D&D 5E What D&D should learn from a Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones)

[Bluenose]

The problem with not having a rule-based solution is that the GM and/or players have to put effort into making sure it works. The problem with a rule-based solution is that rules are inflexible - so that either things some players want are prohibited, or the GM and players have to put effort into making sure things work, regardless.

It comes down to a simple fact - no finite and usable ruleset can do *everything*.

I'm not sure I agree with the bit I've bolded. A ruleset like Fate or Heroquest, rules light, with a clear resolution mechanic, may take work from the GM and players, but it is not hard to find a resolution that is rule-based. Both games are almost written to make that possible. Neither would necessarily satisfy someone who wants the degree of detail found in D&D (at least in it's combat resolution), of course.

 

[Vague Jayhawk]

Take what GoT does and do the opposite.

You need to keep the plot moving.

I can imagine a D&D game Game of Thrones style. Three gaming sessions spent talking to the exact same guy. 3 minutes of dice rolling and excitement. Then three more sessions of talking to a second guy about the first guy.

 

[Hussar]

Take what GoT does and do the opposite.

You need to keep the plot moving.

I can imagine a D&D game Game of Thrones style. Three gaming sessions spent talking to the exact same guy. 3 minutes of dice rolling and excitement. Then three more sessions of talking to a second guy about the first guy.

I have to admit, there's something to that. I would LOATHE a campaign paced at GoT pacing.

 

[Uchawi]

D&D has a problem with supporting a lot of novels just based on the magic system. In my opinion, it is not a good fit for GoT or even LoTR, unless you have a method to significantly reduce the power and scope of magic.

 

[Sadras]

Tone down the magic system, unless your character is learned in the arcane tantric-sex arts of the Asshai

 

[Uchawi]

That would be a good case to have a more robust ritual system in 5E that may compliment, or even replace the magic system.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not sure I agree with the bit I've bolded. A ruleset like Fate or Heroquest, rules light, with a clear resolution mechanic, may take work from the GM and players, but it is not hard to find a resolution that is rule-based. Both games are almost written to make that possible. Neither would necessarily satisfy someone who wants the degree of detail found in D&D (at least in it's combat resolution), of course.

And, in that last sentence, you support my point while trying to refute it.

FATE is awesome. I like it. I'm running Spirit of the Century at a housecon this weekend. But I note that it does some things well, and some things poorly. Detailed tactical combat? Nope, not in FATE. Ergo, it doesn't do *everything*. QED.

RPGs encompass the full breadth of human imagination. No single book can manage that. This is an important point, as it means there will not ever be One True Game. This is wisdom.

 

[Bluenose]

And, in that last sentence, you support my point while trying to refute it.

FATE is awesome. I like it. I'm running Spirit of the Century at a housecon this weekend. But I note that it does some things well, and some things poorly. Detailed tactical combat? Nope, not in FATE. Ergo, it doesn't do *everything*. QED.

RPGs encompass the full breadth of human imagination. No single book can manage that. This is an important point, as it means there will not ever be One True Game. This is wisdom.

I think though that is not a matter of the ruleset being unable to do "everything" but more an objection to how it does them.

 

[Mistwell]

From what I've seen of 5E, combat speed hasn't changed significantly.

Hasn't changed from what?

It's definitely fast combat. Faster than 3e or 4e at least. What have you seen that makes you think it is not fast?

 

[Umbran]

I think though that is not a matter of the ruleset being unable to do "everything" but more an objection to how it does them.

My answer comes on two levels.

Level one: Not, it isn't. FATE does not give me a tactical combat minigame in which there's fine details, and minis can play a big part of resolution. At all. It is not there in the rules. These rules do not to tactical combat even poorly.

Level two: I say that is a quibble like retreating to the word "technically". As in, "Technically, the rules can do that." Which is always followed by, "But...."

Technically, I can drive a screw into wood using a hammer. Is this something anyone would want to do? Is this a selling point for hammers? No.

RPG rules are, in the end, a tool. And for any tool, practical use matters. If your tool performs a particular job badly enough in practical use, it is equivalent to not doing it at all.

Moreover, with RPGs, there is a point where the rules accomplish a job by pushing the job to the GM - FATE has *loads* of GM adjudication involved, for example. D&D has its Rule Zero. In such cases, it is not really true that the rules accomplish the job.