D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[Minigiant]

What are you talking about? BA was explained in detail during development.

points to books

Is it in here?

 

[payn]

points to books

Is it in here?

The DMG nobody reads?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

points to books

Is it in here?

You are correct. The core books do not front the math.

Again, this is not a bug, this is a feature. The vast majority of people that play don't care about the math. Those that do will be able to figure it out, either on their own, or through a plethora of other sources.

Very few people say, "I play D&D because I want to do math homework." And for those who do, there are resources. They just aren't the majority of the RPG player base.

 

[Vaalingrade]

What are you talking about? BA was explained in detail during development.

"Math bad. Roll Dice. Dice Not Math Somehow."

 

[Micah Sweet]

You are correct. The core books do not front the math.

Again, this is not a bug, this is a feature. The vast majority of people that play don't care about the math. Those that do will be able to figure it out, either on their own, or through a plethora of other sources.

Very few people say, "I play D&D because I want to do math homework." And for those who do, there are resources. They just aren't the majority of the RPG player base.

Not explaining your game's assumptions and how it actually works is never a feature to me. I didn't like how 4e worked, but I was very glad they told me.

 

[Minigiant]

You are correct. The core books do not front the math.

Again, this is not a bug, this is a feature. The vast majority of people that play don't care about the math. Those that do will be able to figure it out, either on their own, or through a plethora of other sources.

Very few people say, "I play D&D because I want to do math homework." And for those who do, there are resources. They just aren't the majority of the RPG player base.

They don't care about the math.
They do care about the feels.

And what happened when a players gnome fighter misses a few crucial attacks.

"My gnome fighter miss too much. Strength too low. If me had strength like half orc. Me hit. But me not want be half orc. Cannot me be strongest gnome in gnomeria? Me want +2 STR and start with 16."
-Larry.

My friend Larry complains in Me speak.

 

[Vaalingrade]

"Math bad. Roll Dice. Dice Not Math Somehow."

Oh, and 'You get to fight the same wolf over and over. Isn't that exciting?'

 

[payn]

Oh, and 'You get to fight the same wolf over and over. Isn't that exciting?'

How is that different than anything in the last 25 years?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

And before someone says "everyone loved 5e math", there is a reason why the community believed everyone needed to start with a 16.

That reason is the online CharOp crowd comes to bonkers conclusions about what is “necessary”.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Because they are kludges. Of course you can houserule 5e. But the houserules are just bad rules laid atop the the poor assumptions of the original. And most of these houserules don't fit on most character sheets nor apply to apps so most DMs use a few hard kludges.

The best fixes would be the adjustment from the ground up. But then it wouldn't be 5e anymore.

What is your take on Success at a Cost or Success with a Complication being tacked on for anything that fails by 5 or less? Would that solve your issue with the math?
It seems like it would and it would make the game more interesting with these little nuances.