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
*TTRPGs General
The New Design Philosophy?
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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 2988123" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Fair enough, but it seems that "beating up things and taking their stuff" is the core game of D&D, and the point from which much pleasure derives. A story you tell is framed by "beating up things and taking their stuff." A legendary feel you recreate...by "beating up things and taking their stuff." A fantastic world of dragons and monsters....that you can beat up and take the stuff of. Evil villains...which you beat up and take the stuff of... Heck, entire D&D sessions can go by without doing it (political intrigue, etc.), but the rules don't need to handle that which does not need die rolls. They need to cater to that which does. The way that most people (not many or some, but most) play D&D needs to be addressed. </p><p></p><p>You perhaps see the point. While it's not the ONLY way to play the game, it is one of the most fundamental aspects of the game, and so designing for it -- for a way to ensure that there are no unexpected hiccups in beating up things and taking their stuff -- is one of the only logical goals of design.</p><p></p><p>You would rather them try to explain complexity? Eh. People don't have time to listen to justifications of why they can't just sit down and have fun. D&D shouldn't be something you have to study and work at to be fun. It should just *be* fun. Instantly. That way, if I want to add complexity, it shouldn't be a problem, and if I just want to roll some dice and raid a dungeon, that shouldn't be a problem, either. </p><p></p><p>I'm not Hussar, but I'm nodding in agreement with a lot of what he says, so I'll see if I can perhaps clarify my own stance...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's the dev's job to support the game that the most people want to play. If 4e winds up being wildly unsuccessful because it does a poor job of that, then 4e is a bad step. If this new design philosophy doesn't make most consumers happy, then it is a bad step. But while it's certain to alienate some, I feel those it alienates are a small fraction of the gaming community who doesn't invest a lot of money in the future of the system anyway. </p><p></p><p>The changes they make should make the game "better," by making it more fun for more people. If some dozen stoics get stuck in the mud about an issue or three, but those changes draw three dozen more people into the game, the game is better.</p></blockquote><p>Are you having trouble with the way in which the rules are explained or are you having trouble with the rules themselves? </p><p>[/QUOTE]</p><p></p><p>For me, in most cases, it's the rules themselves. Because they shuoldn't need another paragraph or three explanation, IMHO. If the rules were clear and sensible to begin with, there wouldn't need to be any explanation of them.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For me, it's very much the former. If the rule can't be explained clearly enough for a brain-dead six year old to understand, it's not a good rule, and should be replaced with something simpler and more efficient that is easier to explain and understand. AoO's serve a purpose that we still want served, but they don't do it well. The same thing is true of grapples, for instance.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 2988123, member: 2067"] Fair enough, but it seems that "beating up things and taking their stuff" is the core game of D&D, and the point from which much pleasure derives. A story you tell is framed by "beating up things and taking their stuff." A legendary feel you recreate...by "beating up things and taking their stuff." A fantastic world of dragons and monsters....that you can beat up and take the stuff of. Evil villains...which you beat up and take the stuff of... Heck, entire D&D sessions can go by without doing it (political intrigue, etc.), but the rules don't need to handle that which does not need die rolls. They need to cater to that which does. The way that most people (not many or some, but most) play D&D needs to be addressed. You perhaps see the point. While it's not the ONLY way to play the game, it is one of the most fundamental aspects of the game, and so designing for it -- for a way to ensure that there are no unexpected hiccups in beating up things and taking their stuff -- is one of the only logical goals of design. You would rather them try to explain complexity? Eh. People don't have time to listen to justifications of why they can't just sit down and have fun. D&D shouldn't be something you have to study and work at to be fun. It should just *be* fun. Instantly. That way, if I want to add complexity, it shouldn't be a problem, and if I just want to roll some dice and raid a dungeon, that shouldn't be a problem, either. I'm not Hussar, but I'm nodding in agreement with a lot of what he says, so I'll see if I can perhaps clarify my own stance... It's the dev's job to support the game that the most people want to play. If 4e winds up being wildly unsuccessful because it does a poor job of that, then 4e is a bad step. If this new design philosophy doesn't make most consumers happy, then it is a bad step. But while it's certain to alienate some, I feel those it alienates are a small fraction of the gaming community who doesn't invest a lot of money in the future of the system anyway. The changes they make should make the game "better," by making it more fun for more people. If some dozen stoics get stuck in the mud about an issue or three, but those changes draw three dozen more people into the game, the game is better. [/QUOTE] Are you having trouble with the way in which the rules are explained or are you having trouble with the rules themselves? [/QUOTE] For me, in most cases, it's the rules themselves. Because they shuoldn't need another paragraph or three explanation, IMHO. If the rules were clear and sensible to begin with, there wouldn't need to be any explanation of them. For me, it's very much the former. If the rule can't be explained clearly enough for a brain-dead six year old to understand, it's not a good rule, and should be replaced with something simpler and more efficient that is easier to explain and understand. AoO's serve a purpose that we still want served, but they don't do it well. The same thing is true of grapples, for instance. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The New Design Philosophy?
Top