D&D General D&D 2024 does not deserve to succeed

[Micah Sweet]

Tell me, do you take long breaks away from the PCs to fixate on things happening in other parts of the setting? Not in the "the PCs hear about a plague in Townsville" style rumors, but in the "meanwhile in the Court of the King..." Style events where the PCs play no role in the action?

Because I can't for the life of me figure out how you divorce the fact the PCs are the protagonists. They are always going to be the center of the narrative because they are always on screen. They might not be heroes (although I find all villain games tend to die quickly) but they are always going to end up in the center of all the interesting stuff because they are never not the focus of the game.

A novel like LoTR or ASoIaF can have a variety of people all over the place, some who never meet, doing interesting things because a novel has no requirement for the protagonists to be active at all times. Games do that, unless the players play multiple PCs or sit on their hands listening to you describe things going on that don't involve them. That takes a mighty good DM to do.

I get the whole "your character isn't special" is a tenant of OS gaming, but I fail to see how they can't be. The game revolves around them! Adventures happen in the town they go to, not some town 20 miles to the North the PCs will never go to. I mean, you don't have to do the whole prophesized Heros destined to save the world, but they're still protagonists.

I simply disagree, in a lot of ways. I do keep track of events happening out of the PC knowing, and I keep track of time in the campaign. The world doesn't freeze if the PCs aren't interacting with that part of it. Heroes or villains are not the only roles PCs can play, because those are narrative roles, and narrative roles are not required for TTRPGs, whether that makes sense to you or not.

You can play with multiple PCs per player, and indeed reasonable healing rules pretty much demand that you have someone else to play when a character was injured and is convalescing. The fact that this style of play isn't common anymore does not make it impossible to understand, as you seem to imply.

In short, I reject your assertion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If I go to Vegas and party until dawn, I still had a great time until I woke up with a maxed credit cards and a hangover worse than death. I'm guessing Micah is likewise opting for yolo.

I don't know what "yolo" means, but if I understand you correctly that's more or less accurate, although I would never phrase it that way.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

All of which are narrative tropes, not necessarily needed for D&D play.

Not necessarily needed, but it’s also not necessary needed that everyone the players fight is a homicidal manic who kills on sight either. Aren’t the city guards going to throw offending PCs in jail? Isn’t the enemy army going to take prisoners for ransom? Aren’t the giant spiders going to store prey in their larder to eat later?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't know what "yolo" means, but if I understand you correctly that's more or less accurate, although I would never phrase it that way.

“Those who burn brightest burn fastest.”

 

[dave2008]

I simply disagree, in a lot of ways. I do keep track of events happening out of the PC knowing, and I keep track of time in the campaign. The world doesn't freeze if the PCs aren't interacting with that part of it. Heroes or villains are not the only roles PCs can play, because those are narrative roles, and narrative roles are not required for TTRPGs, whether that makes sense to you or not.

You can play with multiple PCs per player, and indeed reasonable healing rules pretty much demand that you have someone else to play when a character was injured and is convalescing. The fact that this style of play isn't common anymore does not make it impossible to understand, as you seem to imply.

In short, I reject your assertion.

While I sympathize with your style (and DM similarly to some extent), it is only from the DMs perspective. Your players, when they are playing, are the story are they not? Or, as suggested, do you do a lot of monologs describing what is happening in the world around them for the player's and your enjoyment, ut that has nothing, or almost nothing to do with the PC? I mean the PCs can't really engage with stories happen a continent away or in another world that they have no knowledge of or interaction with.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not necessarily needed, but it’s also not necessary needed that everyone the players fight is a homicidal manic who kills on sight either. Aren’t the city guards going to throw offending PCs in jail? Isn’t the enemy army going to take prisoners for ransom? Aren’t the giant spiders going to store prey in their larder to eat later?

Maybe. It depends on the situation in the setting, not on what would make the best story or what would keep all the PCs definitely alive. That's my point.

 

[Micah Sweet]

“Those who burn brightest burn fastest.”

I don't know...TSR lasted quite a while and made a lot of product. I can't see it as a flash in the pan.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

I simply disagree, in a lot of ways. I do keep track of events happening out of the PC knowing, and I keep track of time in the campaign. The world doesn't freeze if the PCs aren't interacting with that part of it. Heroes or villains are not the only roles PCs can play, because those are narrative roles, and narrative roles are not required for TTRPGs, whether that makes sense to you or not.

i mean...do you do that for parts of the settings you don't think your players will ever interact with or will ever effect them (e.g. completely different continents they'd have no reason to visit)? if so, why? and if not, doesn't that demonstrate on some level that you DO consider the PCs to be the protagonists?

 

[Micah Sweet]

While I sympathize with your style (and DM similarly to some extent), it is only from the DMs perspective. Your players, when they are playing, are the story are they not? Or, as suggested, do you do a lot of monologs describing what is happening in the world around them for the player's and your enjoyment, ut that has nothing, or almost nothing to do with the PC? I mean the PCs can't really engage with stories happen a continent away or in another world that they have no knowledge of or interaction with.

No, I keep track of that stuff on my own, and bring it to the PC's attention when its relevant. The attention is on the PCs, and their choices, but I'm not trying to create any kind of story, other than leaving hooks for them to pick up (or not). What they decide to do in the game is their choice, and the setting will react to it in a realistic way.

 

[Minigiant]

Still not a mistake from a consumer standpoint. As I've said, lots of great content.

Ask Matt Coville whose favorite setting he can't play because Brightright is partially blamed for TSRs demire and thus gets no support and few care enough to run it.

Mistake on the consumers side if company death means you have no one to play with.