D&D General Matt Colville on adventure length

[Paul Farquhar]

C) Castle Amber is not exactly a quick adventure...

That’s hardly a typical example, since it has a whole proto-Ravenloft campaign setting tagged on to the last couple of pages.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Can't speak to later-era 2e as (other than the settings) I stopped paying attention to it a year or two after initial release.

Yeah a bit later, once kits really got rolling and detailed NWPs and languages and so on became more of a thing, it got surprisingly close to 5E in terms of taking a while to create a character. Especially as we tended to prefer PCs to have, not quite a detailed backstory, but a relationship to the world.

* - which has, admittedly, helped my dice collection a bit over the years: if you throw it at me, it's mine.

100% that is how it works lol. Don't throw anything at me unless the intention is to give it to me!

Luckily this has never happened to me as an adult. The last time anything got thrown in an RPG session it was actually by me, as DM, when I was 17, when my most munchkin player made a truly ridiculous suggestion as to what his character was going to be equipped with, and I playfully threw a eraser, you know the sort of two-inch long art kind at his forehead, knowing it would bounce off. It was an excellent throw and on-target but unfortunately he turned his head just as I released and it hit him in the temple and was thus incredibly painful (there's like a pressure point right there), and this poor guy was almost in tears from the pain, and I was utterly mortified. Suffice to say I never threw anything at anyone again (in any situation). Live and learn!

If someone doesn't do well when their characters die at low levels, that to me is a clear warning that they're also not going to do well later in the campaign when their characters lose levels, or lose all their magic items, or get a leg chopped off, or get turned into an earthworm. And the odds are very high that at some point or other all of those will happen...maybe not all to the same character*, but to someone; and if I-as-DM feel like I have to play favourites because Joe will get upset and Mary won't, that's just wrong.

None of this is particularly likely in modern editions of D&D, and where it can happen, it's usually fixable - as is death - and it's only non-fixable stuff that's an issue. Losing all your magic items kind of the worst of them, but one would presume any DM willing to take all your magic items would be pretty easy-come-easy-go re: items so enemy NPCs would die with full sets of magic items on them and the like, and thus it might not be a big loss in the longer term.

I would definitely suggest the fact that this sort of thing became less common and more fixable (not that it wasn't fixable in 1E - much of it was, just less so) is part of what has allowed D&D to survive. There's a thread about "Neotrad" games and whilst they don't fully become a thing until like 2000, there's a real change in how characters in RPGs are regarded between the '70s and the mid-late '80s, as more and more effort becomes asked for from players in creating characters (games like HERO really started this, but ones like Cyberpunk, Shadowrun and Vampire continued it), and players generally start to engage with their characters as characters a lot more and less as sort of mere extensions of the player, who only jokingly have a personality. There's also a change in DMing from the DM being the adversary of the players, and out to get the PCs, to a more genuinely neutral role, or even one more akin to an arbitrator, who is trying to get to people to a goal (which is to say, an adventure enjoyed by all). If characters were dying and being maimed and deleveled in D&D 5E at the rate they used to in 1E there's no way it would have attracted all the streams and podcasts about it, because people would have to be changing characters far more often.

I do think there's a place for the more meat-grinder-y, disposable character kind of game, but outside of horror/CoC I'd say it's a small niche one now.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Early D&D was great, and I played it much the same way as I play 5e. The main reason for 5e’s success is managing to recapture much of the feel of early D&D in a more accessible fashion (and with less sexism).

I don't think it is. 5E doesn't feel much like any OSR I've played, nor 2E, nor RC D&D, nor basic D&D, which I played back in the day. Accessibility + cultural factors is basically the entire picture with 5E's big success. It's a pretty modern game.

 

[tetrasodium]

Why would you think I didn't know about Cleric spells when I've been running the game since 1989? Are you confusing me with someone because of my weird new avatar? Do I need to change back?

It has literally nothing to do with what I'm saying. That you think it does is truly bizarre. If the character isn't dead/doesn't stay dead, the problem doesn't occur, does it? Think about it mate.

This is why deaths are rarely as much of a problem past 5th, and tend to be more heroic and people more likely to be satisfied with them. The idea that it's not difficult to find an NPC to cast them is unsupportable though. There's nothing in RAW/RAI to support that - it's entirely DM-dependent. Some DMs will basically run a guy out to you to res someone. Others will insist the nearest guy is an unreasonable distance away and then have him try to charge you more money than the whole of the party has. Others still will just say no. The sort of DMs who select for death-loving players (thanatics?) are generally in the last category.

Delicious in Dungeon has an interesting approach where there roving bands of miscreants who res you and then charge you money (I feel like there is something culturally Japanese in the idea that they'd do this rather than just rob your corpse but perhaps that's just me).

I'll start out with... PHB159 spellcasting services xge131/132 religious service specifically the bits about earning favors & services TCoE pg98 Religious order literally says "any spell up to 5th level" & RftLW has multiple references that all tackle you provably false claim nothing in RAW claim and point out how that particular correlation goes back to the "here are some solutions in the phb. Maybe read then" point. There were quite a few additional examples that I left out for being more situational too

The answer is simple with that bolded question though. You (and @EzekielRaiden ) seem to be approaching this tangent lanefan's completely reasonable statement started as if we are all talking about some sort of permadeath Ironman one and done game system rather than d&d where death has always been a chance to make something new or loop back through the revolving door revolving door. Since you admit to being aware of revolving door spells and have been corrected about their RAW accessibility now it seems the obvious question you aren't answering is why you are painting the reaonable scenario of a dead PC as one where the player was in some permadeath Ironman game system without the easily accessible revolving door spells. Since it's not reasonable to expect the game to be designed around "but some people might want to play d&d permadeath/ironman style" when that choice is on them please answer that bolded question.

Indeed.

I don't have the first two spells in my game. For the others, all you need to supply is the corpse...and the cost, which is far from trivial (which is the main barrier to low-level revivals)...and it's usually fairly straightforward to find an NPC to cast the spell for you. The biggest obstacle is often being able to get the corpse to town in time; there's a hard time limit on how long someone can be dead before Raise Dead (the cheapest option) no longer works.

By the time parties are able to hard-cast revival spells (9th level, usually) the cost is no longer an issue.

Sounds about par for the course.

I originally intended to include it instead of spare the dying but forgot & was posting late.The gentle repose spell(5ePHB pg245, 3.5 PHB pg235) is a first level ritual that pauses the timer on getting it done soon enough

 

[Ruin Explorer]

as if we are all talking about some sort of permadeath Ironman one and done game system

You're confused because you failed to follow the discussion. We're talking primarily about low-level churn.

Your whole point is fundamentally irrelevant as I said - if people don't stay dead people don't get upset.

So the question was already answered, if you actually followed the discussion.

I'll start out with... PHB159 spellcasting services xge131/132 religious service specifically the bits about earning favors & services TCoE pg98 Religious order literally says "any spell up to 5th level" & RftLW has multiple references that all tackle you provably false claim nothing in RAW claim and point out how that particular correlation goes back to the "here are some solutions in the phb. Maybe read then" point. There were quite a few additional examples that I left out for being more situational too

Why on earth is this spoiler-blocked? I'm de-blocking it.

You're talking about two optional books, and an Eberron setting book. So, no, my claim isn't false. Quite the contrary - that rather supports my position.

Instead of making dodgy references, why don't we quote spellcasting services from the PHB:

It might be possible to find someone willing to cast a spell in exchange for coin or favors, but it is rarely easy and no established pay rates exist. As a rule, the higher the level of the desired spell, the harder it is to find someone who can cast it and the more it costs.

Thanks for helping to show I was correct, and saving me from having to find the exact thing myself. What I said was:

There's nothing in RAW/RAI to support that - it's entirely DM-dependent.

As you have helped demonstrate, that is correct. It is 100% up to the DM whether anything at all is available.

Let's look at your other examples - XGE's Religious Service downtime option - you can earn 1 (2 on a crit) by spending downtime working for the church. Here's what a favour is:

A favor, in broad terms, is a promise of future assistance from a representative of the temple. It can be expended to ask the temple for help in dealing with a specific problem, for general political or social support, or to reduce the cost of cleric spellcasting by 50 percent.

Which is lovely, but from the PHB we already know the DM tells you whether this is available and sets the prices. So you've got 50% off whatever the DM thought they'd charge normally. Which could be anything from a reasonable price to an unreasonable one to "they just don't do/have that".

What about Tasha's? You're referring to "Religious Order" as in the Patron of the PCs is a religious order.

The benefits of having a Religious Order Patron for the party rather than other are:

Religious Order Perks​

With a religious order as your group’s patron, you gain the following perks.

Divine Service. In times of need, your group can appeal to the priests of your faith for magical aid. An NPC cleric or druid of your faith who is of sufficiently high level casts any spell of up to 5th level on your group’s behalf, without charge. The caster provides any costly material components needed for the spell, as long as you demonstrate your need and are in good standing with the faith.

Equipment. Each member of your party has a holy symbol or druidic focus, even if it isn’t needed for spellcasting. Each of you also has a book containing prayers, rites, and scriptures of your faith.

Proficiencies. Each member of your party gains proficiency in the Religion skill, if the character doesn’t already have it.

So if the following is true:

1) You are playing in a game where the party has a Patron.

2) The party agreed with should be a Religious Order.

Then yes you can get official access to "spells up to 5th level".

The Eberron references appear to be to this Religious Order Patron as well.

So again, you've shown I'm correct. RAW/RAI, the DM determines if any spells are available or not, and what they cost.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Early D&D was great, and I played it much the same way as I play 5e. The main reason for 5e’s success is managing to recapture much of the feel of early D&D in a more accessible fashion (and with less sexism).

I'm with Ruin Explorer on this one. Accessibility, inclusivity, an absolute crap load of free marketing from the podcast boom, and lucking into favorable socioeconomic and cultural conditions are all far and away more productive explanations of 5e's success than "it's like old-school D&D."

Particularly when one of the most common complaints I hear about 5e is how difficult it is to make it truly challenging, to insert actual survival challenges, and to get players to focus on logistics and SOPs rather than equipment, spells, class features, and personal story arcs.

 

[tetrasodium]

You're confused because you failed to follow the discussion. We're talking primarily about low-level churn.

Your whole point is fundamentally irrelevant as I said - if people don't stay dead people don't get upset.

So the question was already answered, if you actually followed the discussion.


Why on earth is this spoiler-blocked? I'm de-blocking it.

You're talking about two optional books, and an Eberron setting book. So, no, my claim isn't false. Quite the contrary - that rather supports my position.

Instead of making dodgy references, why don't we quote spellcasting services from the PHB:



Thanks for helping to show I was correct, and saving me from having to find the exact thing myself. What I said was:



As you have helped demonstrate, that is correct. It is 100% up to the DM whether anything at all is available.

Let's look at your other examples - XGE's Religious Service downtime option - you can earn 1 (2 on a crit) by spending downtime working for the church. Here's what a favour is:



Which is lovely, but from the PHB we already know the DM tells you whether this is available and sets the prices. So you've got 50% off whatever the DM thought they'd charge normally. Which could be anything from a reasonable price to an unreasonable one to "they just don't do/have that".

What about Tasha's? You're referring to "Religious Order" as in the Patron of the PCs is a religious order.

The benefits of having a Religious Order Patron for the party rather than other are:



So if the following is true:

1) You are playing in a game where the party has a Patron.

2) The party agreed with should be a Religious Order.

Then yes you can get official access to "spells up to 5th level".

The Eberron references appear to be to this Religious Order Patron as well.

So again, you've shown I'm correct. RAW/RAI, the DM determines if any spells are available or not, and what they cost.

I'm familiar with the discussion & remember how it came up. In a discussion anout PC death in general not Lanefan mentioned "An early, and IME impressively reliable, sign of whether a player will turn out to be a problem player or a good player is how they handle the churn and inevitable character turnover of low-level play." when you jumped into an ongoing discussion incorrectly assuming that it was only about low level play, but that discussion had been going on quite a bit further back like 214, 210, & 203. The statement in 203 was a fairly straightforward comment talking about TPKs in the context of campaign resiliency & how one PC surviving was enough to get back to town or whatever to bring folks back or find new recruits. Things really picked up in 210 though with a shift to enthusiasm to continue playing. Given that this started with his hypothetical example of a TPK and he's already stated that "it's fairly straightforward to find an NPC to cast the spell for you", I think that the references I've listed from various core & supplement books very much meet the bar of making the revolving door accessible in the event of a near TPK or a dead PC given sufficient party gold or favors to pull.

I don't feel that you've explained why the entire game should be expected to cater to a hypothetical corner case where the revolving door of death in d&d is locked shut and the PCs are low in level and they are of such a low level that the party is without resources or owed owed favors/IoUs they can use for a on and the GM is unwilling to find an NPC capable of casting a third to fifth level spell.

I put the details in spoilers because it seems like there are individuals in the thread who have gone to great lengths to avoid exposure to them. "low level" is a sliding scale and on one side you hjave PCs not developed or played long enough to establish firm attachments personal/party wealth or contacts in the world with the other side characters who have started accumulating enough of those things to pull a revivify★/raise dead.

★You noted being aware of the spells available, a first level ritual that extends the timer 8 hours makes this a thing that could absolutely involve the third level revivify spell even if the party can't yet cast it.

 

[billd91]

there's a real change in how characters in RPGs are regarded between the '70s and the mid-late '80s, as more and more effort becomes asked for from players in creating characters (games like HERO really started this, but ones like Cyberpunk, Shadowrun and Vampire continued it), and players generally start to engage with their characters as characters a lot more and less as sort of mere extensions of the player, who only jokingly have a personality.

One of the big shifts here is genre, so it makes sense that Champions helps lead the way. As a superhero genre game, death is (and should be) pretty rare or you’re not following the genre conventions. With some of the others, fleshing out a character concept requires a lot more than rolling up 6 stats and picking a class because you've got a ton of cyberware/tech specialist subsystems to grapple with or a setting in which you're supposed to grapple with personal angst. All of these are pretty different from D&D's history of wargame -> RPG, deadly dungeon exploration development. And as soon as RPGs broke out of that fairly focused sub-genre into others, the change was inevitable and would inevitably come back to influence D&D. I'd even argue this was already appearing in the early 80s.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't feel that you've explained why the entire game should be expected to cater to a hypothetical corner case where the revolving door of death in d&d is locked shut and the PCs are low in level and they are of such a low level that the party is without resources or owed owed favors/IoUs they can use for a on and the GM is unwilling to find an NPC capable of casting a third to fifth level spell.

That's nice, but it's also obviously not something I argued, so I dunno, find someone who believes that?

 

[tetrasodium]

That's nice, but it's also obviously not something I argued, so I dunno, find someone who believes that?

You are splitting the hairs a bit too fine now to avoid recognizing your error. Design is inextricably linked to lethality in play, especially given how far 5e turned the dial towards virtually guaranteed survival. When you unlink the influence design has on shaping the structure & boundaries of gameplay & table specifics, why does it matter how a player might feel If you want to unlink the two how can it at all matter if someone gets upset over a dead PC in a fairly extreme corner case hypothetical game ? I don't expect an answer on that because at this point you've made clear in 285 that you thought the discussion you jumped into was quite a bit more limited in scope than it was, you took a stray comment and unknowingly tried to sever it from the wider context of the discussion where it came up.