D&D 5E [Warlords] Should D&D be tied to D&D Worlds?

[billd91]

It's about cinematic action and enthralling gameplay, and not resorting to "because magic" for everything extraordinary.

I'd like to point out that cinematic action + enthralling game play is not mutually exclusive with certain kinds of extraordinary being limited to magic.

 

[Weather Report]

It's about cinematic action and enthralling gameplay/QUOTE]


Which D&D always has, or are you referring to the moving around pieces of plastic, being the aforementioned above (that edition), the game for that is DDM.

 

[DMZ2112]

It's not about physics or nature. It's about cinematic action and enthralling gameplay, and not resorting to "because magic" for everything extraordinary.

I've never understood the cadre of D&D players that depises magic to this degree. Admittedly, the game is not called Dungeons & Dragons & Magic, but one might've thought you could infer the third from the first two.

 

[Ratskinner]

Two editions of D&D might hand wave hit points as being an abstraction, but all seven versions of the game only cause you to lose them when a physical event penetrates or bypasses your physical defenses. By the RAW, you don't lose hit points to blocked blows that were simply exhausting or a strain to defend against, and you don't lose hit points to any kind of miss.

hmmm....funny because:

As has been detailed, hit points are not actually a measure of physical damage, by and large, as far as characters (and some other creatures as well) are concerned.

AD&D 1e DMG, page 61 (emphasis added)

Damage scored to characters or certain monsters is actually not substantially physical - a mere nick or scratch until the last handful of hit points are considered - it is a matter of wearing away the endurance, the luck, the magical protections.

AD&D 1e DMG, page 61 (emphasis added)

...and the oft-cited "turning a big hit into a little one"... or as Gygax would did call it: "skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the "sixth sense" which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection."

...seem to describe hit points losses as precisely "blocked blows that were simply exhausting or a strain to defend against".

Not that any of that fixes the many problems HP have as a system wrt the narrative and spell names.

 

[Obryn]

I'd like to point out that cinematic action + enthralling game play is not mutually exclusive with certain kinds of extraordinary being limited to magic.

I never said it was. However, I think stuff like this greatly enhances the cinematic action style, along with a strong reliance on metagame mechanics designed to push it. In other words, cinematic results tend to require cinematic mechanics. Otherwise you get (for example) 1st-level force wizard jedi who spam Force Push over and over again and never need to talk with anyone in SWSE. And Fighters who trip people every round. And some Fighters who specialize in darts.

Which D&D always has, or are you referring to the moving around pieces of plastic, being the aforementioned above (that edition), the game for that is DDM.

Come on, spell it out for me here. You know you want to.

-O

 

[Obryn]

I've never understood the cadre of D&D players that depises magic to this degree. Admittedly, the game is not called Dungeons & Dragons & Magic, but one might've thought you could infer the third from the first two.

Who said I despise magic? I love magic; magic is great. It's a necessary ingredient for fantasy.

But not everything fantastical or awesome should rely on "because ***MAGIC***" as an explanation. That's a lazy failure of imagination.

-O

 

[urLordy]

RE: warlords, unity edition, and hit points

The hit point mechanic may suck, but in a way, its faults are genius.

It is its very ambiguity that once unified at least 2 conflicting playstyles.

For years, D&D hit points got away with it.

The warlord was contentious exactly because it forces a closer examination and requires the gaming table to get on the same page in a way they were never asked to before.

The problem is not entirely "what do/should hit points represent" but "should any aspect of the game (like a 4e warlord) compel us to examine more closely what hit points represents?" Because once we examine it, we have to decide which is what, and probably splinter D&D into subset playstyles (which, based on the intended design philosophy of a core game and optional modules, is exactly what quite a few people are expecting, I think).

We will ever again see that imperfect pragmatic truce between a pro-meat-hp player and an anti-meat-hp player at the same table? Do you guys agree that metagame expressions like the warlord has already heralded the inevitable splintering of D&D into two or more denominations?

 

[DMZ2112]

But not everything fantastical or awesome should rely on "because ***MAGIC***" as an explanation. That's a lazy failure of imagination.

Well, no, of course not. That would be like saying modern society is possible "because ***SCIENCE***." But that doesn't mean that science isn't still responsible for damn near everything.

 

[Ahnehnois]

But not everything fantastical or awesome should rely on "because ***MAGIC***" as an explanation. That's a lazy failure of imagination.

And indeed, not everything fantastical/awesome does. Your garden variety D&D (non-4e) fighter can do all kinds of fantastical/awesome things, many of them impossible in real life. If it ain't broke...

 

[Weather Report]

Come on, spell it out for me here. You know you want to.

...ooh, that seems quite transparently antagonistic, I would just prefer to make the agenda crystalline.

So, what do you want, aside from 4.5?