D&D General Styles of D&D Play

[loverdrive]

I didn't reject the power of the God. I rejected the God themselves. I don't need them and their meddling doesn't help.

This is splitting hairs. If I was reading a novel or watching a film or listening to a radio play and there was a character who had a dramatic moment where they abandoned their faith and in the next scene they were throwing bolts of divine energy I'd be scratching my head and considering picking up something else.

 

[Neonchameleon]

This is splitting hairs. If I was reading a novel or watching a film or listening to a radio play and there was a character who had a dramatic moment where they abandoned their faith and in the next scene they were throwing bolts of divine energy I'd be scratching my head and considering picking up something else.

I'm going to disagree and say it depends which way they were throwing those bolts.

I'd also say this isn't so much about D&D being bad as it is about PbtA being good. I mean e.g. GURPS, Fate, and WoD don't enable what you are suggesting.

 

[Minigiant]

It's pretty clear that the base 5e D&D game is not a survival game. 5e D&D doesn't really care about survival. As @Hussar and you both say, the game gives players so many ways to bypass survival that it never becomes an issue. There are other d20 fantasy adventure games that DO care about survival. These other games care about torches, food, supplies, foraging, repairing equipment, gear, journey time, health condition and recovery, weather and road conditions, encumbrance, square/hex/point-crawling, etc.

5e D&D mostly cares about your characters having cool abilities and looking cool while doing them. If these things are there in 5e, it's mostly as a result of legacy and tradition, but it's vestigial. It's mostly there for show but left untouched by many tables. I believe that Matt Collville made a similar point in one of their past videos.

I would never use D&D for a survival game. I'd use another system.

But some fans has staunch allegiance to the idea that modern D&D can do anything.

 

[Imaro]

I would never use D&D for a survival game. I'd use another system.

But some fans has staunch allegiance to the idea that modern D&D can do anything.

And some detractors have staunch allegiance to the idea that just because they wouldn't choose to do something... it can't be done.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Simple: you can say your character's words at the table, and even if you-as-player aren't necessarily as eloquent as your character you can still get the point across, as can the DM (or another player) in response.

You can't climb a cliff at the table no matter what, nor can you cast a web spell, and most jurisdictions don't allow you to swing swords at people. Those are all things that need to be abstracted, which is where the rules come in.

It kinda boggles my mind that people object to in-character roleplaying being important in a game that's in theory built around just that.

but somehow social interaction doesn't need to be mechanically structured? even though there's still the same divide between player and character as all the rest of the game, social interaction gets to work different simply just because it's easier to perform at the table?

if i, hypothetically a master mountainclimber, couldn't describe in excruciating detail how Grug my character, who has been climbing trees and cliffs and all manner of things all their life, how they very precisely climb the cliff with the right gear and proper climbing technique in a way that allows me to succeed without rolling any checks, so then why can your character talk their way past rolling to convince the guards just because you IRL said the right things? well sorry, you said those things and maybe you did say enough of the situationally right things and got advantage but now you've still got to roll those dice like everyone else does to prove that your character doesn't mess it up in their own presentation of that argument because they are not you.

i don't object to in-character roleplaying at all, what i object to is the idea that social interaction gets to be exempt from any kind of mechanics because it's 'character roleplay.'

 

[Minigiant]

And some detractors have staunch allegiance to the idea that just because they wouldn't choose to do something... it can't be done.

Of course.

But that's why you hear me constantly criticize 5e's slow schedule.

If WOTC offers no example, you can't be surprised people don't see the option.

Like I say often, 5e overly focused on grognards who already have a library of old books.

 

[Hussar]

And some detractors have staunch allegiance to the idea that just because they wouldn't choose to do something... it can't be done.

It's not that it can't be done.

Just that it's not done very well.

 

[Hussar]

Heh. Yeah, 5e supports survival play so well. There are just all those iconic 5e survival adventures.

Just like that bunch of iconic 5e political campaign adventures.

Oh, right. Those don't actually really exist. We do have a shopping list of heroic fantasy campaigns like Horde of the Dragon Queen, Princes of the Apocalypse or Storm King's Thunder. Y'know, those incredibly popular adventures? But, funnily enough, I'm rather drawing a blank at the survival campaigns from WotC. Or the political ones.

For all these claims about how 5e supports these campaign styles, I'm seeing a rather sparse selection on the ground compared to the things that 5e really does very well - heroic fantasy.

 

[Aldarc]

i don't object to in-character roleplaying at all, what i object to is the idea that social interaction gets to be exempt from any kind of mechanics because it's 'character roleplay.'

Yes, just because I can say the words my character says at the table, it doesn't mean IMHO that the participants and arbitration of social interaction shouldn't somehow be likewise bound by the rules of the game. What rules or principles, if any, bind the players or GM in these social situations? The GM may tell that the players are lying. What binds the GM in a way to play the NPC honestly or with integrity? Does the GM just declare that they see through their ruse? Or what rules, if any, bind play to respect the good roleplay of the players? The GM's whims? I guess then that we shouldn't consider that "true roleplay," since what's really transpiring is "sparkling GM-play."

Moreover, I think that the idea that just because I can say the words my character says at the table, that doesn't mean that this is the sole legitimate means of roleplaying. Many, if not most, players simply declare the actions of their character and describe what their character is doing. Saying the words of your character is not required. This is a legitimate form of roleplaying. Anyone declaring otherwise is engaging in bad OneTrueWayism about roleplaying, and that sort of thing has no place here.

I would never use D&D for a survival game. I'd use another system.

But some fans has staunch allegiance to the idea that modern D&D can do anything.

It's not that it can't be done.

Just that it's not done very well.

Yeah, can I hypothetically run survival with D&D 5e? Sure. However, I think that's a bit of a truism as that says nothing about whether or not it will be done well or to my sufficient tastes. Will playing that 5e survival game achieve the desired play experience without major alterations to the core rules? That's more questionable.

Likewise, just because I can run eldritch horror with D&D 5e, it doesn't mean that those rules will cultivate a good or desirable play experience that my table enjoys. Our table may be better off playing another game with rules that better supports the experience we actually want.

 

[Imaro]

Heh. Yeah, 5e supports survival play so well. There are just all those iconic 5e survival adventures.

Just like that bunch of iconic 5e political campaign adventures.

Oh, right. Those don't actually really exist. We do have a shopping list of heroic fantasy campaigns like Horde of the Dragon Queen, Princes of the Apocalypse or Storm King's Thunder. Y'know, those incredibly popular adventures? But, funnily enough, I'm rather drawing a blank at the survival campaigns from WotC. Or the political ones.

For all these claims about how 5e supports these campaign styles, I'm seeing a rather sparse selection on the ground compared to the things that 5e really does very well - heroic fantasy.

Like Rime of the Frostmaiden and Out of the Abyss?