D&D 5E [Guidance] What, +1d4 to every check ever?

Sacrosanct said:

This whole discussion reminds me of a tweet Mearls said a couple weeks ago. (paraphrasing) "5e is not going to have rules preventing people from playing boring if they want to play boring." And that's what this conversation seems to me.

Want to cast a spell every minute? Knock yourself out. But that's tedious and boring. And since it's concentration, you can't cast any other spell that requires concentration without losing it.

Click to expand...

Right, but the problem is, what do you do when you meet a player who decides to play tedious and boring because it's convenient?

What would Mike Mearls do, if everybody else at gaming table started to be annoyed by such tedious tactics? Would he/you house rule his own design (then why not making it a bit more tedious-proof since the start)? Would he/you simply tell the player to stop playing the game as written? Would he/you find a 'narrative' solution to sometimes stop this tactic?

I don't know which one I'll do eventually, but I don't like very much when a game puts me into the position of having to enforce one of these 'DM's countertactics' (especially when this is not a particularly devious exploitation of the rules by some munchkin, this is something basic that everyone can figure out at some point).

Li Shenron said:

Right, but the problem is, what do you do when you meet a player who decides to play tedious and boring because it's convenient?

Click to expand...

If it is different from the rest of the players then either he's going to adjust the way he is playing or the other players are just going to leave him behind or something. If it disrupts the table then the DM needs to step in and say something. Running into players that play the game differently is really common at conventions and running one shots. It's nothing new to this edition.

I don't have a problem with Guidance as is. It has many holes in its applications, such as the problems with reactionary skills and Stealth that have already been noted.

But it's also a near-automatic failure in many social situations. If a PC is trying to lie to the guards to gain entrance to the necropolis, and a second character begins casting a spell while the first is having a conversation, then the guard clearly knows something is up-- he's going to distrust the character who needs the luck of the gods to have a conversation. If a PC is bargaining over the price of a weapon, and another guy uses a spell to affect the outcome, then guess what? The price just went up.

Guidance is great for helping the wizard make his climb check to scale the wall, or the ranger to remember exactly how dangerous those beasts are, but it isn't the game-breaking option that people claim it is. At least, not in my games.

KarinsDad said:

A simple conversation to the player to use it when appropriate, but do not overdo it should suffice if the DM has a real issue with it.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

My point was that when things get 'too easy' (subjective), the system (or DM) compensates by raising difficulty.

We playtested and in the playtest monsters were too easy. Now they are much stronger. No punishment involved.

If someone wasn't in the Playtest they wouldn't understand how players are now being "punished" by having the difficulty ramped up.

Personally, if players optimize (I never equated Guidance to power-gaming, I related it to power-gaming in that it is common for the difficulty to be raised to compensate) and then complain that things are too easy my normal response is, "I thought that's what you wanted."

Li Shenron said:

Right, but the problem is, what do you do when you meet a player who decides to play tedious and boring because it's convenient?
.

Click to expand...

Let them know how my table is playing, and if it's not a style they like, they can find another table. When people talk to each other like adults, it's really not a problem. You (general you) shouldn't have to lean on rules in a game to make up for lack of communication or personality problems at the table.

jodyjohnson said:

Agreed.

My point was that when things get 'too easy' (subjective), the system (or DM) compensates by raising difficulty.

We playtested and in the playtest monsters were too easy. Now they are much stronger. No punishment involved.

If someone wasn't in the Playtest they wouldn't understand how players are now being "punished" by having the difficulty ramped up.

Personally, if players optimize (I never equated Guidance to power-gaming, I related it to power-gaming in that it is common for the difficulty to be raised to compensate) and then complain that things are too easy my normal response is, "I thought that's what you wanted."

Click to expand...

Funny though. I will be playing a Cleric 1 / Wizard X and will probably be spamming Guidance, Blade Ward, and Resistance a lot. I'm just knowledgeable enough to know when to do it (when it's worthwhile, but not all of the time) and when to not do it (like when trying to sneak up to a door before opening it for a surprise round, a spell verbal component could interfere with that).


There are a lot of game elements that a given DM might perceive as being overused though. The Bard's Song of Rest could be interpreted by a DM as overused if it is used nearly every short rest. He can handle that by having wandering monsters show up, but to the players, it still might seem like a punishment. In the DM's mind, the Bard is making noise that can be heard. In the player's, the bard is being chastised.

But if the DM is adversely reacting to a player using his PC's abilities, solutions like this (and the earlier one you proposed) do seem more punitive than productive.

Ruin Explorer said:

This seems like a very circular argument indeed.

It also seems hollow to me. I've had long experience of spells and abilities like this in dozens of games, and they cause problems - not so much balance problems (though +2.5 to lots of stuff is pretty huge), but rather atmosphere problems, and when you design rules so they cause a problem with atmosphere, that's actually the opposite of what I expect to see in an RPG - it's much more like what I expect from a wargame or board game. It's lazy/bad design, imo, of a hard-to-defend kind.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying that it's the way I would have done things, but I don't think it's any kind of major problem (or any problem at all if you're playing characters, as opposed to character sheets).

I'll admit I am not a fan of guidance myself.


My first note, for people that are arguing its power level compared to combat or noting its concentration denies other spells...I think that is missing the point. We need to look at guidance when it is at its strongest, and there are plenty of noncombat scenarios that you wouldn't expect the cleric to have other concentration spells up.

In terms of its power...think of it this way, it effectively makes the cleric proficient in ALL skills. Every single one. Better even, the skills he is proficient with he is even better at.

In terms of its spammability...people are arguing for roleplaying reasons why the cleric wouldn't cast this spell all day long. However, I would argue that if the mechanics are driving you one way, and the roleplay aspect is driving you another...than the mechanic has failed.

Mechanically, there is no reason why a cleric wouldn't keep this up most days...or at least cast it right before doing anything remotely resembling a skill check. If a cleric player who is just following the mechanics is penalized for that in roleplaying...I think the mechanic is at fault.


Its similar to the old 3e Detect Evil. Paladins used it to detect everything and their mother...because they could. 5e limited Detect Evil so that Paladin could use it with some frequency...but would have to be discerning in its use. There is no reason guidance could not be the same way.

Sacrosanct said:

Let them know how my table is playing, and if it's not a style they like, they can find another table. When people talk to each other like adults, it's really not a problem. You (general you) shouldn't have to lean on rules in a game to make up for lack of communication or personality problems at the table.

Click to expand...

Crothian said:

If it is different from the rest of the players then either he's going to adjust the way he is playing or the other players are just going to leave him behind or something. If it disrupts the table then the DM needs to step in and say something. Running into players that play the game differently is really common at conventions and running one shots. It's nothing new to this edition.

Click to expand...

But of course...

What is a bit different this time, is that Guidance is so clearly unlimited and upfront, that I have to really cross my fingers that players won't notice and abuse it. This ain't some tricky rules combo that usually only players specifically looking for that kind of tricks will find out.

This case reminds me a little bit of the problem with searching for traps at every 5ft, and (less) about the problem with keep trying the same task until successful. I think it happened to most gaming groups to bump into the case of a Rogue player, bothered by too often not guessing right where to search for traps, who starts searching & rolling for every damn 5ft square and bore everyone to tears. However in that case at least the DM can promise to place traps where it makes more sense, or explain how the time required for this tactic is a huge drawback.

IMHO Guidance really mostly rely on player's own volition to avoid tedious use, because it's very simple and largely independent on outside factors (unless the DM purposefully adds outside factor, but I won't feel good if I do so, I will feel like I'm trying to artificially punish the player when it's really not her fault...).

Some narrative limitations make sense to me, such as reminding the players that casting a spell normally makes noise (so you can't always use Guidance for Stealth), and that it is a visible action (thus not easy to use it for Cha checks in the social interaction phase). These are good ideas, grounded in the narrative descriptions, that make sure you can't cast it "ad nauseam". Let's see if it still gets tedious in other situations, particularly the exploration/investigation phase.

(By the way, concentration is not much of a restriction IMHO instead. For a lot of checks the Cleric is going to cast the spell just before the check is made, then if needed cast it again on the next PC and the next etc.)

Li Shenron said:

Right, but the problem is, what do you do when you meet a player who decides to play tedious and boring because it's convenient?

Click to expand...

I normally have a chat about how they don't fit into our long established play style and should probably find a different group.