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
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5989099" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>The particular importance of planning and preparing, or being concerned about dying easily, is system and campaign specific. It's a bit part of low-level classic D&D play. It's a typical part of Burning Wheel play, I think. It's not a big part of high level D&D play in any version of the game except (perhaps?) 3E.</p><p></p><p>But if we take out that particular play preference, and focus just on players being close to their PCs, and acting as their characters and making decisions, which posters on this thread do you think you're differentiating yourself from?</p><p></p><p>I GMed a session today where the players, in character, were arguing out what to do about some Death Giants geased by the Raven Queen to guard the warded entrance to an ancient temple of Orcus. The dwarf (who wields Overwhelm, a modified version of Whelm, which is an artefact Dwarven Thrower) wanted to kill the giants. The invoker and the paladin (both servants of the Raven Queen) wanted to leave the giants there burdened by the geas. This disagreement played itself out in the combat itself - it didn' come to blows between the PCs, because the social contract at the table moderates passions in that way, but harsh words were certainly used!</p><p></p><p>In the course of all this, the player of the dwarf fighter-cleric used one action point to get an extra attack, two daily powers and three encounter powers, as well as multiple uses of at-will powers. This didn't hurt his immersion. The focus of his play isn't the causal question "What exactly is my PC doing now with his weapon, and how is he doing it?" The focus of his play, in combat, is "Who am I attacking, and why, and what is at stake for me and for my allies?" And at all relevant times he was a dwarf fighting giants with a honking great two-handed warhammer. Until it got cut with him when he wouldn't use one of his limited-use powers to finish of a giant, and made him swap it out for his non-artefact +4 halberd. What, in the fiction, was going on when the PC made this choice? He wasn't fighting the giants as hard as he could - he was holding back a bit, keeping some energy in reserve for later - and Overwhelm could tell this and got angry about it.</p><p></p><p>I'm sure this is true for you. It is true for me to. I don't see what it tells us about the suitability, in general, of particular mechanics to support RPGing.</p><p></p><p>This is an interesting biographical fact about you - there is a certain (in my view, somewhat vaguely defined) category of mechanics that spoils your game.</p><p></p><p>Hit points use to be like that for me. Then I learned how to interpret them in a metagame ("dissociative"?) fashion and got over my in-principle objection, and I found a game that made more than just hit point attrition the focus of D&D-style combat (ie 4e) and got over my practical objection (that hit point attrition, on its own, is boring).</p><p></p><p>I have a friend who is a bit of a Rolemaster snob. The last time I played D&D with him was a mnth or two after 3E came out. I was GMing a few sessions to see how it played. This friend was playing a wizard, and he cast a web spell - but miscalculated on range or AoE or something, and caught another PC in the web. The player of that other PC complained, to which my friend repied "It's only D&D!" - meaning, it's not something to be taken that seriously. For him, D&D as such - with its hit points, its AC that makes you harder to hit rather than reducing the damage, its Vancian magic, its somewhat silly spells like Web - was "dissociative". (As far as I know he's never tried 4e.)</p><p></p><p>That's a biographical fact about my friend. But I wouldn't generalise from it to anything objective about D&D or 3E.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5989099, member: 42582"] The particular importance of planning and preparing, or being concerned about dying easily, is system and campaign specific. It's a bit part of low-level classic D&D play. It's a typical part of Burning Wheel play, I think. It's not a big part of high level D&D play in any version of the game except (perhaps?) 3E. But if we take out that particular play preference, and focus just on players being close to their PCs, and acting as their characters and making decisions, which posters on this thread do you think you're differentiating yourself from? I GMed a session today where the players, in character, were arguing out what to do about some Death Giants geased by the Raven Queen to guard the warded entrance to an ancient temple of Orcus. The dwarf (who wields Overwhelm, a modified version of Whelm, which is an artefact Dwarven Thrower) wanted to kill the giants. The invoker and the paladin (both servants of the Raven Queen) wanted to leave the giants there burdened by the geas. This disagreement played itself out in the combat itself - it didn' come to blows between the PCs, because the social contract at the table moderates passions in that way, but harsh words were certainly used! In the course of all this, the player of the dwarf fighter-cleric used one action point to get an extra attack, two daily powers and three encounter powers, as well as multiple uses of at-will powers. This didn't hurt his immersion. The focus of his play isn't the causal question "What exactly is my PC doing now with his weapon, and how is he doing it?" The focus of his play, in combat, is "Who am I attacking, and why, and what is at stake for me and for my allies?" And at all relevant times he was a dwarf fighting giants with a honking great two-handed warhammer. Until it got cut with him when he wouldn't use one of his limited-use powers to finish of a giant, and made him swap it out for his non-artefact +4 halberd. What, in the fiction, was going on when the PC made this choice? He wasn't fighting the giants as hard as he could - he was holding back a bit, keeping some energy in reserve for later - and Overwhelm could tell this and got angry about it. I'm sure this is true for you. It is true for me to. I don't see what it tells us about the suitability, in general, of particular mechanics to support RPGing. This is an interesting biographical fact about you - there is a certain (in my view, somewhat vaguely defined) category of mechanics that spoils your game. Hit points use to be like that for me. Then I learned how to interpret them in a metagame ("dissociative"?) fashion and got over my in-principle objection, and I found a game that made more than just hit point attrition the focus of D&D-style combat (ie 4e) and got over my practical objection (that hit point attrition, on its own, is boring). I have a friend who is a bit of a Rolemaster snob. The last time I played D&D with him was a mnth or two after 3E came out. I was GMing a few sessions to see how it played. This friend was playing a wizard, and he cast a web spell - but miscalculated on range or AoE or something, and caught another PC in the web. The player of that other PC complained, to which my friend repied "It's only D&D!" - meaning, it's not something to be taken that seriously. For him, D&D as such - with its hit points, its AC that makes you harder to hit rather than reducing the damage, its Vancian magic, its somewhat silly spells like Web - was "dissociative". (As far as I know he's never tried 4e.) That's a biographical fact about my friend. But I wouldn't generalise from it to anything objective about D&D or 3E. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top