D&D 5E What Single Thing Would You Eliminate

[Oofta]

That doesn't address the issue of milestone leveling at all.

You asked about player agency. For me player agency is all about playing a character, not thinking about meta-game issues like getting XP to gain levels.

If that doesn't answer your question I don't know what your asking.

 

[cbwjm]

You get that this is a balance issue right?

Despite that both rage and Giants might last multiple rounds so you can have both running.

Basically you want free buffs instantly and extra attacks? While the wizard/cleric is using their actions every turn to get theirs...

I doubt there would be much if any kind of imbalance if the bonus action requirement was done away with. Besides, this doesn't change the fact that many of us think that bonus actions are overdone and their current inclusion has pretty much scuttled what would otherwise be a cool character concept, at least using the official options, it's why I think I'll turn the rune knight into a rune rager instead and have its powers activate when raging.

 

[TheSword]

Just out out of curiosity: how do you incorporate player agency into milestone leveling? I ask because usually "milestone leveling" is either number os sessions, or some story gate, and neither of those things really says "agency."

My preference IS gated campaigns. Each portion of which is a mini-sandbox.

For instance I’m about to start Age of Worms. Milestone 1 will be completing either the Lair of the Architect or the Lair of the Labourers. Milestone 2 will be returning to Diamond lake having explored the True Tomb.

Complete agency is overrated. If we’re playing a campaign then players are asked to come to the table with a character ready to play that campaign. I aren’t interested (neither are most of the players) in watching one person go off on a massive tangent because it happens to interest them.

They can deal with the challenges however they like, largely in any order they like. But there will usually be a rough end point and start point. Failure in the previous section may change the nature of the start point but in either way the players are going to be investigating a cult in part two, and part three is gonna involve lizard men. That’s just the way it goes.

 

[TheSword]

I would eliminate Agency as a virtue in and of itself.

 

[TwoSix]

My preference IS gated campaigns. Each portion of which is a mini-sandbox.

For instance I’m about to start Age of Worms. Milestone 1 will be completing either the Lair of the Architect or the Lair of the Labourers. Milestone 2 will be returning to Diamond lake having explored the True Tomb.

Complete agency is overrated. If we’re playing a campaign then players are asked to come to the table with a character ready to play that campaign. I aren’t interested (neither are most of the players) in watching one person go off on a massive tangent because it happens to interest them.

They can deal with the challenges however they like, largely in any order they like. But there will usually be a rough end point and start point. Failure in the previous section may change the nature of the start point but in either way the players are going to be investigating a cult in part two, and part three is gonna involve lizard men. That’s just the way it goes.

It's nice to see someone replace the subtext with text for once and just flat-out say they prefer tour-guided story path play.

I'm not being snarky; it's such a popular mode of play and yet there aren't a lot of people on here who explicitly advocate for it.

 

[TheSword]

I doubt there would be much if any kind of imbalance if the bonus action requirement was done away with. Besides, this doesn't change the fact that many of us think that bonus actions are overdone and their current inclusion has pretty much scuttled what would otherwise be a cool character concept, at least using the official options, it's why I think I'll turn the rune knight into a rune rager instead and have its powers activate when raging.

Cool. It’s a power thing. Your concept isn't scuttled because you can’t rage and use giant magic. It’s scuttled because you don’t get the benefit of both on turn 1.

I don’t disagree that bonus actions carry a lot of weight, just that they are intentionally balancing to prevent me being able to throw a meteor, take an extra attack, and misty step all on top of my normal action and move.

As an aside in the Age of Worms campaign I just mentioned, players can also use Inspiration to gain an extra bonus action or reaction in a round, or add a little damage or reduce a little damage. It’s a trial, never tried it before. They can each award another player inspiration 1 per session.

 

[Reynard]

You asked about player agency. For me player agency is all about playing a character, not thinking about meta-game issues like getting XP to gain levels.

If that doesn't answer your question I don't know what your asking.

I asked about player agency specifically in the context of milestones and how milestones often boil down to "GM fiat."

 

[Reynard]

I would eliminate Agency as a virtue in and of itself.

I think player agency is the only thing that separates RPGs from any of the other myriad forms of interactive tabletop entertainment options.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I asked about player agency specifically in the context of milestones and how milestones often boil down to "GM fiat."

Everything boils down to dm fiat. You can't earn xp until the dm puts something in the world that grants xp, and the dm can decide how much xp there is to gain.

 

[Oofta]

I asked about player agency specifically in the context of milestones and how milestones often boil down to "GM fiat."

Then let me turn that around. If player agency is disassociated with the meta-game of class leveling, what does XP have to do with player agency?

If you don't agree with the basic premise, that's fine. But either the method of gaining levels is associated to player agency or it is not. I think it's the latter.