D&D 5E So 5th edition is coming soon

Jhaelen

First Post
I think Karinsdad hit the nail. 1 enounter per day, or 20, should be supported by the game.
I disagree. Imho, the only thing they shouldn't have done is to link any rules to specific periods of time.

E.g. replace every instance of 'day' with 'scene' and you can have any number of encounters per day. A scene could cover several days or just a tiny fraction of a day.

It's just like the length of an encounter or a short rest doesn't always need to be defined as 5 minutes.

Actually, DMG2 makes several suggestions how to 'reinterpret' periods of time to support 'unusual' situations, like having a long string of battles without any pause or never having more than one encounter per day.

The rules can be as flexible as you want them to.

There are other things that are more limiting than they'd have to be:
E.g. movement, distances, etc. all use 'squares' as a unit. There's no rule in the game that requires the definition 1 square = 5 feet. So, if you don't like it, it's easy to go ahead and decide that 1 square can be any distance you like.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

TwoSix

Master of the One True Way
First, I don't have to justify it IC. You seem to be really hung up on that. Players justifying the actions of their PCs. That really is a form of the DM trying to take control for something he doesn't understand. Don't worry about that.

Yea, I'm sorry, but that just doesn't fly. I don't demand an explanation for actions. Most things characters do make sense. If I can't see why somebody did something, I'll simply ask for clarification.

I mean, we're playing a TTRPG. I only have a few sentences at best to give the player a sense of what's going on. If I don't know what the character is doing or why he's doing it, how can I make the game come alive for the player?

I mean, as a DM, I don't know what's in the well either. Nothing in the campaign world has any reality until it's been shared between the players and myself.

Second, if I felt like justifying it, it's pretty simple. It's a pit trap (or a well or whatever) into water. There's a chance that one or more other creatures fell into it sometime since it was built. OOC, it's a either a trap or an NPC source of water that the DM put into the encounter just last night when prepping the game. IC, it's potentially a whole lot more, an object that might have been there for decades with a history. If creatures have ever fell into it, then there's a chance that there is treasure, a key, gems, or all kinds of things at the bottom. Or even nothing.

So saying:

"I'm curious about what's in the bottom of the well, since monsters may have dropped something in. I'm going to dive down, can I use an Arcana check to allow myself to breathe underwater for a few minutes?"

is infringing on your rights as a player as opposed to:

"Wait here. I'm drinking my water breathing potion and diving down this well."?

I don't limit my gaming exploration to 2 dimensional grids. My PCs look up at ceilings, look behind doors, check out shafts and potential exits.

I play explorers, not just combat monsters (well, they are combat monsters too, but that's not the only thing they are).

You seem to be extrapolating from a narrative driven approach to "All we do is fight all the time." None of this preparation or exploration is denied to you in a 4e game. All you have to to do is discuss it with the DM. I just can't see why that's so hard to accept.

You really should try to get over this player justification thing. It's a mental block to other possibilities and other ways to have fun. Players have different amounts of experience playing the game, different mental abilities, and different motivations for playing. You don't need to know what the player (or the PC) is thinking, only what the PC is doing, unless of course there is a magical way for NPCs to read the PCs mind or some such, or if the PC is attempting to Bluff, then the player should tell you that if you cannot figure it out on your own.

I started playing in 1990. I cut my teeth on 2e, which emphasized that story and background were more important elements to the game then dungeon crawling. So maybe my disdain for this playstyle comes from my background.
And I've DMed enough (and even read DMG2!) to get that people play differently, thanks. :)

I've also seen a lot of players pipe up OOC in game with what their PC is thinking as well. Personally, I'm not too keen on that. I'm not reading a book. My PC shouldn't know what his PC is thinking and neither should I. It will unduly influence my thought processes and hence, my PC. If his PC tells me what he is thinking IC, great. Not OOC.
As a player, I explain what I'm doing all the time. Usually IC, but occasionally OOC if the situation requires it. Again, probably good we live 2500 miles apart and can't accidently play in the same game. :)

But for me, roleplaying is best when everyone doesn't know what everyone else is thinking. Then, the game has mystery and unexpected things can happen. Nothing wrong with the PCs saying what's on their minds, but IC (where possibly, NPCs can overhear them or at least know that they are whispering), not OOC. I've seen a lot of games where the players discuss combat tactics OOC quite a bit as well and I'm not too keen on that either. A little bit, no problem. But, players and DMs should let each player play his or her own PC the way he or she wants without the dictionary of OOC advice (unless of course the player is a novice, then the other players should sometimes offer advice, but they should be careful not to overdo it).

No, no, I oppose any sort of mystery or suspense or attempts for characters to deviate from my story! How dare they! :)

This is pretty circular at this point, and I just realized I'm debating an issue that's been around for years.

My games are narrative driven. The campaign world only loosely exists outside of the player's perceptions. I don't put in secret doors or buried loot with no rhyme or reason. (Well, sometimes I do it to reward characters for being on their toes with looking around.) I will change the world on the fly to suit character's motivations. If exploring wells is super-important to the character, if exploring in general is important to the character, then you better believe it'll become important in the game. We shape the story together.

But your job as a player is to play a character. If you like to kill stuff, we'll hack-and-slash. If you like powergame and build cool characters, I'll throw tough stuff at you so you know you did well. If you just like to sit back and relax, that's awesome, just know one interesting thing about your character so at least we have a hook. Not hard stuff. But what is hiding from the DM and other players going to do to make the game better?
 

MrMyth

First Post
I want the ability as a player to sometimes have the option to control this situation to some extent. If I have a Potion of Water Breathing, I can go down into the water and explore without worrying about the pesky Endurance checks.

Without the option of such a potion, I'm stuck with a bunch of crap like:

1) Get group consensus that they want to allow the Fighter to split from the party (and hope the DM isn't one of those who bought into the whole "never split the party and punish players for trying it" schtick).

2) Get the party Wizard to cast Water Breathing on you via ritual. Ok, first I have to convince him, or possibly even negotiate something with him to get him to do so. Then, it takes 10 minute of in game time to cast the ritual.

3) The Fighter could even be in a situation where getting back is difficult, so he wants to explore first, then head back and he cannot do so because the Wizard is needed to cast the ritual.

Just as a note, a Scroll of Water Breathing is a single-use consumable that lets anyone cast Water Breathing. That's the entire point of ritual scrolls - anyone can use them, they are consumables that allow a single casting of the ritual without actual Ritual Training. You pay your 815 gp (a tad more than the 750 gp of a 3.5 Potion of Water Breathing, though admittedly the economies of each system scale differently). And the Fighter can go exploring off on his own - he might still have to convince the group to let him go, but that is really tied to party and DM, not edition or even system.

Now, I'm sure some of your concerns still apply - the casting time remains an obstacle to doing so quite as casually. But 10 minutes isn't the end of the world, especially if the group is taking any sort of short rest, which already represents an investment of half that time already.

Anyway, not trying to dismiss your concerns at all! But did want to mention that consumables to do some of these effects exist. That's what ritual scrolls are. And other spells and utilities can be occasionally found in the form of Wands and other magic items.

It doesn't solve the dilemma entirely, but depending on how you handle item distribution and loot, some solutions are there to an extent already.
 

I think the reasonable way to deal with all of this is pretty simple. Create an item for whatever rituals or powers it is felt should be allowed as instant effects. Basically make crafting them possible but needing special ingredients etc (uncommon rarity). Each such item captures the effect it is charged with, can hold one charge, and then needs to be recharged (either by ritual casting or use of power).

Now, as non-consumable items these things aren't going to be super cheap, but you can certainly buy them (each version would exist at whatever level the creator was or whatever level he bothered to pay for and can store stuff of up to that same level). So you could have a 'Scroll of Storing Level 5 Wizard Daily Power' that can store level 1 or 5 wizard daily attack powers and gets charged by putting one in. You could have a Feather of Feather Falling that can store only that one utility, and (as a consumable) a Potion of Water Breathing that is charged via casting the ritual. I'm not at all against more options being in the game.

OTOH I think the DM should be in this process. The players decide to make or acquire some ways to 'be prepared', that's fine, but the available options still should fit in with the DM's planning and he gets to decide what the menu of options is.
 

KarinsDad

Adventurer
Yea, I'm sorry, but that just doesn't fly. I don't demand an explanation for actions. Most things characters do make sense. If I can't see why somebody did something, I'll simply ask for clarification.

No doubt. There is always the possibility of mis-communication between the DM and the player that might need clarification.

But using the same example here, you don't understand why a PC would want to investigate a well or pit that they just fell into?

I mean, we're playing a TTRPG. I only have a few sentences at best to give the player a sense of what's going on. If I don't know what the character is doing or why he's doing it, how can I make the game come alive for the player?

Well, you should always know the the PC is doing because the player cannot have his PC do anything without saying it out loud.

Why the PC is doing what he is doing?

It's almost as if you need a reason for your DM decision making process here.

If I know that the player is looking for treasure at the bottom of the well, then I can decide to put it in or not.

If I know that the player is looking for an exit at the bottom of the well, then I can decide to put it in or not.

If I know that the player is looking for a dead body at the bottom of the well, then I can decide to put it in or not.

If a player tells me that he is searching the well, I immediately decide what it is in there: nothing, a treasure, dead bodies, rats, an underwater tunnel leading away, etc.

I don't limit myself to what the player was hoping to find, I'm the DM. I decide. The moment a PC interacts with anything in my game world, I immediately flesh it out if I haven't previously done so.

That way, the player is surprised.

Fighter: "Gee. I was expecting to find some dead orcs down here in the water, but I found a tunnel leading off into the distance. Cool."

When the DM allows the player to drive instead of driving himself, then the player isn't surprised. The DM is merely either reinforcing or not reinforcing the players expectations.

I mean, as a DM, I don't know what's in the well either. Nothing in the campaign world has any reality until it's been shared between the players and myself.

PRECISELY. You don't know as DM. The moment the player declares what he is having his PC do is the moment you decide what is in the well.

You don't NEED the player to tell you what he expects to find in the well, you can instead tell the player what his PC finds in the well. It will be a total surprise to the player that way.

Since it is a shared story, sometimes the player finds the dead orcs in the well that he expected to find because the recent storyline is about orcs. Cool. His expectations were met in that case.

But you as DM do not need to know his expectations in order to give him something cool or interesting to find.

So saying:

"I'm curious about what's in the bottom of the well, since monsters may have dropped something in. I'm going to dive down, can I use an Arcana check to allow myself to breathe underwater for a few minutes?"

is infringing on your rights as a player as opposed to:

"Wait here. I'm drinking my water breathing potion and diving down this well."?

Prefering me to do the former and not liking it if I do the latter IS infringing on my rights. Seriously. What gives the DM the right to judge how I play my PC? Why should the DM be the arbitrator of bad/wrong fun?

Especially since the former method here is OOC. The former is a backhanded OOC attempt to influence the DM into giving the PC a bennie. By putting the idea of what he is searching for, the player is attempting to OOC change the scenario by putting an idea into the mind of the DM and it might often work if the DM has not fleshed out this part of his adventure. The latter is roleplaying in character. There is no OOC influence in the latter case, it's the player merely roleplaying his PC's IC actions.

Personally, I prefer roleplaying my PC.


Also, I would never as a DM allow a PC to use an Arcana check to gain a new magical ability. It's one thing to bend RAW, it's another to break it up into tiny pieces and stomp on it.

Arcana is for interacting with magic that is already there (detecting it or learning from it), not for creating new magic on the fly.

By original RAW, the Arcana skill doesn't even allow for the influencing or modifying of magic. But, WotC has put a bunch of options to do so for Skill checks in some of their products to push the envelope on it. Technically, influencing or modifying magic with an Arcana skill is limited to specific magic that the DM indicates can be affected by Arcana. But it shouldn't be for every magical item or effect, otherwise the skill itself should have that property.

But as a DM, I wouldn't allow a PC to use Arcana to create new magic and breathe underwater anymore than I would allow him to use Acrobatics to do a normal climb (there is already a skill for that). I would on occasion allow Acrobatics to swing from a lower elevation to a higher one via a pole, but not to just climb up a wall.

You seem to be extrapolating from a narrative driven approach to "All we do is fight all the time." None of this preparation or exploration is denied to you in a 4e game. All you have to to do is discuss it with the DM. I just can't see why that's so hard to accept.

Why should I have a discussion with the DM as to why I want my PC to go search a well? Why is it so hard to accept that I just want my PC to go do something without a discussion, especially a discussion by committee by the entire group of players, ahead of time?

If there is a metal grate in the way underwater so that my PC cannot explore too far, so be it.

Are you as DM going to on the fly remove the metal grate that you had set up under the water because I explain to you that I am looking for the Princess' comb and you as DM never thought of that? Are you going to change your scenario on the fly from what you had planned to something brand new?

As DM, I know that the comb is on the other side of the canyon. I don't need to remove the grate that I put there. If the player wants to still search for the comb beyond the grate, he will get out some tools and do so.

There is no reason to on the fly remove the grate because the player is expecting to find something in the well. Yeah, once in a blue moon the DM will on the fly think of a really cool idea and he'll just throw it in, but as a general rule, why not just have a consistent campaign world?

My games are narrative driven. The campaign world only loosely exists outside of the player's perceptions. I don't put in secret doors or buried loot with no rhyme or reason.

Precisely. But there is a reason for everything in the game, not just secret doors and buried loot. It all has a rhyme and reason.

There is a pit trap with water here. Why? Is it just for water? Is it to trap enemies? It exists for a reason. It takes a lot of effort to dig a pit trap. It might only be a trap, or it only might be to obtain water, or it might be both, or it might be more.

If you as DM tell me it's there, you have given me a reason to go explore it. By definition.

I will change the world on the fly to suit character's motivations. If exploring wells is super-important to the character, if exploring in general is important to the character, then you better believe it'll become important in the game. We shape the story together.

And this is where we differ. I will change the world to suit the character's major motivations, but not the little things (as a general rule). When he goes to check out the well, if I had something there before, it doesn't change. If I never thought to put something there, I'll decide what's there and stick with it, regardless of the player's expectations of what might be there.

The game feels more real if it is solid and concrete, not if it is malleable.

And trust me, sometimes when a DM starts mucking with his plans on the fly without good reason, his more intuitive players are going to pick up on it. When the DM has reasons for what is in his game world and how it all fits together ahead of time, the world feels cohesive. He doesn't need to flesh out every detail, but he should try to be as consistent as possible.

When the DM mucks around with it on the fly, he starts making mistakes and forgetting stuff, and the enviroment feels out of whack.

Player One: "Wasn't there a corridor here a while back?"
Player Two: "Yeah, we came down it, took a left, and then three rights. We should be back at it.
DM: "Err, ah, oh yeah, there was, but ermm, you actually traveled further down the third corridor than you wrote on your map."

Nothing wrong with fleshing out what the DM has not already placed into the scenario. DMs have to do that. But, it can become jarring to the more intuitive players when the DM starts modifying what he has already placed in the scenario on the fly. Usually, the DM puts things into his game for a reason, but he might not remember all of those reasons during the game. If he doesn't change things on the fly, he doesn't screw up a reason that he thought of earlier, but just forgot.

But your job as a player is to play a character. If you like to kill stuff, we'll hack-and-slash. If you like powergame and build cool characters, I'll throw tough stuff at you so you know you did well. If you just like to sit back and relax, that's awesome, just know one interesting thing about your character so at least we have a hook. Not hard stuff. But what is hiding from the DM and other players going to do to make the game better?

You are acting as if I as a player am hiding the big stuff. My PC will have a background and over the course of the game, I will flesh out my PC's thoughts and ideas about over the big stuff. It won't be an immediate process, it will take months or years of real time to flesh it all out until I stop playing that PC. And the DM will be aware of a lot of my ideas there because it will come out in game, both OOC and IC.

But, we are talking the small stuff here. The "don't sweat it" stuff.

I don't understand why you would need or want to know every small thing that the players are thinking about their PCs if you cannot figure it out on your own. As DM, there is no mystery for you that way. As players, when they tell the DM everything they are thinking about their PCs, there's less chances for the DM to do strange and unusual things because the DM is revolving his game about the player's minor thought processes.

The DM should be thinking about revolving some portion of the game around the PC's major thought processes. Not why a player wants to search a well.

Pick what's in the well and don't worry about why the player is having his PC search it.

There's still a ton of shared story without the DMing knowing every little thing going through a player's head and the game will be more imaginative if the DM creates on the fly game elements that the player is not expecting as opposed to ones the player is expecting.

There's no doubt. If the player attempts to do something that is way off in left field, then the DM should ask for clarification because there's probably a communication issue. But if the player says his PC is going to dive down into the well to go searching (which is a fairly typical thing for a PC to do), why do you need to ask him about this? I seriously don't get that.
 

TwoSix

Master of the One True Way
There's no doubt. If the player attempts to do something that is way off in left field, then the DM should ask for clarification because there's probably a communication issue. But if the player says his PC is going to dive down into the well to go searching (which is a fairly typical thing for a PC to do), why do you need to ask him about this? I seriously don't get that.

I think that's an issue. I feel like a character diving into a well other than the fact "it's there" is out of left field.
 

KarinsDad

Adventurer
I think that's an issue. I feel like a character diving into a well other than the fact "it's there" is out of left field.

Well, we were talking about the PC diving into a well that he already fell into, not diving into a well out of the blue.

The former isn't exactly out in left field. The latter, sure.
 

TwoSix

Master of the One True Way
Well, we were talking about the PC diving into a well that he already fell into, not diving into a well out of the blue.

The former isn't exactly out in left field. The latter, sure.

Well, that does make a lot more sense. Now I'm not going to put the player in front of the tribunal to make a reckoning of his actions. :)

Hopefully he has a good Endurance score to hold his breath while exploring!
 

KarinsDad

Adventurer
Just as a note, a Scroll of Water Breathing is a single-use consumable that lets anyone cast Water Breathing. That's the entire point of ritual scrolls - anyone can use them, they are consumables that allow a single casting of the ritual without actual Ritual Training. You pay your 815 gp (a tad more than the 750 gp of a 3.5 Potion of Water Breathing, though admittedly the economies of each system scale differently). And the Fighter can go exploring off on his own - he might still have to convince the group to let him go, but that is really tied to party and DM, not edition or even system.

Now, I'm sure some of your concerns still apply - the casting time remains an obstacle to doing so quite as casually. But 10 minutes isn't the end of the world, especially if the group is taking any sort of short rest, which already represents an investment of half that time already.

Anyway, not trying to dismiss your concerns at all! But did want to mention that consumables to do some of these effects exist. That's what ritual scrolls are. And other spells and utilities can be occasionally found in the form of Wands and other magic items.

It doesn't solve the dilemma entirely, but depending on how you handle item distribution and loot, some solutions are there to an extent already.

Although this is an option, I don't see this as anywhere near a viable economic solution to the issue.

I agree that it is difficult to compare the two different economic systems. 815 GP is more expensive than a 14th level 4E consumable or potion or about the same cost as a 4th level normal item. In 3.5 costs, the 750 GP was a little over 1/3 the cost of a +1 magic weapon, not over twice the cost of a +1 magic weapon. And of course, the scroll version in 3.5 was half of the potion cost, even cheaper.

But the ritual scroll takes 5 minutes to cast. It is not a consumable or potion level time frame, so using it while drowning is out of the question. So, that's a limitation that takes this completely out of the "in combat" or "emergency" time frame (the main downside of ritual scrolls in 4E, they can't be used in time critical emergencies and PCs have to rely on only powers then).

Granted, the ritual scroll affects multiple PCs so it has more utility, But, that's overkill for a PC just going to check something out.

I really don't see a DM handing out this ritual scroll too much earlier than Paragon too often which means that PCs cannot, shy of a major expense, do any sort of underwater reconnaissance or adventures until almost Paragon. An entire party could save up most of party gold for an entire level at level 2 (or a single PC for most of a level at level 7) and get one such scroll, but that's an awful large chunk of party or PC wealth, just to go exploring for a few hours.

By the time this ritual scroll becomes a relatively inexpensive solution, the equivalent of a potion that players don't mind sucking down, we're talking mid-Paragon or later.
 

Canor Morum

First Post
I think there should be an end to the whole series of editions. Just make a basic core rules set that is easy enough for anyone to play and then periodically release expansions that add new mechanics and complexity that fundamentally alter the way the game is played. It would keep the things fresh without having to re-write the book, so to speak. All expansions being optional of course.

Other than new mechanics, each expansion should include new settings, monsters, magical items, adventures, etc. It should also follow a larger storyline that stretches out over time.

Team D&D needs to take a few cues from those Wizards across the hall. ;)
 

Remove ads

Top