D&D 5E Do PCs at your table have script immunity?

[Nefermandias]

He didn't present it as a matter of preference, he presented it as illogical/wrong for the information to be there. He just never expanded it out into a rational argument with actual reasoning. I don't see any "Well it may well help some people but I have no use for it" or similar equivocation that would back up your reading. Rather he ALL CAPS says it has NO PLACE in RPG books. That's an extremely strong/bold statement that doesn't sound like mere preference to me.

Also I'm not presenting my opinion as purely preference. I'm suggesting it literally makes sense, and is correct, for a book purporting to be advice for Dungeon Masters to contain advice on how to manage/run an RPG group which might not relate solely or strictly to rules. I don't think that's "preference", I think that's basic logic. And it's easy to see that the overwhelming majority of RPGs do indeed have that sort of information. I've presented an actual argument and can back it up, and it's pretty straightforward. I think it's actually a bad idea for RPGs to not contain advice of this type, in fact, but that's been rare for a very long time.

You are not respecting my request for disengagement if you keep talking about me.

Also, nobody here is forcing anything on anyone. It's all a matter of opinions and point of view. Always.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Um, you said you would disengage. Didn't even ask others to stop addressing you.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You are not respecting my request for disengagement if you keep talking about me.

I'm responding to Galandris' points, I intentionally didn't @ you. /shrug.

As forcing, I don't think anyone has suggested that. Galadris' point was about "personal preference", which is something I would separate from a reasoned opinion/argument which is intended to convince others. To me, a personal preference is "I like milk in my tea", whereas a reasoned argument is something like "You should cook mince until it's browned - because you might get food poisoning if you do not".

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

He didn't present it as a matter of preference, he presented it as ill That's an extremely strong/bold statement that doesn't sound like mere preference to me.

In my experience, speech is more heated when expressing opinions and preferences instead of argumentation. Demonstrative speech is often much more muted (because if there is nothing to add after a proper demonstration). I have never heard anyone yell a syllogism

Also I'm not presenting my opinion as purely preference. I'm suggesting it literally makes sense, and is correct, for a book purporting to be advice for Dungeon Masters to contain advice on how to manage/run an RPG group which might not relate solely or strictly to rules. I don't think that's "preference", I think that's basic logic. And it's easy to see that the overwhelming majority of RPGs do indeed have that sort of information. I've presented an actual argument and can back it up, and it's pretty straightforward. I think it's actually a bad idea for RPGs to not contain advice of this type, in fact, but that's been rare for a very long time.

I agree it me be "logical" (or simply, expected) for a product like a DMG to contain overall advice not specifically centered on rules. However, it might depends on the target audience. A "What are RPGs" section is useful in a product aimed at a wide range of people (who might not be player but have heard of D&D because of a film or Stranger Things or a CRPG and bought the PHB because that's what you might stumble upon, however they are a feature that sounds strangely when the product is aimed at people who obviously already know what are RPGs (like some niche RPG games... Such sections would be unhelpful in MLWM or DitV, for example, or even in LU, because I expect all LU players to have read the PHB at some point). Same with more specific advice: at some point, rehashing advice one is already familiar is basically making one buy the same advice again and again across multiple products. When it comes out first, it's innovative. When it's repeated, it's becoming like "what are those strange pointed dice thingies", a filler paragraph that adds nothing. I understand your point about the appropriateness of such GMing advice in a "general public" product like 5e, but I'd say that it depends on the product when going into more "niche" products, were its usefulness is lower.

 

[Umbran]

You are not respecting my request for disengagement if you keep talking about me.

Mod Note:
This site tries to get people to honor requests for folks to not respond directly to posts - culminating in the Ignore/Block feature.

Short of that feature, though, we cannot police requests to "not talk about what I said or did". If you want that level of protection, please use the Ignore feature.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I understand your point about the appropriateness of such GMing advice in a "general public" product like 5e, but I'd say that it depends on the product when going into more "niche" products, were its usefulness is lower.

Context matters, sure, but do any of those actually not contain DM/player "how to play/run this" advice? I'm presuming DitV is Dogs in the Vineyard, and MLWM is My Life With Master, and LU I just don't know. I take your point re: not every section being needed (like "What are RPGs?") but that seems a bit different from not including any kind of "how to make it work/how it should work" advice at all to me. Didn't DitV in fact have an issue where the author felt he had been insufficiently clear on how it was intended to be played, and that's part of why he pulled it? Also random but I know for a cold fact people very new to RPGs ended up playing DitV once back in the day, I have a friend who told me about it. I know absolutely nothing about MLWM so I can't comment on it at all lol.

Of course there's also the hilarious situation where a "DM advice" book or section basically shrieks "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!!!" and instructs you to cease and desist. There was at least one WW Storyteller book which basically said "Stop having fun, if your [insert WoD game, I forget which] game is fun, and you're kicking ass and taking names, you're not playing as intended!!!", but given parts of the same book said "ignore anything in this you disagree with", that was very easy to ignore. There was also the whole "'Trenchcoats and Katanas'/
'Superheroes with Fangs' is an illegal and wrong way to play Vampire and I intend to end it!" thing which happened with V:tM Revised, but that wasn't in a book (IIRC), that was just on the WW website.

 

[Campbell]

Games shouldn't tell you how to play an RPG. They should tell you how to run and their play the game in front of you. You don't play Apocalypse World the same way you play D&D. The process of how a game is intended to be played is part of the game design. I wouldn't expect a What is a board game? section in the Monopoly rules. It's irrelevant. What is relevant is how to play Monopoly.

 

[Umbran]

Games shouldn't tell you how to play an RPG.

Much of "how to play an RPG" is "how to work with other humans".

The process of how a game is intended to be played is part of the game design.

The process of play is one thing. There's a whole lot about playing an RPG that isn't directly the process of play.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Didn't DitV in fact have an issue where the author felt he had been insufficiently clear on how it was intended to be played, and that's part of why he pulled it? Also random but I know for a cold fact people very new to RPGs ended up playing DitV once back in the day, I have a friend who told me about it.

Interesting about DitV as en entry game... Well, that must have been strange for him. And yes, because it is a very specific story-making, I feel it really needed a specific section instead of a general introduction, not because people would risk "not knowing what to do with it" but risked "playing it in the unintended way" like any other RPGs (something the mechanics didn't support). I concur with what @Campbell said above, the more specific, the better, the more general, the "more fillery". A general "Wheaton rule" advice is generally useless (since two human beings will seldom agree on what breaks Wheaton's rule) and I doubt anyone reading "don't be a dick" will say "drat, I've been doing it wrong for years!"

Of course there's also the hilarious situation where a "DM advice" book or section basically shrieks "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!!!" and instructs you to cease and desist. There was at least one WW Storyteller book which basically said "Stop having fun, if your [insert WoD game, I forget which] game is fun, and you're kicking ass and taking names, you're not playing as intended!!!", but given parts of the same book said "ignore anything in this you disagree with", that was very easy to ignore. There was also the whole "'Trenchcoats and Katanas'/
'Superheroes with Fangs' is an illegal and wrong way to play Vampire and I intend to end it!" thing which happened with V:tM Revised, but that wasn't in a book (IIRC), that was just on the WW website.

Yes, a section isn't necessarily well-written, even when it's specific.

 

[overgeeked]

I'm a bard! Which pretty much fits, and would make @Snarf Zagyg disappointed, so win-win!

My Gamer Motivation Profile: Proficient, Relaxed, and Creative

Want to know your profile? Take the survey!

quantic.page.link

I think their profile description thing is a bit off. The survey is interesting though.

Here’s mine, and a lot of it make sense. Some not so much.

My Gamer Motivation Profile: Aggressive, Spontaneous, Relaxed, Independent, Immersed, and Creative

Want to know your profile? Take the survey!

quantic.page.link