D&D 5E How do you define “mother may I” in relation to D&D 5E?

[Xamnam]

Good catch, definitely missed that! Looking specifically for just 'yes' and 'no' only goes so far.

 

[Ovi]

I think it's more a function of the fair criticism that 5e books take a little too much institutional knowledge for granted, and assume certain practices are understood without needing to be mentioned. They can say "As always" because the general advice is just so obvious (/s). I'm not saying it's not a failing. I just think the text makes more sense in that context.

Sure, and I've clearly references both cultural zeitgeist and a table's social contracts, which embed that information. When looking at what the system actually says, I strive to only consider that and leave off the assumptions of experience or my preferences and experience. I don't think it should be particularly objectionable to think that the industry leader after almost 50 years should be able to write a system that doesn't rely on having to have someone experienced to explain how it works due to omissions of important institutional knowledge.

Then again, I've written papers on new technologies for first responders so they can effectively utilize grant money (instead of buying things that don't work as they thought and so end up in a closet -- shockingly often the result of the expenditure of grant monies on technology). There you cannot assume any knowledge, and so have to 100% stand on your own while discussion application and use of technology all at an 8th grade reading level. I don't say this entirely in criticism, but also in sympathy -- it's HARD!

I earnestly believe that the choice to avoid clear advice on how to run 5e is intentional and part of the success of 5e. By leaving it open to interpretation/prior experience/personal preferences, you end up having the largest tent for D&D. So, I don't fault them, but it's worthwhile to note that many of the arguments about how the system is supposed to work come from that institutional knowledge and prior exposures and personal preferences and not from anything the system says.

And, again, I think that's not a bad thing for 5e. Clearly a successful strategy.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's better, but I still think it runs into the question of "why?" After all, if you have expectations of how things should work out, and they don't, you kind of want to know why they didn't so you can either change conditions next time something similar comes up, or avoid doing that thing if you don't like the result.

Basically, unless its a rare event, getting different results than you want without further information is the sort of thing that can progressively destroy the ability to make sensible decisions.

I’m going to hone in on 2 possible player reactions to that. 1) I’m going to play and try to find out about what is different in this situation because I know my character doesn’t know everything In the game. 2) Obviously the dm is just out to get me and shoot my character down, he better have a good reason right now or I won’t be back.

I agree having an action not function as expected should mostly be a rare event as the extreme of having nothing work as expected is very bad. IMO there’s alot of room between never say No and always say Yes. And never unexpected vs always unexpected.

 

[Ovi]

The layout and much of the writing is indeed terrible. That said, I'll post this part again, from p. 6 of the introduction

The success of a D&D game hinges on your ability to entertain the other players at the game table. Whereas their role is to create characters (the protagonists of the campaign), breathe life into them , and help steer the campaign through their characters' actions, your role is to keep the players (and yourself) interested and immersed in the world you've created, and to let their characters do awesome things.

Knowing what your players enjoy most about the D&D game helps you create and run adventures that they will enjoy and remember. Once you know which of the following activities each player in your group enjoys the most, you can tailor adventures that satisfy your players' preferences as much as possible, thus keeping them engaged.

By contrast, consider the introduction to the 1e DMG (p. 9)

Welcome to the exalted ranks of the overworked and harrassed, whose cleverness and imagination are all too often unappreciated by cloddish characters whose only thought in life is to loot, pillage, slay, and who fail to appreciate the hours of preparation which went into the creation of what they aim to destroy as cheaply and quickly as possible. As a DM you must live by the immortal words of the sage who said: “Never give a sucker an even break.” Also, don‘t be a sucker for your players, for you‘d better be sure they follow sage advice too. As the DM, you have to prove in every game that you are still the best. This book is dedicated to helping to assure that you are.

That's a great contrast, but the 5e introduction is still talking to the GM making these choices and not at all to the resolution processes. I mean, the above can 100% be satisfied by a railroad at some tables. It isn't actually solid advice to the GM on how to operationalize the resolution process or advice on what makes for good resolutions.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I absolutely agree that GMing advice in 5e is lacking and it often just assumes that the GM knows how to handle things. However, I don't consider "these are different ways you could approach this matter, and here are pros and cons of each" as bad advice; in a mass market game designed to appeal wide variety of people with different tastes that is perfectly sensible.

 

[Ovi]

I absolutely agree that GMing advice in 5e is lacking and it often just assumes that the GM knows how to handle things. However, I don't consider "these are different ways you could approach this matter, and here are pros and cons of each" as bad advice; in a mass market game designed to appeal wide variety of people with different tastes that is perfectly sensible.

No, that's about the best form of advice in the game. I can make an argument that it's not a spectrum, but two opposites and something completely different. The middle path has advice on adjudication that's pretty good. It's just not enough, and not presented as anything other than an option, and doesn't really go far enough. And here I'm speaking to what I'd have hoped for each of the paths -- more discussion about how they work and what they're doing to the play of the game, and some more practical advice on operationalizing them.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I absolutely agree that GMing advice in 5e is lacking and it often just assumes that the GM knows how to handle things. However, I don't consider "these are different ways you could approach this matter, and here are pros and cons of each" as bad advice; in a mass market game designed to appeal wide variety of people with different tastes that is perfectly sensible.

Sure. But the decision to do that has an impact. If we’ve accomplished anything in this thread, it had seemed to be that MMI as a problem comes from mismatched expectations.

When do folks have mismatched expectations? When the books aren’t explicit about the process of play.

That’s where problematic MMI is born.

We don’t see examples of people sharing their MMI complaints about Initiative. Because Initiative is explicitly described and so everyone’s expectations are in alignment.

It’s when the rules and how to apply them are fuzzier that the issues come up. And that’s because the designers didn’t want to commit to a specific approach.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure. But the decision to do that has an impact. If we’ve accomplished anything in this thread, it had seemed to be that MMI as a problem comes from mismatched expectations.

When do folks have mismatched expectations? When the books aren’t explicit about the process of play.

That’s where problematic MMI is born.

We don’t see examples of people sharing their MMI complaints about Initiative. Because Initiative is explicitly described and so everyone’s expectations are in alignment.

It’s when the rules and how to apply them are fuzzier that the issues come up. And that’s because the designers didn’t want to commit to a specific approach.

On a side note I do see discussions and disagreements around initiative. Primarily related to the when to roll for it.

 

[Ovi]

Sure. But the decision to do that has an impact. If we’ve accomplished anything in this thread, it had seemed to be that MMI as a problem comes from mismatched expectations.

 

[Maxperson]

Good catch, definitely missed that! Looking specifically for just 'yes' and 'no' only goes so far.

Yeah. When I was going through the PHB and DMG, I passed 10-15 "Entertain the players" and "Everyone should be having fun" quotes, but opted not to include those in my posts because those things will vary widely from group to group. One group might want the DM to say yes when possible, and another might like more adversity and not want a yes unless they can really earn it.