D&D 5E D&D compared to Bespoke Genre TTRPGs

[prabe]

I think it's possible to bring a shared expectation that the DM should make their rulings firmly with only the fiction in mind (as was the original expectation in older versions of the game). I'm not seeing that as a general expectation in the DMG what with all the lead storyteller language it seems enamored with.

I do think the vast majority of DMs try to respect the players' dice rolls, but more in a improv storyteller fashion where you are still skewing results in certain directions. I know you do not run the game that way, but I have encountered it all over the place. I think it's quite compatible with the DMG.

My interpretation of the text in the books, where the DM narrates the results, is that they didn't tell the DM to honor the results of any checks or other die rolls because they didn't think they needed to. I mean, in principle, if the DM doesn't want a check to be passable they can skip the roll.

(And thanks for the vote of ... trust or confidence. I genuinely appreciate that.

 

[prabe]

I didn't say about ignoring the results.

How success look like? How fail looks like?

Let's say, city watch shows up to a scene of a fight between the party and the NPCs. My character tries to play a damsel in distress, attracting the attention of the watchmen with "HEEELP" yells.

The GM calls for a Deception check (or Persuasion, or flat Charisma, doesn't matter — that's negotiable). Cool. I beat the DC. Cool.

Then what? Is my success that they rush to help, or that they don't just kick everyone's ass and then sort us out later? Or maybe they'll help, but only for a generous bribe?

Hell if I know. Before the GM tells me, all of the outcomes are possible.

Is it good for the DM to be clear about what success and failure look like? Yes. If the DM is narrating results that don't match up with the results (or the decision if the roll is bypassed) then the DM is breaking the rules. Implicit rules, but still rules.

 

[tetrasodium]

I said the DM decides if the roll is necessary. I said the DM stops deciding once the dice are rolled.

Would more guidance on setting DCs be good? Yes. Is it a good idea to have more DCs be player-facing? Yes. Neither of those has anything to do with when the DM stops deciding.

If you compare the 5e dmg to the dmg in past editions WotC basically skipped out on providing any guidance to gm's on the mechanical elements of the system. As a good example that should have objective crunch. compare 3.5' guidance on awarding experience to the sad 5e equivalents.

 

[prabe]

If you compare the 5e dmg to the dmg in past editions WotC basically skipped out on providing any guidance to gm's on the mechanical elements of the system. As a good example that should have objective crunch. compare 3.5' guidance on awarding experience to the sad 5e equivalents.

I don't bother with XP, but I don't disagree that they went too far in the direction of removing crunch--and some of the crunch they clearly decided later wasn't exactly right (which is why so much of it is rewritten revised and expanded in. e.g., Xanathar's).

 

[loverdrive]

Is it good for the DM to be clear about what success and failure look like? Yes. If the DM is narrating results that don't match up with the results (or the decision if the roll is bypassed) then the DM is breaking the rules. Implicit rules, but still rules.

I mean... I just gave you a three examples of very different outcomes that all are consistent with a successful roll in this situation.

Sure, their narration is consistent and they aren't breaking the rules.

It's still a black box. Okay, a gray box — at least, I know that I need to roll high (though I've seen a Barbarian rolling 25+ on an Intimidation check to extract information from an NPC... And scaring him to death instead, but that's just stupidity and we can ignore that).

Also, with a somewhat new trend of narrating failures as "turns out, this was harder than it looked..." to avoid PCs looking incompetent, things get even more blurry.

 

[tetrasodium]

I don't bother with XP, but I don't disagree that they went too far in the direction of removing crunch--and some of the crunch they clearly decided later wasn't exactly right (which is why so much of it is rewritten revised and expanded in. e.g., Xanathar's).

It's not just xp, nearly any area of crunch game balance rules tinkering or whatever where past editions gave significant gm guidance into how the system works & how to make it sing were pretty much replaced with "rulings not rules" and "it's easy to change" in crayon. I only picked the sections on experience because I could link to an old discussion with screengrabs of the old dmg sections.

The "crunch" they added to xge/tcoe is almost entirely player facing and still provides the gm with little if any insight into the pros & cons or things to be aware of when making changes. edit, I think I linked to a section in the 2e dmg on awarding treasure earlier too. If a gm doesn't learn to gm from some other system or version it's just pure trial & error guesswork

 

[prabe]

I mean... I just gave you a three examples of very different outcomes that all are consistent with a successful roll in this situation.

So ... heterogeneity and all-a-that, but if I'm DMing and it's not clear what result you want, I'll ask. If what you want isn't consistent with what's come before, we'll negotiate. If it's as sketched-out as your thumbnail above, I'd literally let you choose the result.

Also, with a somewhat new trend of narrating failures as "turns out, this was harder than it looked..." to avoid PCs looking incompetent, things get even more blurry.

This connects up to a different trend I dislike, which is telling me my character is awesome when in practice they aren't. Different thing. In your case, it's a failure to imagine a way for a competent person to fail (and if it's that difficult, maybe the check isn't necessary?).

 

[prabe]

It's not just xp, nearly any area of crunch game balance rules tinkering or whatever where past editions gave significant gm guidance into how the system works & how to make it sing were pretty much replaced with "rulings not rules" and "it's easy to change" in crayon. I only picked the sections on experience because I could link to an old discussion with screengrabs of the old dmg sections.

The "crunch" they added to xge/tcoe is almost entirely player facing and still provides the gm with little if any insight into the pros & cons or things to be aware of when making changes

While I don't disagree that more (and better) guidance would have been good, I don't find 5E to be so ... objectionable as you seem to. I've found it hackable and easy to run and play and understand from almost immediately after picking up the books. Different people will have different preferences.

 

[tetrasodium]

While I don't disagree that more (and better) guidance would have been good, I don't find 5E to be so ... objectionable as you seem to. I've found it hackable and easy to run and play and understand from almost immediately after picking up the books. Different people will have different preferences.

Oh I can run it just fine. I can play it just fine. If I join a game run by a less experienced GM there's literally nothing I can point them towards between sessions or whatever other than back seat GM'ing.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think I'd put it as:

In 5e this was intentfully designed. Therefore, if you're playing 5e, you accept that this is "All Feature", "No Bug." WotC specifically designed in heterogenity; each GM making the game their own.

Sure.

I am not sure I understand what you are even trying to say here. I would simply reply that the system as you conceive it doesn't seem to have any switches at all. Yes, you can make it pretty much impossible to pass most checks for your PCs, so can a 4e DM or myself running HoML

I wasn’t talking a switch within the game, I was saying that the difference pointed out in the post I replied to is one which informs both what type of game a group is most likely to enjoy as a primary system, and whether it is easier to do one or the other of the following;

• Hack the system you’re already using
• Switch to a different game