D&D 5E What does this photo say to you? [Project: Morningstar)

[I'm A Banana]

But you still don't need to able to access the DDI at the table for this, no?

Rules questions come up in play, so yeah, that's part of when the DDI access separates folks' experiences into the haves and have-nots.

Mmmm, I think that's a really weak argument myself,

I mean, the characters you build and the concepts you build them around stay with you for months, if not years, and change a bit at every level. Having DDI, beyond the access, makes comparisons, backtracking, organization, and sorting easy. That changes the specific options chosen, which changes the play of the character.

Neither of these are inherent issues with an online char builder/rules database as much as they are inherent issues with a complex ruleset that relies on precise detail to achieve its effects.

So when 5E comes out, and it turns out to need a big errata to run better/best, would you prefer that to happen or not happen?

The issue with errata in 4e wasn't so much that it existed, or even the quantity of it, it was the impact of it. In 4e, a little change to a little rule could matter tremendously in play. A DM's best judgement of intent could send a power off the rails with just a little touch (say, changing "creatures" to "enemies" in the targeting of a burst or blast).

I hope that 5e manages to be more flexible and resilient than that, less fragile. Elder e's certainly are (largely because balance was a much more theoretical thing in them), and there's cause to be optimistic. When 5e needs errata, regardless of the amount it needs, I would hope that the errata would be less necessary, less significant, less massive in play impact. So someone who has the updates might find them clearer or more strictly worded, but they won't risk changing the essential nature of the thing.

 

[Ichneumon]

I was not serious. Of course I know I can. But that picture just makes me sad

There's no need. Playing with tablets and apps like 'Morningstar' will enhance the gameplay experience for many groups, but the good old pen and paper style is still going strong.

 

[Quickleaf]

If the DM has all of his campaign notes, the adventure and the relevant tables he needs on his laptop or tablet- something I aim for- then there is no need for a DM screen.

That's impressive to me both from an organizational standpoint, but also from a software functionality standpoint. I've never found a suite of programs that is as quick at tracking initiative or recording monster HP as doing it by hand, for example.

I think I've used a screen once in more than 30 years of GMing - I got one in my 4e Essentials DM kit and took it with me to one session.

You could still probably tell I'm the GM from a photo of our sessions, though - I would have a bigger pile of paper in front of me, and perhaps a Monster Manual or two.

Yeah, exactly. Another thought is that if Morningstar requires an Internet connection (so no data is downloaded to the actual tablet), then there's the obvious issue of gamers who play without an Internet connection. There's also a more subtle issue about document legacy and invisible updates that mess with what players/DMs thought was established rules.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

My concern is the one about player distraction. Both the group I'm DMing and the group I'm playing in are online right now (the first didn't start that way, but people moved around). I haven't noticed a lot of distraction in the group I'm DMing--probably because we use a VTT, and even when there isn't any need to reference it, I play music and move people around to different rooms just to catch their attention and try to set a mood. In the game I'm playing in, we rarely make much use of the VTT (initiative tracking is about the extent of it lately), and distraction is a problem. Most of the players are multi-tasking during game. And the worse part is that it is contagious. I find myself fighting the urge to do it myself.

1. Your eyes are there to be used. If they have nothing catching their attention, they will find something. Usually that something is on a screen. This is the bane tele-gaming.
2. If other people are slowing the game down because they are distracted, you are more likely to expect the game to be slower, and in your impatience start doing something else yourself, thus creating a cycle. It's like people being late. If one player is always half an hour late and you always wait for him, soon most players will start showing up half and hour late because they know the game won't start until then anyway.

#1 shouldn't be a problem when everyone is at the same table. It hopefully won't be any worse of a problem for tele-gaming with these tools than with any other software. I doubt it will help much though.
#2 really doesn't have much to do with the tech.

So the conclusion I've drawn from this stream of thought post is that the overall effect is likely to worsen the game experience only for a group that isn't currently using or allowing any electronic devices at the table. So very few groups.

*Sigh* I still would really like to have a face to face game where everyone checks their tech at the door. Yep, phones too. There is just something about that experience that you can't get otherwise.

 

[pemerton]

In 4e, a little change to a little rule could matter tremendously in play. A DM's best judgement of intent could send a power off the rails with just a little touch (say, changing "creatures" to "enemies" in the targeting of a burst or blast).

I hope that 5e manages to be more flexible and resilient than that, less fragile. Elder e's certainly are

This is a long, long way from my experience.

In AD&D, for instance, it would make a huge difference to apply damage from a fireball to enemies only, or to all creatures in the burst.

4e doesn't stand out at all in this respect.

 

[I'm A Banana]

This is a long, long way from my experience.

In AD&D, for instance, it would make a huge difference to apply damage from a fireball to enemies only, or to all creatures in the burst.

4e doesn't stand out at all in this respect.

The major distinction is that in AD&D, the rules adjudicated the fiction -- a big ball of fire clearly does damage to all creatures in the area it occupies, friend, foe, or innocent bystander, because it's a big ball of fire. Unless it states otherwise, it probably damages objects in that area, too, because that's what a big ball of fire would do. What it is defines what rules you use, so it's easy to adjudicate as a DM.

"Oh, that line says it only targets enemies? That's silly, it's a big ball of fire. Your friends need to make a save, too. Don't like it? Don't use it."

The system's disregard for precise balance meant that this was pretty much clearly within the bounds of the DM to call -- DMs were encouraged to make similar rulings. If it screwed the player over, that was "fine" from a system standpoint.

Then errata comes out and corrects the error and it conforms with what the DM says. Or the errata never comes out and that particular player just doesn't use that particular spell and the game doesn't sweat it much even though the DM is changing the rules of the game on the fly to suit her view of the world.

In 4e, however, an effect that may generate a big ball of fire plays a specific role within the structure of the game itself, and ultimately the description must conform to the bounds that the rules of the effect set. That is, the fiction should flow from the rules. So an effect that generates a burst that deals fire damage to all creatures is a different effect in the fiction from an effect that generates a burst that deals fire damage to only enemies. One implies a level of control and precision that the other lacks. In addition, whether or not it affects only enemies or allies as well plays a key part in comparing it to other abilities of the same level, and, indeed, may be one of the power's defining traits in that comparison ("Oh! This doesn't hurt friendlies!").

Now, a DM needs to tread more carefully. If the rules describe a power that only targets enemies, and the player describes it as a ball of fire, the DM shouldn't just rule that balls of fire of course burn everything in their area, because that might be an unfair stipulation present on a carefully balanced power that reduces its utility in comparison to other powers of that level. Just nerfing a power like that might clearly go against the intent of the design here -- DMs can't just go around changing targeting lines like it doesn't matter.

"Oh, that line says it only damage enemies? Weird. Well, could you describe it in some other way?"

The system's more cautious balance means that a rule not in the spirit of the power's intent reduces the character's utility and effectiveness. The targeting line isn't just a description of an effect, it's part of the player's choice in gaining that power.

Then the errata comes out and corrects the error, and, well, it looks like it was a ball of fire all along, the DM was giving out traits that were beyond the intended scope of the power. And maybe it's not been a big deal, so what's she gonna do, nerf a power her player has come to appreciate? Or just eat the fact that she's made a power more potent and shrug and sigh about it? Or maybe that's not the problem as much as it is that the description of this power that the player's been using now has to change. Great, the fiction changed because the rules updated. Or maybe the errata never comes out, and everything's hunky dory.

This isn't just a hypothetical, either. I've seen errata in 4e do this to people. "Oh. That's not how I envisioned this power. Guess I'll change it now." or "What? That big of a nerf? Well, I guess..." or "Sorry, guys, I know we've been playing it like X, but I guess it's like Y now, so lets try to do it right, OK?"

I don't want errata in 5e to have that big of an effect. While I don't want to dismiss balance entirely, I also want to be able to use the AD&D method of, "Well, it's a big ball of fire, here's what it WOULD do," and not have the game balk at that.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That's impressive to me both from an organizational standpoint, but also from a software functionality standpoint. I've never found a suite of programs that is as quick at tracking initiative or recording monster HP as doing it by hand, for example.

I think you'd recognize everything I do, actually. Nothing fancy.

My PCs, adventures and campaign notes are all kept in Notes type apps or emails. Each is typed directly into the app itself, or cut & pasted into it from other programs. Essentially little different from a notepad.

I keep my browser tabs open to things like the SRD and other sites. Usually, I'm looking at spells or abilities I want to use.

The only issues I have that don't crop up with P&P are:

1) occasional freezes or crashes.

2) battery life- usually because I've been using it without recharging earlier in the day.

3) loss of wifi signal, alleviated by my hotspot.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think you'd recognize everything I do, actually. Nothing fancy.

My PCs, adventures and campaign notes are all kept in Notes type apps or emails. Each is typed directly into the app itself, or cut & pasted into it from other programs. Essentially little different from a notepad.

I keep my browser tabs open to things like the SRD and other sites. Usually, I'm looking at spells or abilities I want to use.

The only issues I have that don't crop up with P&P are:

1) occasional freezes or crashes.

2) battery life- usually because I've been using it without recharging earlier in the day.

3) loss of wifi signal, alleviated by my hotspot.

have you seen http://www.habitualindolence.net/masterplan/

 

[mechascorpio]

There's no need. Playing with tablets and apps like 'Morningstar' will enhance the gameplay experience for many groups, but the good old pen and paper style is still going strong.

Absolutely. Someone could have been sitting at our table using nothing but pen and paper, and would not have been at a disadvantage. Even if the DM were the only one with a tablet accessing Morningstar while the players used paper sheets, the game would have been the same. We still used physical dice. We did use minis, but loosely. For the DM and the players, it simply helped it run more quickly. None of us at that table had ever played 5E, and yet we were able to generate characters, comprehend what we were doing, and get through two encounters in about an hour. Not bad for a first game, I think.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I have no problems with the tech at the table. Mainly because if people are distracted or not paying attention... that's my fault, not the phone or tablets. *I'M* either not engaging them in what is happening, or I'm focused on someone else and not letting them in to participate. Those would be flaws in my game as Dungeon Master. I either need to step up my game to re-engage them... or accept that their character is not actively involved in what is currently happening and thus be okay that they are checking emails.

Tablet or phone use at my table are just symptoms of the real disease, which is poor DMing.