D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[Oofta]

Does the time you spent rolling dice and having anything happen add anything interesting to the game?

Yes. I'd explain but it's been explained a dozen times already. This question and responses are just on spin cycle now.

 

[Maxperson]

Well, that assumes you can articulate ANY reason that is fundamentally rooted in some established aspect of the setting/fiction.

And I can.

Also that you can establish that other logical alternatives don't make more sense.

This is false. As has been noted in this thread, if there are multiple things that can make sense, any one of them will do for sim. In fact, always going with the thing that makes the most sense is less of a simulation than not doing that. Things don't always go that way.

The claim that you are simulating something when you simply apply garden variety TV Tropes level lampshading, which I contend is pretty much all a D&D setting can achieve, is simply reducing the term simulation to meaninglessness.

This is not what I do. And I disagree that it is all a D&D setting can achieve. It's all about how the DM runs the setting and it's inhabitants, not the setting itself.

Beyond that though, obviously naming very direct proximate causes to simple immediate events isn't much in question. I think those are often also driven by game logic but "you broke your leg when you fell" can reasonably reflect how a realistic world works. As you move further out, this breaks down very quickly.

IME this is a large part of the division between classic and trad play. Classic play is mostly very focused on NOW and HERE. As you move more into the trad realm play takes on higher level trajectories and more game focused techniques become important. I just contend that simulation is a terrible name for them.

And you have every right to feel that it's a terrible name. I simply disagree strongly with the notion that it can't be done.

 

[Oofta]

It's not nearly as pithy as "Be a Fan of the Character", but I tend to view that guidance as being more "Be a supporter of the character's narrative arc."

Do your player's characters always have a narrative arc? Heck do your characters always have a narrative arc? Because sometimes I write up interesting backgrounds, sometimes my characters have goals. Other times? It's just Thumper the Barbarian who wants to smash heads.

Some of my favorite characters I've played or GMed for have been the ones I've followed into breakdowns, dissolution, or demise, because that was the natural ending point of their narrative. Where "Fan of the Characters" can break down for D&D is the normal assumption that D&D is fundamentally a game about beating challenges, and every D&D character's arc is intended to be a variation of "Get more power and make numbers go up".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Who's being pressured? I see people ask about problems they have and respond with the best available techniques for solving or avoiding them.

As for popular, I don't think you do this, but many many times I've gotten told in these forums that I am a tiny and insignificant part of the community and basically my preferences mean nothing because someone thinks they are less popular.

Yeah, I don't do that. Many of my opinions about gaming are far from popular. But I'm sorry if you've experienced that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So what is your idea game style? Because without drama and themes... wouldn't it just be kind of boring?

Drama and themes come out through the setting the GM creates and the nature of the players interactions with it. I cannot stand any rules that attempt to engineer narrative.

 

[Oofta]

And I can.

This is false. As has been noted in this thread, if there are multiple things that can make sense, any one of them will do for sim. In fact, always going with the thing that makes the most sense is less of a simulation than not doing that. Things don't always go that way.

This is not what I do. And I disagree that it is all a D&D setting can achieve. It's all about how the DM runs the setting and it's inhabitants, not the setting itself.

And you have every right to feel that it's a terrible name. I simply disagree strongly with the notion that it can't be done.

Simulations do not have to be particularly accurate to be simulations. Ever seen a simulation of a gravity well using coins? It's not accurate in many ways but it gets the idea across. Same with D&D being a simulation of a fantasy world.

 

[Aldarc]

There's a difference between "This is how I do it, why, and how I find it useful. Here are some other options you can look into." and "If you do it this way it's better." Because when it comes to DMing, there is no one true way.

While there may not be One True Way, there are also apparently "Bad GM ways"? So how do we sort out the good GM ways from the bad GM ones? Should we not try to cultivate, nurture, and promote the growth of Good GM practices? Not playing gotcha here. Just wanting to engage in some friendly discussion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

they are not saying that there shouldn't be drama or thematic occurences in their games, just that it is not the GM's job to serve them up to the players on a silver platter for the players to pick and choose at as they so desire.

IMO the GM serves up a world that lives and breathes as it's own entity, the players create their own drama and themes by the actions they take to interact with that world, and the GM narrates back to them the organic consequences of their actions

Seriously, that's it. I don't want the rules to "help" me with any of that.

 

[Faolyn]

The advice is already there. It could be spelled out better and I hope the 2024 edition does so, they've already said they recognize that they need to improve it. But to say this kind of advice doesn't exist is simply untrue.

Right, but "be a fan of your players" is from PbtA games, not D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They're in combat and they're still in danger, and there are consequences to their failed rolls--they didn't weaken or kill their opponent.

It's not the same as failing to pick a lock, where their failure means they literally can't progress past that area.

It is the same. The consequence of failing to open the door is...the door remains closed. The consequence of failing to hit your opponent is...your opponent remains undamaged. In both cases, circumstances may allow you to try again, with the same or a different method.