Sure, when you're running a long-long damn campaign and want to have a bunch of heists, switching to Blades, or switching to GUMSHOE when you have a short detective episode are both stupid ideas, like, no one questions that.
But there's another thing worth questioning. Is running a long-long damn campaign, longer than Long Dick Johnson's, with an OCEAN'S 11-style HEISTS arc, then a MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS DETECTIVE arc, then WILDERNESS EXPLORATION arc, then, idk, TEENAGE DRAMA arc actually a good or sane idea?
Well, except for the fact that I detest TEENAGE DRAMA, that's roughly what the campaigns I'm running in 5E are. There haven't been any heists, but the parties have been involved in a mystery of ratiocination, a labor dispute, several planar incursions, lots of travel, several instances of research, interactions with powerful (mostly) friendly beings, a couple instances of contagious undead, some contagious madness (connected to some of the planar incursions), a couple revenge arcs, a crashed formerly-floating wizard's tower, some scattered rescues, a cage match with a death knight (to recover the death knight's soul), occasional extensive planning, at least one dungeon-crawl, and a raid into an illithid hive to destroy an artifact that has boosted and corrupted the lillithids. Now, you probably think the campaigns are insane, because one has run 77 sessions and the other has run 43; you might be right, but the broader point is it's possible to run one long campaign that tells several different (and several different kinds of) stories.
But wouldn't it be better served with a several separate campaigns, set in the same world, where the system would support the genre well and the characters would be tailored for the game?
Well, I prefer for the type of story that emerges from playing the game, to emerge from playing the game; I'd find it frustrating to play several shorter campaigns and inevitably leave things hanging in all of them. Both as a player and a GM.
I tend to not join long campaigns, because my schedule is a bitch and I really prefer knowing how many sessions there will be, but the only time I did, by session 20 or so I couldn't help but wonder "what the hell my action hero character is doing in a game of court intrigues?", and I was the one who actually had any buttons (I was playing a sorcadin with obviously high Cha and prof in all the social skills)! It felt weirder than the GM constantly staring at my damn lips.
I can see why you'd prefer shorter campaigns (even without the social awkwardness of being stared at). And there's nothing wrong with that--just as I (obviously) prefer the longer ones.
My argument began as, and has remained, that 5e can support additional rules to change the tone and gameplay experience of an adventure or campaign.
This is directly false. My response to personal experience was initially, “okay that doesn’t match my experience, so maybe your experience isn’t universal” and then “Okay, sharing your experience is fine and good. Telling someone that you know better than them, especially with no explanation or reasoning, is bad.”
Yeah god forbid I explain how I have or would handle a given thing that someone is claiming D&D cannot do, in order to figure out why they think it can’t be done, or in some cases simply because the explanation amounts to a matter of preference about how games should work.
False again.
This isn’t an advice thread, for a start. It’s a discussion thread about gaming advise and about the nature of D&D 5e and of “kitbashing” games compared to switching games or abandoning an adventure/story idea.
So, no, things suggested in the thread aren’t going to get the same reply as they would in an advise thread. If someone says, “D&D cant do horror” I’m going to explore and challenge that idea.
Unsurprisingly, this is full of sidesteps and rhetorical flourishes, while absolutely maintaining the claim that it is bad advice to suggest 5e is poor at something without extensive evidence while you xan claim it can easily do things without it. Not one-sided at all.
It's clear what your position is, and also ckear that you are not interested in a discussion, but in being right without concession. I don't think any of this will move the needle, though.
and also ckear that you are not interested in a discussion, but in being right without concession. I don't think any of this will move the needle, though.
No, you're either agreeing with fellow travellers or naysaying, neither of which is a discussion. Your opening post was an attempt at a fait accompli and every reply since is defending it, usually with pedantry. That's not a conversation.
Let's try to start over. 5e offers no support for heists. Other systems do. What say you?
No, you're either agreeing with fellow travellers or naysaying, neither of which is a discussion. Your opening post was an attempt at a fait accompli and every reply since is defending it, usually with pedantry. That's not a conversation.
Let's try to start over. 5e offers no support for heists. Other systems do. What say you?
Huh. It's on topic, D&D compared to bespoke games, and a topic mentioned often enough already in the thread. What's redefining, here? I'm offering the exact discussion you're talking about, and asking your opinion on the matter.
I'll elaborate:
5e features no mechanical support for heists. A game like Blades in the Dark does. Other systems do as well. What is your opinion on this matter? Do you feel 5e offers such support, and, if so, how?
Huh. It's on topic, D&D compared to bespoke games, and a topic mentioned often enough already in the thread. What's redefining, here? I'm offering the exact discussion you're talking about, and asking your opinion on the matter.
I'll elaborate:
5e features no mechanical support for heists. A game like Blades in the Dark does. Other systems do as well. What is your opinion on this matter? Do you feel 5e offers such support, and, if so, how?
Tell ya what. I think you really are trying to restart and get out of the loop we have been in, rather than my initial impression that your request was entirely facetious, so I’m going to just not reply in earnest for now, allow myself to be less angry with you (though my anger is justified) and come back to it either after work, or tomorrow.
@Hussar , sorry to get back to you so late. First I want to clarify that I acknowledge that 5e hasn't worked for you. Clearly we have different play styles, desires, or tolerances, such that what doesn't work for you, does work for me and my group. That is to be expected. So, thank you for your response, it is all 100% correct for you and I will not try to dispute any of it. Instead, I will present a modified version of my low magic house rules that I think may get closer to your needs:
Low Magic D&D: Race: No changes. You could ban or modify some races that have magical abilities if that fits your theme better.
Class: There are 4 non-magical classes in the PHB: barbarian, fighter, monk, and rogue. However, I personally restrict to just fighter and rouge so that is what I will discuss. With these two classes we get 13 archetypes that are non-magical. In my experience these can significantly change how the classes are played, but yours may vary.
Fighter:
Banneret
Battlemaster
Brute (UA) - I include this one because we have used it and liked it quite a lot
Cavalier
Champion
Monster Hunter (UA) - I included this one because I feel a variant will be showing up in a supplement soon
Samurai
Rouge:
Assassin
Inquisitive
Mastermind
Scout
Swashbuckler
Thief
Optional Class Features (TCoE):
Fighter
Fighting Style Options (5 new styles)
Martial Versatility (4th level fighter feature)
Maneuver Options (7 new maneuvers)
Rogue
Steady Aim (3rd level rogue feature)
3PP Classes: There are many good non-magical classes from other creators. I have seen warlords, spell less rangers (we use the Rogue Scout for that), scholars, etc. It all depends on what works for you. The 13 subclasses of Fighter and Rogue work for my group, they may not for you. We find with feats and backgrounds and multiclassing there is more than enough variety and options to make the characters we want.
Backgrounds: All 53+ backgrounds are available and provide additional variety to characters.
Feats: Required (you cannot take an ASI). This is the big one for me. The fighter gets 7 feats and the rouge gets 6. If you are required to take a feat instead of an ASI you will have many more options, tactical and otherwise, and much more variety in your characters even with a limited number of classes. With 60+ feats (not included racial feats) there is a lot variety. This is also the only way (except racial abilities) to get magic.
Optional: give each character a bonus feat at level 1 (like in MOoT)
List of Feats (includes some UA feats because the provide more options for martial characters and we use them and like them):
Actor
Alchemist (UA)
Alert
Athlete
Blade Mastery (UA)
Burglar (UA)
Charger
Chef
Crossbow Expert
Crusher
Defensive Duelist
Dual Wielder
Dungeon Delver
Durable
Elemental Adept (optional)
Everybody's Friend (UA – optional for all races)
Fell Handed (UA)
Fighting Initiate
Flail Mastery (UA)
Grappler
Great Weapon Master
Healer
Heavily Armored
Heavy Armor Master
Human Determination (UA – optional for all races)
Inspiring Leader
Keen Mind
Lightly Armored
Linguist
Lucky
Mage Slayer
Magic Initiate - this is the only way to cast non-ritual spells. (optional, limit cantrips to non-damage cantrips; option 2: limit cantrips to once per short or long rest)
Martial Adept
Master of Disguise (UA)
Medium Armor Master
Mobile
Moderately Armored
Mounted Combatant
Observant
Piercer
Poisoner
Polearm Master
Prodigy (Optional – allow to any race)
Resilient
Ritual Caster – the only method to cast spells over 1st level or cantrips
Savage Attacker
Sentinel
Sharpshooter
Shield Master
Skilled
Skill Expert
Skulker
Slasher
Spear Mastery (UA)
Spell Sniper
Tavern Brawler
Tough
War Caster
Weapon Master
Equipment: All non-magical equipment is allowed. No magic items or 1 per party / tier.
Magic: A player can only gain the ability to cast magic by taking the Magic Initiate and/or Ritual Caster feats. Magic can then be improved with other feats (as described in the feats). This limits general spellcasting to:
One first level spell cast 1/ long rest and...
Cantrips (Optional rule 1: limit cantrip cantrip casting to 1/ short rest; Optional Rule 2: replace cantrips with additional first level spells; Option rule 3: limit cantrips to non-damaging spells; chose options as needed to fit your idea of low magic), or...
Rituals.
Additionally, the only method to cast a spell over 1st level is with rituals.
IMO, this gives you a variety of character options (thousands of potential combinations), while providing the limited magic casting you requested (1 per encounter), unless everyone jumps on the magic casting feats (but even then it should run out pretty quickly). Now will this make 5e fun for you? I imagine not, but I think it gets pretty close to the low magic game you described with very only a few rules changes. Now if you can stomach using only 2 classes (and 13 subclasses) and you will not look to 3PP, then I can't help you. It works for me, it doesn't have to work for you too.
EDIT: And whether or not this creates the low magic game you want, it does create a low magic game (and good one IMO) and it was achieved with only one or two changes to the core rules:
No ASIs, feats only
Optional revision to how the Magic Initiate feat works
You and I have very different definitions of "very simple". You just required, what, four different supplements? Five? Most of them weren't even published when I ran my low magic campaign. But, in any case, if it takes me a thousand pages of supplements to achieve what I want, that's is the opposite of simple.
5e features no mechanical support for heists. A game like Blades in the Dark does. Other systems do as well. What is your opinion on this matter? Do you feel 5e offers such support, and, if so, how?
I don't really feel this relevant to this thread, but that has never stopped me before!
However, I am curious what is the support for heists that Blades in the Dark offers? I looked at Blades in the Dark recently and I don't remember anything in particular.
Now, I think the PF2e VP system could be used to support a heist scenario as could a skill challenge system in 5e, though I would probable mod the VP system which I think is conceptually better.
