D&D General "Hot" take: Aesthetically-pleasing rules are highly overvalued

[Don Durito]

One meta-aesthetic, I would like to see questioned is the idea that character skill and ability should play a part in all player rolls.

An appreciation for pure randomness is often seen as part of the OSR aesthetic, but it was 13th Age which really made me appreciate it as a game design element*. Things like the 3 saves in that game where you just have to beat a number on a flat roll of a d20 or flexible attacks (where they work best - people focus too much on when they are used as a basis for maneuvers - but where they really work is in pacing something like the rangers off-hand attack which they would want to do every round) solve an awful lot of problems and solve them easily while completely bypassing even the need to ensure balance is maintained (because it's literally impossible for it not to be - if it's not a matter of character skill and it's not possible to add anything to a roll then it's not possible that some unforseen combination of things could make a character too good at it.)

*Controversial opinion, 13th Age is an OSR game.

 

[Don Durito]

Double post

 

[EzekielRaiden]

One meta-aesthetic, I would like to see questioned is the idea that character skill and ability should play a part in all player rolls.

An appreciation for pure randomness is often seen as part of the OSR aesthetic, but it was 13th Age which really made me appreciate it as a game design element*. Things like the 3 saves in that game where you just have to beat a number on a flat roll of a d20 or flexible attacks (where they work best - people focus too much on when they are used as a basis for maneuvers - but where they really work is in pacing something like the rangers off-hand attack which they would want to do every round) solve an awful lot of problems and solve them easily while completely bypassing even the need to ensure balance is maintained (because it's literally impossible for it not to be - if it's not a matter of character skill and it's not possible to add anything to a roll then it's not possible that some unforseen combination of things could make a character too good at it.)

*Controversial opinion, 13th Age is an OSR game.

It's worth noting that there are still some things which modify saves, but they're relatively rare,, or at least it's rare for them to be persistent effects. The Monk Diamond Focus talent would be a very tempting option even if it didn't allow delays in form progression, for example, because it's a flat +2 to saves when not staggered.

And yeah, I'd call that a pretty controversial opinion, given stuff like OUTs and the like. If it's an OSR game, it's a very odd one.

 

[FrozenNorth]

To quote a well-known Prime Minister of ours from 50 years ago: "Just watch me."

What, you’re going to declare martial law on the ENWorld forums?

 

[pemerton]

Sure it can, provided one accepts that there's going to be some natural variance in someone's best attempt each time. (i.e. no re-rolls)

And races can in fact be handled using pursuit rules*, except the parties start side by side rather than with one having a head start.

So while a thief-acrobat of x level might be rated to jump a 9-foot high obstacle, you can still have a high-jump competition between numerous t-a's of that level, starting the bar at 8'9" and slowly raising it each time, with each t-a rolling once for success at each successive height until a fail occurs. Or, and much easier, you just do a roll-off between the competitors to see who's best that day.

* - though I admit the pursuit rules haven't always been brilliant either.

The pursuit rules in B/X and AD&D don't have any sort of "opposed check" system.

The base chance for evasion is 80%, +10% because fewer than 6 (a single runner), -20% because fewer than 12 pursuers, = 70%. So the biggest determinant of who gets to win is who gets labelled the evader.

This effect is only exacerbated by differences of movement rate, because the pursued being faster is +10%, while the pursuer being faster is -20%.

So the pursuit rules cannot be used to handle a race.

With the thief-acrobats, what roll is made as the bar is raised? The thief-acrobat jumping mechanics don't involve checks, only maximum distances.

Again, all this ultimately tells us is that for those early 70s wargamers athletics wasn't a focus of the action. They had morale rules for determining if soldiers run away, but didn't bother having rules for whether or not they could be caught.

The idea that these idiosyncrasies of wargaming design have taken on shibbolethic status in parts of the RPG community - so that eg combat rules are a must-have but rules for athletics are needless bloat - is actually pretty weird when you think about it.

See eg this:

I would suspect that the number of D&D games in the world that include an orc bucket brigade is probably in the low 1 to 2%.

The bucket brigade thing is just a strawman. Which came from your post: Here. So the only person suggesting that D&D has anything to do with firefighters is you.

If a bucket brigade of orcs becomes an important part of my next game session, I'll reach out to you for guidance on how I should run it.

Well D&D is not about any of these things. If you want these things to be important to your game then fine... use whatever framework makes you happy. But I really don't care about any of this. None of these things are an important part of any game I run and if they do come up, I'll make a ruling and move on. Easy peasy. Cooking competitions, high jump competitions, races are small stuff compared to dungeon delvng and exploration. They don't need any time to adjudicate beyond a quick ruling.

Another strawman argument, by the way. Since no one in this thread is at all talking about cooking competitions.

I'm not expecting a system to cope with firefighting. That is again the same strawman argument. You are creating a completely unlikely and insignificant situation to make a point. Firefighting orcs is not something that is expected to be within the scope of the Dungeons & Dragons game.

Stop using that as an example of why one version of D&D fails against another version or another game.

I think you have me mistaken. I have never 'decryed limits and corner cases'. I simply have stated that corner cases not covered by the rules are well within the rights of the GM to adjudicate by way of GM rulings.

And again another mark for the same firefighting strawman argument.

Races? Competitions of song or other performance? Seeing who can clean stables the quickest, or cut the most firewood, or shovel the most soil? These things all figure in the stories that D&D presents as its inspiration. They can easily be elements of fantasy adventuring.

They don't pose any mechanical difficulty in principle. And will produce rules bloat only if the mechanical framework is one of activity-based subsystems, rather than generally extendable conflict resolution.

 

[pemerton]

You cannot, by design, 'break' Dungeon World

To quote a well-known Prime Minister of ours from 50 years ago: "Just watch me."

Watch what?

Have you ever played DW? Do you plan to? Have you ever read or even scanned its rules?

What do you think your breaking is going to look like?

 

[pemerton]

None of these statements are true or fair.

Why do you care how I prefer to run my game? You approach this as if your way is superior. It is not. Stop that.

I came into this thread to respond to your claim that:

There is an easy solution to this.

The player can simply ask the DM. "If I use Charm Person in <whatever situation> how would it work/what would happen?".

The DM can then take in the situation and the context and provide possibilities to the player that can be used to make a decision.

This does not at all inhibit the player from wagering stakes or reduce their agency. It instead allows the DM to handle corner cases that depend on specific situations in order to present the stakes and agency to the player. It increases the versatility and applicability of the spell by allowing the DM to judge cases not covered by the rules.

If this were to be hardcoded then you end up with two situations (neither of which are positive, in my opinion).

1. You have very clear but limiting rules that state what you can and can't use the spell on. The player can ONLY do those things with the spell and anything applications outside of those rules are verboten, thus limiting player creativity.
2. You have the official rules expand to further cover more and more corner cases and more and more specific details. Situations that come up in-game that don't have rules need to be presented to the designers and the players have to wait for an update or a ruling from the designer.

This statement is not true. There are not two situations that one ends up with. As I posted, there is a third possibility which does not lead either to limits or to rules bloat.

You may or may not like that - though presumably you don't care how others play - but you might acknowledge that it exists.

 

[Campbell]

In general I find the idea that the game can be broken comes from 1 of 3 common conceits :

1. The game has fragile math that can be broken wide open through player chicanery,
2. It is the role of GM to constrain players so they do not "ruin" the story or the fragile setting.
3. It is the role of the GM to make sure each player has their moment in the sun.

I choose not to play games where any of these conceits are on the table. This is pretty much true for Dungeon World. The game cannot be broken because the math is tight and it is about whatever the players decide to have their players do.

On the moves front a character move in Dungeon World is not like a thing you can do. It's when rules apply. Anyone can attempt to steal something from an NPC. Only a Thief will have binding rules for it. If a Fighter or Wizard does it we just use fictional positioning and the GM gets to make as hard a move as they like.

 

[Undrave]

I wasn't talking about Sleep. I was talking about Turn Undead as a clear example.

And I'm pointing out that there is still at least one spell that uses a non-d20 resolution mechanic. I'm surprised there isn't more.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

To quote a well-known Prime Minister of ours from 50 years ago: "Just watch me."

So does this mean the wizard can't even try to hide? 'Cause that's exactly the sort of thing I mean: I'd be trying to do reasonable things that aren't on my list of moves if doing so made sense in the fiction. Being me, I'd almost certainly at some point try gonzo or irrational things as well, 'cause that's just how I roll.

And that's fine. In fact, looking at a standard DW 'thief' sheet, it doesn't specifically call out moves analogous to D&D thief abilities. I assume that 'hiding' would take on one of several connotations, which would determine the sort of move it is, probably 'Defy Danger' as an obvious choice. DD is a generic move, so in fact your wizard could simply do that, and assuming it would apply as a DEX modified move, then everyone is on equal footing there. But this is what I mean, there are generic moves that generally represent character's intent. So if you want to avoid or overcome a problem in some general way, then Defy Danger is likely to apply. However, more specific moves generally carry improved results. A thief could, for instance use: "Poisoner Goldenroot (applied): The target treats the next creature they see as a trusted ally, until proved otherwise". As a move it requires a check, rolling below a 7 will indicate something went wrong (DM makes a move, I can think of many possibilities there).
Anyway, if REALLY nothing applies, then the question becomes "is it a move at all?" Its not like you can't just "do stuff" in DW. "I go into the bar", "I duck into the alley to avoid talking to Martha", etc. Maybe the later one MIGHT be a move, depends, does she have a rolling pin and a grudge? The point is, this is not a game where there are only a few specific rules that cover certain things and everything else is "outside the rules", its a game where fiction and intent determine what sort of move you are making, and any action with real fictional significance (at least within the reaches of milieu of DW) will have some sort of move. Granted, nothing talks about driving a car, but DD would still cover most situations.

Obviously, if what I'm trying requires some special skill and I don't have it my attempts are much more likely to fail. I'm referring to things I - as a real person and not a skilled adventurer - can try (which by default means my character in the fiction can try, assuming my character isn't disabled in some way), such as hiding when someone's looking for me.

Sure, and again, they will fall under some sort of move, or else be very simple changes to your position in the fiction. Even travel is covered as a move though. In fact the generic moves are fairly broad:
Hack and Slash - kill it with weapons, note that only PCs 'move', so you can give OR take damage here
Volley - Missile fire, this one is safe! but you could run out of ammo
Defy Danger - deal with some immediate threat, the details will determine what ability score is used
Defend - protect someone else, stand your ground
Spout Lore - Requires the GM to give you some information your character knows
Discern Realities - This is the basic "I'm looking around, what do I see?" sort of move
Parley - just like what it says...
Aid/Interfere - this is pretty obvious
Those cover all the basic adventuring-type scenarios you would run into in a 'dungeon' type of situation. There are also some more generalized moves:
Last Breath - you're dying, you can make a bargain with death!
Encumbrance - this is more of a rule than a move, really...
Make Camp - like a 'short rest'
Take Watch - yeah, its the middle of the night, and...
Undertake a perilous journey - This is your basic travel move. Obviously not all trips to the general store are 'perilous'.
Level Up -
End of Session - tally XP etc.
Carouse - have a big party, things can get bent...
Supply - Go shopping
Recover - the 'long rest'
Recruit - get you some henchthings
Outstanding Warrants - avoid, or fail to avoid, the consequences of your past actions (civilized places only, though how you define that could be interesting)
Bolster - take extra prep, study, etc. to get an advantage called 'preparation', which can be spent during play for specific things

It really is hard to run off the edge of this scheme. In order to do so you really have to just not be playing a D&D-like anymore, and even then DD, Spout Lore, and Discern Realities can cover most situations between them.