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 LIVE! 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
Take A Closer Look At The 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide
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="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9001188" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Right, I got that, but here is the problem. That was a bad thing. That led to "you showed up late to the session, so you play the healer" a meme that is based in truth, because it was a role that mechanically needed to be filled, but was so undesirable that no one actually wanted to play the role. You want to revert class design to something that was specifically called out as a problem, and hope that that solves this entirely unrelated issue. </p><p></p><p>After all, set this up, require each role be filled by specific classes to cover their weaknesses.... how does this affect the first player to show up, with a fully formed character, who is unwilling to cooperate with you or anyone else? They have just claimed the first of the roles, and everyone else is forced to conform to them, so your stated issue has no bearing on this conception of mechanical pressure.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, the problem is that it doesn't say "Step #1: Get permission from your DM"? That is what you are saying. Because it doesn't say "Step #1: Get Permission from your DM" all players are immediately conditioned to never speak to their DMs about anything, never willing to compromise, never willing to ask questions. And if ONLY step #1 was "Get permission from your DM" then none of this would ever happen. </p><p></p><p>But that is false, a player's attitude towards cooperation isn't determined by whether or not step #1 is talk to the DM. After all, as I stated, it is FAR easier as a DM for me to work with someone who comes to me and says "I want to play an Elf" or "I want to be a Paladin" than it is for me to deal with someone who asks "What should I play?" </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because it isn't the DM's choice? Just like it isn't the GM's choice to have the players roll for HP or take the standard result. </p><p></p><p>But I find this a bit telling as well, you started this with calls for how players will never work with their DMs, will not collaborate... but NOW you are saying it is an "extra steep hurdle" to nerf attributes because players have a choice between rolling or point buy. That has nothing to do with collaboration on the story, and everything to do with the DM trying to control character creation to fit their vision. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Why should what MY character cares about be something I talk to other players about? OR what about my character's ideals, why should I have to get those approved by the players? Why can't I pick them, then talk to the DM about them? Yes, talking about the character and their goals and personality is something that is useful to do between players and the DM, but you are acting like these are all things you need permission to do. </p><p></p><p>Again, this starts reading less like "I can't collaborate with my players because of these suggestions" and more like "I'm not being given explicit control over every part of their character and they are allowed to make decisions without my consent." Sure, maybe some player will abuse Flaws or Bonds and create something that is truly disruptive... but that is a very different thing. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"So far into heresy"? Dude, what the heck? It isn't heresy. The game book assumes you use the game rules. That is pretty basic. If you want to drastically change the equipment list, you can, but it isn't something most people even do. And it wouldn't be something you need to tell every single player to consider when making their character, </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, so even if these suggestions were as terrible as you want to claim, they still tell you to take that character and talk to your DM. Which means that all those things you are worried about, are things you can talk to the player about. </p><p></p><p>But none of this leads to players refusing to cooperate with each other of the DM. None of this applies to what you claim the problems actually are, they only apply to the players being allowed to make choices within the assumed baseline of the rules. Which... yes, the rule book assumes you use the rules. That's pretty obvious</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>None of this applies to your problem though. None of it. </p><p></p><p>Your stated problem is a player who is a diva, who wants to be the spotlight character who has made a character and backstory without asking anyone else what is going on. That isn't a character like what Brennen is talking about. Your problem is someone who cares too much, someone who is too invested in an idea, not someone who doesn't care at all. </p><p></p><p>And your entire problem is this "doing character creation in isolation" and Mercer's is something Brennen says "I love that" to, because the point Mercer makes is that even if you don't have time to sit together in the same room and do a session zero, send a questionaire to your players. Not to inform their mechanical roles in the party that all must fill, but to CREATE that backstory you are so afraid of. One of Mercer's questions was "What is something you regret from your childhood?" This could easily fit into the structure of BIFFT's and what did <strong><u>you </u></strong>say about those? "<em>every part of that last bit on backgrounds dives into building one or more aspects of the GM's world without even mentioning the GM or DM.That's a pretty big problem when the GM says "well the game is set in $setting & that's not going to fit" but the player has been told to just come up with all this stuff without speaking to anyone else because now there's a potentially excessive backstory that conflicts with the world in one or more ways that the player has grown deeply attached to</em>"</p><p></p><p>But Mercer never talks about those questions leading to that problem... because they won't. If someone says that their childhood regret is stealing from the temple of Pelor, he doesn't face a crisis, he talks to the player. He communicates. But your position is that because the PHB doesn't say "step #1: Get permission from your DM" that that cannot happen, that the players will never cooperate. And this interview shows you are incorrect. Because none of these excellent DMs have that problem. And they are using the same rule set. So it isn't a rules problem. It can't be.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 9001188, member: 6801228"] Right, I got that, but here is the problem. That was a bad thing. That led to "you showed up late to the session, so you play the healer" a meme that is based in truth, because it was a role that mechanically needed to be filled, but was so undesirable that no one actually wanted to play the role. You want to revert class design to something that was specifically called out as a problem, and hope that that solves this entirely unrelated issue. After all, set this up, require each role be filled by specific classes to cover their weaknesses.... how does this affect the first player to show up, with a fully formed character, who is unwilling to cooperate with you or anyone else? They have just claimed the first of the roles, and everyone else is forced to conform to them, so your stated issue has no bearing on this conception of mechanical pressure. So, the problem is that it doesn't say "Step #1: Get permission from your DM"? That is what you are saying. Because it doesn't say "Step #1: Get Permission from your DM" all players are immediately conditioned to never speak to their DMs about anything, never willing to compromise, never willing to ask questions. And if ONLY step #1 was "Get permission from your DM" then none of this would ever happen. But that is false, a player's attitude towards cooperation isn't determined by whether or not step #1 is talk to the DM. After all, as I stated, it is FAR easier as a DM for me to work with someone who comes to me and says "I want to play an Elf" or "I want to be a Paladin" than it is for me to deal with someone who asks "What should I play?" Because it isn't the DM's choice? Just like it isn't the GM's choice to have the players roll for HP or take the standard result. But I find this a bit telling as well, you started this with calls for how players will never work with their DMs, will not collaborate... but NOW you are saying it is an "extra steep hurdle" to nerf attributes because players have a choice between rolling or point buy. That has nothing to do with collaboration on the story, and everything to do with the DM trying to control character creation to fit their vision. Why should what MY character cares about be something I talk to other players about? OR what about my character's ideals, why should I have to get those approved by the players? Why can't I pick them, then talk to the DM about them? Yes, talking about the character and their goals and personality is something that is useful to do between players and the DM, but you are acting like these are all things you need permission to do. Again, this starts reading less like "I can't collaborate with my players because of these suggestions" and more like "I'm not being given explicit control over every part of their character and they are allowed to make decisions without my consent." Sure, maybe some player will abuse Flaws or Bonds and create something that is truly disruptive... but that is a very different thing. "So far into heresy"? Dude, what the heck? It isn't heresy. The game book assumes you use the game rules. That is pretty basic. If you want to drastically change the equipment list, you can, but it isn't something most people even do. And it wouldn't be something you need to tell every single player to consider when making their character, Right, so even if these suggestions were as terrible as you want to claim, they still tell you to take that character and talk to your DM. Which means that all those things you are worried about, are things you can talk to the player about. But none of this leads to players refusing to cooperate with each other of the DM. None of this applies to what you claim the problems actually are, they only apply to the players being allowed to make choices within the assumed baseline of the rules. Which... yes, the rule book assumes you use the rules. That's pretty obvious None of this applies to your problem though. None of it. Your stated problem is a player who is a diva, who wants to be the spotlight character who has made a character and backstory without asking anyone else what is going on. That isn't a character like what Brennen is talking about. Your problem is someone who cares too much, someone who is too invested in an idea, not someone who doesn't care at all. And your entire problem is this "doing character creation in isolation" and Mercer's is something Brennen says "I love that" to, because the point Mercer makes is that even if you don't have time to sit together in the same room and do a session zero, send a questionaire to your players. Not to inform their mechanical roles in the party that all must fill, but to CREATE that backstory you are so afraid of. One of Mercer's questions was "What is something you regret from your childhood?" This could easily fit into the structure of BIFFT's and what did [B][U]you [/U][/B]say about those? "[I]every part of that last bit on backgrounds dives into building one or more aspects of the GM's world without even mentioning the GM or DM.That's a pretty big problem when the GM says "well the game is set in $setting & that's not going to fit" but the player has been told to just come up with all this stuff without speaking to anyone else because now there's a potentially excessive backstory that conflicts with the world in one or more ways that the player has grown deeply attached to[/I]" But Mercer never talks about those questions leading to that problem... because they won't. If someone says that their childhood regret is stealing from the temple of Pelor, he doesn't face a crisis, he talks to the player. He communicates. But your position is that because the PHB doesn't say "step #1: Get permission from your DM" that that cannot happen, that the players will never cooperate. And this interview shows you are incorrect. Because none of these excellent DMs have that problem. And they are using the same rule set. So it isn't a rules problem. It can't be. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Take A Closer Look At The 2024 Dungeon Master’s Guide
Top