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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
October Playtest Packet - Magic Items, Updated XP, Monster Traits
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="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6029312" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>I understand one of their core design tenants is "rulings not rules" but this strikes me as needlessly and arbitrarily "rulingsish". I mean, inserting this non-mechanics resolution bit into a core aspect of the game when there is seemingly only one way to handle this - eg; Boots of Elvenkind cancel Stealth disadvantage on antagonistic terrain or cancel advantage on Listen/Perception checks in those contests - is odd. I thought they wanted to marry fluff to mechanics...not remove explicit, hard-coding of mechanics entirely, arbitrarily and especially when there is only one sensible interpretation for how the boots effect the game...allowing for non-proficient DMs to stumble their way forward or misinterpret. This is bad because the boots outline this "implied mechanic" but Listen/Spot are (as was also done in 4e) married into the single Perception and there are no mechanical implications for the Listen-portion (acoustical ramifications) but there are explicit rules for the Spot-portion. So people might be playing all along with no disadvantage on antagonistic terrain...then all of a sudden the boots are given out...and what? They all of a sudden start putting disadvantage in on antagonistic terrain for folks who don't have Boots of Elvenkind and then retrofit that mechanic to all their future games/rulings? It makes no sense and is willfully obfuscatory or rules-light for no clear advantage in handling.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6029312, member: 6696971"] I understand one of their core design tenants is "rulings not rules" but this strikes me as needlessly and arbitrarily "rulingsish". I mean, inserting this non-mechanics resolution bit into a core aspect of the game when there is seemingly only one way to handle this - eg; Boots of Elvenkind cancel Stealth disadvantage on antagonistic terrain or cancel advantage on Listen/Perception checks in those contests - is odd. I thought they wanted to marry fluff to mechanics...not remove explicit, hard-coding of mechanics entirely, arbitrarily and especially when there is only one sensible interpretation for how the boots effect the game...allowing for non-proficient DMs to stumble their way forward or misinterpret. This is bad because the boots outline this "implied mechanic" but Listen/Spot are (as was also done in 4e) married into the single Perception and there are no mechanical implications for the Listen-portion (acoustical ramifications) but there are explicit rules for the Spot-portion. So people might be playing all along with no disadvantage on antagonistic terrain...then all of a sudden the boots are given out...and what? They all of a sudden start putting disadvantage in on antagonistic terrain for folks who don't have Boots of Elvenkind and then retrofit that mechanic to all their future games/rulings? It makes no sense and is willfully obfuscatory or rules-light for no clear advantage in handling. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
October Playtest Packet - Magic Items, Updated XP, Monster Traits
Top