&D.</p><p></p><p>Most other people feel the same way. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. It should. That doesn't mean that the game that is now published, which should offer support to many different styles, should not support it.</p><p></p><p>But it <em>does</em> mean that this shouldn't be the only or even primary way the game is designed to be played. That's part of why I support well-made <em>but purely DM-opt-in</em> "zero level* rules, and actually <em>good</em> alternative approaches for things like resting and healing (as opposed to 5e's "well you can do X, or you can do <em>not</em> X; you figure it out" approach), and really good encounter-building tools. Because those are the things that <em>actually do</em> empower DMs, as the designers have done their damnedest to make it so whenever the DM does something, it's an informed, intentional choice. Further, when you do this sort of thing, then even when things go badly awry (they always go <em>somewhat</em> awry, it's the "badly" that we can mitigate), the DM is equipped with tools that have proven their ability to work by testing and refinement.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay. My emotions don't work that way. If logic could solve the problem, it wouldn't <em>be</em> a problem in the first place, as one of my previous co-players once said in character.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I generally dislike level drain purely from a design philosophy standpoint, as I believe it creates design holes without need, but I can totally embrace that as a setback. I'd prefer that it not be of the form "and now you can never get back even that lost potential," but frankly if the game has level drain in it I'm not expecting that game to last long enough for it to matter. IME, games run where there's a huge point made of using and enforcing level drain are ones that have a tendency to break up. Whether that's correlation, causation, or coincidence, I've no idea. It's just what I've seen.</p><p></p><p>Limbs are totally fair game. Especially because the adventure to see if you can find a good prosthesis or replacement (or treatment, for <em>wither</em>) could lead to incredibly juicy new story. I might get squicked out depending on the precise process of losing it; a clean cut from a <em>sword of sharpness</em> is no problem, but I get queasy when merely obliquely describing eye horror or limbs being like actually squished in a vise or under a 20-ton rock or whatever. Basically, as long as it isn't too graphic, it's fine. (If you've played BG3, the thing Volo can do to you in Act 1 dances <em>hard</em> on the line of "this makes me ill.")</p><p></p><p>Money is no object. Of course, I usually play Paladins, for whom such a loss is necessarily less of a bother, but as a player I don't care about loss of fungible currency most of the time. <em>Especially</em> in old-school games, where most of what I would spend it on isn't available for purchase anyway.</p><p></p><p>That last one is death with more steps, so I see no difference there. It would be like saying "well, you're <em>technically</em> only falling down a truly, physically bottomless pit, so you're alive, but you'll never be able to do anything ever again." Irrevocable loss of character. Some things can skirt the line on this, like being turned to stone; that's something that makes sense as a quest to fix a thing, a quest that might be pretty awesome to see play out, so there's a higher chance I would stick around until the fix. Of course, that's "higher than 'effectively zero'," so it's not a <em>strong</em> claim, but it's still better, I should think. Given how much I dislike playing first-level characters in most editions and offshoots (4e and 13A being major exceptions), it sorta depends on whether my enjoyment of the overall group dynamic outweighs my reluctance to endure that kind of experience. I've had two groups I would have done that with...but both were 4e groups so it's kind of a moot point.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9323410, member: 6790260"] Precisely. I would never have played [I]early-edition[/I] D&D. Most other people feel the same way. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. It should. That doesn't mean that the game that is now published, which should offer support to many different styles, should not support it. But it [I]does[/I] mean that this shouldn't be the only or even primary way the game is designed to be played. That's part of why I support well-made [I]but purely DM-opt-in[/I] "zero level* rules, and actually [I]good[/I] alternative approaches for things like resting and healing (as opposed to 5e's "well you can do X, or you can do [I]not[/I] X; you figure it out" approach), and really good encounter-building tools. Because those are the things that [I]actually do[/I] empower DMs, as the designers have done their damnedest to make it so whenever the DM does something, it's an informed, intentional choice. Further, when you do this sort of thing, then even when things go badly awry (they always go [I]somewhat[/I] awry, it's the "badly" that we can mitigate), the DM is equipped with tools that have proven their ability to work by testing and refinement. Okay. My emotions don't work that way. If logic could solve the problem, it wouldn't [I]be[/I] a problem in the first place, as one of my previous co-players once said in character. I generally dislike level drain purely from a design philosophy standpoint, as I believe it creates design holes without need, but I can totally embrace that as a setback. I'd prefer that it not be of the form "and now you can never get back even that lost potential," but frankly if the game has level drain in it I'm not expecting that game to last long enough for it to matter. IME, games run where there's a huge point made of using and enforcing level drain are ones that have a tendency to break up. Whether that's correlation, causation, or coincidence, I've no idea. It's just what I've seen. Limbs are totally fair game. Especially because the adventure to see if you can find a good prosthesis or replacement (or treatment, for [I]wither[/I]) could lead to incredibly juicy new story. I might get squicked out depending on the precise process of losing it; a clean cut from a [I]sword of sharpness[/I] is no problem, but I get queasy when merely obliquely describing eye horror or limbs being like actually squished in a vise or under a 20-ton rock or whatever. Basically, as long as it isn't too graphic, it's fine. (If you've played BG3, the thing Volo can do to you in Act 1 dances [I]hard[/I] on the line of "this makes me ill.") Money is no object. Of course, I usually play Paladins, for whom such a loss is necessarily less of a bother, but as a player I don't care about loss of fungible currency most of the time. [I]Especially[/I] in old-school games, where most of what I would spend it on isn't available for purchase anyway. That last one is death with more steps, so I see no difference there. It would be like saying "well, you're [I]technically[/I] only falling down a truly, physically bottomless pit, so you're alive, but you'll never be able to do anything ever again." Irrevocable loss of character. Some things can skirt the line on this, like being turned to stone; that's something that makes sense as a quest to fix a thing, a quest that might be pretty awesome to see play out, so there's a higher chance I would stick around until the fix. Of course, that's "higher than 'effectively zero'," so it's not a [I]strong[/I] claim, but it's still better, I should think. Given how much I dislike playing first-level characters in most editions and offshoots (4e and 13A being major exceptions), it sorta depends on whether my enjoyment of the overall group dynamic outweighs my reluctance to endure that kind of experience. I've had two groups I would have done that with...but both were 4e groups so it's kind of a moot point. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Matt Colville on adventure length
Top