Legends & Lore: Roleplaying in D&D Next

[Argyle King]

In theory, I like the idea.

I'm waiting to see how the implementation works out in actual play.


edit: I'm not huge on the idea of advantage so much, but I'd like to see how the idea is expanded in future supplements**. At the risk of causing some flames, I do believe D&D has started to be viewed as something other than a roleplaying game. I'm not denying that rping happens; in my own group, it happens rather frequently. However, I've also noticed that the mentality behind the group I game with seems to be different (even without discussing it) when we play D&D when compared to some of the other games. I can't speak on behalf of anyone else or other groups; just my own isolated experience here and the handful of times I've played with other groups. That's not in any way meant to demean D&D; I'm simply recounting my experience, and my experience is that most of the D&D groups I've played with tend to approach the game differently (without even discussing it) than they approach other games.


**Though this brings up a question I had in a different thread in which I mused over how long it would be until 5th Edition would resemble the kind of game I want to play. That's beyond the scope of this particular thread though.

 

[Alzrius]

In theory, I like the idea.

I'm waiting to see how the implementation works out in actual play.

Yeah, this could very well be used as just another mechanic, encouraging only token role-playing to then demand a bonus.

For example:

Give Me Inspiration (with apologies to Chicago)

[video=youtube;iHHtKP3h_cI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHHtKP3h_cI[/video]

You know our quest it must succeed
And so we have to win the battles
And I must beat the DC
On this check and every other one
You should know, every time I roll
I’m always owed a plus, on to hits
Saving throws

DM

I role-played my PC’s goals
I earned inspiration
Give me bonuses to rolls
I earned inspiration
Even let you hear me
I’ll use a funny voice when talking
No one point whores more than I point whore

And I know, yes I know that I’m min-maxing
I so do love to twist the game rules
And you know, that you can’t stop my PC
From tonight throughout the whole campaign
You should know (yes you need to know), every time I roll
Always owed a plus, on to hits
Saving throws

I role-played my PC’s goals
I earned inspiration
Give me bonuses to rolls
I earned inspiration
Even let you hear me
I’ll use a funny voice when talking
No one point whores more than I
No one point whores more than I

Even let you hear me
I’ll use a funny voice when talking
No one point whores more than I point whore

I role-played my PC’s goals
I earned inspiration
Give me bonuses to rolls
I earned inspiration

When you’re a rules lawyer
Breaking the campaign
When you’re a rules lawyer
Feel no sense of shame
No one point whores more than I

When you’re a rules lawyer
Breaking the campaign
When you’re a rules lawyer
Feel no sense of shame
No one point whores more than I

When you’re a rules lawyer
Breaking the campaign

 

[ExploderWizard]

I suppose I can't argue with that. The problem is...I think, at least...for many of us...is those decisions should not HAVE to be MADE! if we make them/ We'll "own" them. But why is it built into the fabric of the game...all of the sudden...after 30 years...that we NEED to make those DeCISIONS!?!?

I dunno. WOTC has spent the last 13 years creating the consumer oriented gamer and cultivating the cult of officialdom. Perhaps by sticking obnoxious stuff like this in the core more GMs will be reminded just who is in charge of their game and reach for AD&D instead of Next.

We can dream.

 

[billd91]

I know that these certs definitely piled up in certain player's hands. I remember a couple of games where one player pulled out his 17 reroll certs while no one else at the table had even gotten one. Then that same player got another one at the end of the game.

Hmmm... I'm now reminded of some of the issues they had with certs for Raven's Bluff - the Living City. Since the certs were physical, they could often be transferred, and there were some players either good enough at horse trading or wheedling at whatever table they sat at that they ended up with binders full of them as the campaign went on. People could come up to the scratch built with dozens of magic items and advantages on the certs and, I assume, that was one major reason Living Greyhawk implemented its own system of adventure certifications and accountancy of PC wealth.

 

[Cyberen]

Brilliant.
One month ago, we were arguing on these boards about Warlords and *inspirational* healing. On a tangent, I advocated a Hero Point system, with its own refresh rules, fueling the PC big guns. Here it is !
This system has to be "baked in" so it can be dialed/tweaked further in modules/at each table. For a naturalistic feel, don't use Inspiration : you're back to Grognardia (and I'm not being pejorative here : this is an option I intend to use sometimes !). From this base, youcan chose whatever system suits your table tastes to earn those points : story based, "good RP" based as decided by the DM/the table/each player, or even "escalation based" (after 3 rounds of combat !/ the 3rd round of a skill challenge). In the basic system (the one described by mearls), it gives advantage to a single roll : awesome ! (far better math than a flat bonus, helps giving the game a heroic feel inside the stern d20 system). In advanced modules, it could fuel PC SFX in an organic way (at least, abit less dry than a per encounter or per day basis).
Well done Mike !

 

[Doug McCrae]

One reason for baking it in is to let newb DMs know that roleplaying, in the sense of portraying the PC as having a personality distinct from that of the player, is a thing you can do which may make the game more fun. I know not everyone plays that one way, indeed Gary Gygax's original group didn't.

Also, rules for enforcing roleplaying are not a new thing in D&D. 1e has penalties for alignment change, which are harsher for paladins and rangers.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I dunno. WOTC has spent the last 13 years creating the consumer oriented gamer and cultivating the cult of officialdom. Perhaps by sticking obnoxious stuff like this in the core more GMs will be reminded just who is in charge of their game and reach for AD&D instead of Next.

We can dream.

Oh PLEASE!

D&D has said and will always say that the rules can be changed by anyone who is using them and wants to do so. Whether it's 'Rule 0', or standard "treat these rules as guidelines" or "feel free to make the game your own" statements in the books... everyone has always been allowed... if not in fact encouraged... to do whatever the heck they wanted to do with the rules for the betterment of their particular game.

So to imply or say that WotC has been holding a gun to your head these last 13 years telling you that you HAD to play the game in a certain way is absolute bullpappy.

What do you need? A disclaimer on the very first page of the very first book that says "HEY YOU! READER! IF YOU OR YOUR DM OR YOUR OTHER PLAYERS DON'T LIKE SOME OF THESE RULES, YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE THEM!" in order to make sure everyone knows that EVERY SINGLE rule in the game--- whether it's a so-called "core rule" or "basic game rule" or "module" or "advanced rule" is ALLOWED to be changed or removed by someone at the start of their campaign to make the game how they want it.

Is that what you need? For WotC to treat every player like a blind idiot who apparently doesn't read? Come on!

 

[jrowland]

As far as whether or not the award is tied to the GM's authority or a player's choices, I don't care.

Essentially "DM's friend" is a +2/-2 circumstance bonus for 3E (and I think 4E) thats tied to GM fiat. I agree the hyperventilating over Inspirations seems misguided in light of the 10+ years of "DMs friend" GM fiat.

 

[jrowland]

Things like this help. But I'd prefer that games I enjoy not to have these kind of rules in the first place. I'm not saying it's the RIGHT way, I've just given my opinion and an example alternative that WotC could design around instead.

WotC could hand you a bare sheet of paper and say here is D&D. Sounds ridiculous, but you have to have something right? Bare sheets of paper are not a game. Thus, the default is actual rules. That is why people say things like "then don't use that rule!". Having it there has to be a default. Blank sheets of paper are no fun.

For every "game resolution situation" we expect the game to point to some "game resolution mechanic". In many ways, 4E was rules-light roleplay. I am an old school grognard, so I was fine with a combat-crunchy system, because I don't need rules for roleplay. Others like a crunchier roleplay experience, and most of them shied away from 4E. DDNext is trying, I think, to split the difference. Rules light roleplay (Simple skill system + Inspiration) that can be simplified to away to nothing (4E style), left alone, or expanded via modules and advanced rules (3E style). That's a tall order, and I am sure you won't be happy. I probably won't either. But if you are engaged in a forum during a development phase of the game, I am willing to bed tinkering with the game is a real option for anyone reading this, even if tinkering is dropping it entirely.

 

[jrowland]

... GMs will be reminded just who is in charge of their game and reach for AD&D instead of Next.

We can dream.

I imagine if WotC was proposing to make AD&D core (ie officialdom as you put it) these boards would be lit up with outrage. Dreams are great when sleeping, but the reality is never as good.