D&D 5E What are the "True Issues" with 5e?

[pemerton]

just because you can find an example where it does not matter does not mean that it never matters

I didn't say that it never matters. I disagreed with your assertion that it should matter.

I watch quite a few detective shows. In those shows it is day or night as fits the mood. We see the protagonists at home, often in the late evening or the early morning, when it makes sense in the story. But it's often simply not possible for the viewer to actually detail how time passed in the show. Time passes; investigations are undertaken; past events are referred to. A RPG can work like this too.

It doesn't have to; but it can.

Which means that the choice to do things differently is a choice, which presumably is made for a reason. What's the reason? I know what it was at Gygax's table. But what is it, at most contemporary D&D tables?

I get what you're saying. And that's totally fair. However, there are times when the speed of travel and the time to get from A to B can actually matter. Without any guidelines at all in the game, the players can't really come up with any sort of informed decision without negotiating with the DM first. Which is fine, but, that's the trade off.

How long does it take to travel from Baldur's Gate to Waterdeep is not an unreasonable question for the DMG to answer. At least in broad strokes.

Often I think that estimation and stipulation will do the job.

There's also a question of how play works. For instance, the GM decides that sinister event A is going to happen in Baldur's Gate, and that it would be exciting for the PCs to be there just in time to engage with it. To help drive this sequence of play, the GM introduces a rumour - eg that in 7 days time, the epochal conjunction will occur, and so-and-so has been seen in Baldur's Gate and everyone knows that so-and-so loves conjunctions. The GM expects that the PCs, currently in Waterdeep, will head to Baldur's Gate to try and see what is going on, and intends to narrate that travel as taking 7 days. (I have no idea what the actual canonical time and distance are - I'm just making this up for illustrative purposes!)

Now, here's one approach to play: the GM narrates the travel as taking just as much time as is warranted to be broadly consistent with the set up (if the PCs speed up, they meet a child who needs taking home to their parents; if the PCs leave late, the weather is terrific and the roads free of bandits).

Here's another approach to play: the GM is locked in to the timing of the conjunction, and if the players can come up with a technique for being faster (eg all using Longstrider spells) then they can get their first in anticipation of the sinister event.

Which approach is supposed to be the default for contemporary D&D? Knowing the answer to that will then tell us the manner in which the DMG should give the GM advice on how to handle travel time.

(For completeness, there are approaches other than those two, but I think these other approaches are not going to be D&D defaults.)

 

[Red Castle]

That's fair.

Oh, I do this pretty much every damn time!

Why, you ask? Because it gives the players a sense of the passage of time, along with a chance to get a little bored and restless (just like their characters), and bored players sometimes do weird and wonderful things.

In D&D if they're travelling I'll usually at least tell them each day's weather, if for no other reasons than a) some weather conditions can slow or speed travel and b) it gives some atmosphere and mood.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that I never track time either, because I sometimes do, when I think it is gonna be relevant or when a player ask me to be more precise. I only got into this conversation because someone said something that reminded me of the speed of space travel in Star wars (always the speed needed to advance the plot) and then someone said that it can't work in rpg. I just said that it can work. It's funny how sometimes you get drag into an argument and gets pushed into an extreme even though your opinion is actually more nuanced... that's the internet for you.

I also once played in a game of intrigue where every hours was important. We played maybe 8 sessions and at the end of the campaign only 3 days had passed. It was really fun to feel the pressure of time.

Tracking time can be really fun, I just don't think it's always as important as some people make it out to be and sometimes I prefer to keep it abstracted, this way my players feels like they have more time to do what they actually want to do. Sometimes the tracking and pressure of time is a good thing, sometimes it can gets in the way of storytelling.

 

[mamba]

I didn't say that it never matters. I disagreed with your assertion that it should matter

well, we disagree. As I wrote you are free to ignore those rules, I want them included because they are easier to ignore than come up with for those that want them.

I understand that you would not use them, but I do not see your style as the platonic ideal everyone should strive for. There is room for both options here

Which approach is supposed to be the default for contemporary D&D? Knowing the answer to that will then tell us the manner in which the DMG should give the GM advice on how to handle travel time.

the table can decide for themselves, provide the rules and leave it to the players

If you insist on a default, pick whichever one you think represents the majority, I really do not care which one that is

 

[mamba]

Tracking time can be really fun, I just don't think it's always as important as some people make it out to be and sometimes I prefer to keep it abstracted, this way my players feels like they have more time to do what they actually want to do. Sometimes the tracking and pressure of time is a good thing, sometimes it can gets in the way of storytelling.

I do not say it is always important to track time, but it is important to have that option for those cases where it is

 

[Hussar]

I do not say it is always important to track time, but it is important to have that option for those cases where it is

Again, travel speed is hardly a huge ask here. The game DOES have it. And D&D has always had it. Heck, the "travel day" is a base unit of time really. You need some point to have your one and only one random encounter while traveling after all.

But, again, this is where it gets a bit weird. We know exactly how far a character can travel in a day. And we even have some common modifiers for that distance. It's a reasonable benchmark, if not terribly accurate.

And, really, that's all that's being asked for - a reasonable benchmark. No, we don't need detailed rules on the HP of beer steins. Don't be silly. But, knowing the break DC and HP of common objects, something that is included in the rules, is something that helps keep the game running smoothly.

And frankly, since we know the HP, AC and exact statistics of a flying beer stein, asking for some base stats for an object is, again, not a huge thing.

 

[Red Castle]

I do not say it is always important to track time, but it is important to have that option for those cases where it is

Oh absolutly! I said earlier that they should keep this kind of information in the books. Like I said, I think I got painted in a corner of the argument…

 

[mamba]

Again, travel speed is hardly a huge ask here. The game DOES have it. And D&D has always had it.

I was expanding that to other things, agreed. The principle still applies

 

[Starfox]

In classic play, economics can be very important. I've seen characters interested in starting their own business, or becoming a trader between communities. And of course there are henchman to pay for, heals and resurrections, gear for your hirelings and soldiers, upkeep on your holdings, and of course the domain game. Lots of uses for cold hard cash.

I agree with this. Having a money-based magic item economy like 3E and 4E reduces the portential for meaningful plots revolving around money in investment, politics etc. Basically, if gold = xp in another form, other uses of money disappears. 5E tried to avoid this, but it seems to be returning in the new edition.

Still, I find that in my own game, I do use the money = xp paradigm. Silly me.

 

[James Gasik]

Thing is, without those long-winded explanations some of the spells become wide open to exploits and shenanigans. If anything, a lot of spells need longer write-ups rather than shorter, to lock in some of the more common rulings DMs have had to make. More concise wording and maybe a better layout could help a lot here.

If only we could write spells as doing what they say they do and nothing else...nah, who would be content with that?

 

[James Gasik]

You don't need "dozens of pages" to have good equipment rules either. I literally have like 90% finished build-your-own-weapon rules, complete with dozens of pre-made weapons. Their entire length (I have them saved as separate .txt files for organizational purposes only) couldn't possibly be more than a dozen pages, and there are far more weapons in this than there are in actual 5e.

And I'm with @Vaalingrade, the last thing 5e needs is to make Advantage even more ridiculously ubiquitous than it already is.

It's almost like there's a problem with there being almost no bonuses or penalties besides advantage/disadvantage...