D&D General A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

[Paul Farquhar]

I make things difficult for myself all the time. As a player. In D&D. 5e, specifically.

Then you are not playing a game. You are engaged in collective story telling, which is fine and all, but isn’t playing a game.

As I posted earlier, you can't really LOSE in 5e.

You were wrong earlier, and you are still wrong now. Failure is perfectly possible, as are various degrees of success, as in the example I just posted.

It’s likely that the players will succeed to some degree, but any statistician will tell you “likely” is very different to “certain”.

If I sit down to do a puzzle, it’s likely that I will solve it, because I choose puzzles of a difficulty that I can solve.

 

[Manbearcat]

My players make things difficult for themselves quite often!

I make things difficult for myself all the time. As a player. In D&D. 5e, specifically.

As I posted earlier, you can't really LOSE in 5e.

And things get doubly interesting when system designers deftly engineer incentive structures around (i) theme/premise-driven moves, (ii) PC advancement, and/or (iii) decisions regarding currency gains for later plays/gamestate control such that they are at odds with or have an oblique relationship with the best possible play right now.

That makes the calculus around the tactics, strategy, advancement, and theme/premise very complex. Skilled play indexes a lot-O-stuff at every moment because the best tactical play right now and the best strategic play for longterm control over gamestate trajectory or PC growth or the most interesting/thematically potent play might all be rowing in slightly different directions...maybe not fully at cross-purposes (though there may be such occasions), but slightly different directions.

Obviously Torchbearer is the prime example here.

 

[TwoSix]

Then you are not playing a game. You are engaged in collective story telling, which is fine and all, but isn’t playing a game.

Yes, but I’m playing D&D. Whether or not I’m playing a game is an exercise in categorization that I don’t see value in.

You were wrong earlier, and you are still wrong now. Failure is perfectly possible, as are various degrees of success, as in the example I just posted.

It’s likely that the players will succeed to some degree, but any statistician will tell you “likely” is very different to “certain”.

If I sit down to do a puzzle, it’s likely that I will solve it, because I choose puzzles of a difficulty that I can solve.

I think of it more like arcade beat-em-ups from the 90s. I can die over and over again, but as long as I keep pumping quarters, I can’t really lose.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yes, but I’m playing D&D. Whether or not I’m playing a game is an exercise in categorization that I don’t see value in.

Fair enough, but don't try and tell me that I'm doing anything wrong by not doing it your way. Accept that you don't understand what I do and I don't understand what you do.

I think of it more like arcade beat-em-ups from the 90s. I can die over and over again, but as long as I keep pumping quarters, I can’t really lose.

Actually, that is an example were you cannot WIN. Whatever happens, you always lose money. It just has varying degrees of failure.

 

[Oofta]

@Oofta can you see any scenario where a player via character asks your character an origin question which details likely have not been already established and you are not required to turn to the DM for authorship powers?

i.e. Did you have siblings? How many siblings did you have? What does your name mean in elvish? Was your mother a good cook? Were you close to your father? Did you parents ever dabble in magic? Was your family religious/traditional? ...etc

I will generally discussed basic background info with the DM about where I came from before the first session. As part of developing my personality I will have at least a general idea of my roots. If I'm a wizard, who taught me magic or whatnot.

Filing in inconsequential details? Sure. I could see telling a story about how the innkeeper reminded me of a pet cow I had when I was a kid. Maybe I talk about how my father was a cleric and he wanted me to follow in his footsteps (justifying my acolyte background feature as discussed with the DM). But if I only have a general idea of where I came from I won't invent a new country, although I may add details about a small hamlet that no one has ever heard of. If I grew up in a bad neighborhood of the city I'd likely ask the DM if there was a name for the neighborhood because there may already be an appropriate one.

Basically I won't add anything that will have significant direct impact on the campaign world or our specific scenario. It's the difference between what my character remembers that only impacts them and describing scenes we're currently or will soon be interacting with.

EDIT: basically the same thing I said earlier D&D General - A glimpse at WoTC's current view of Rule 0

 

[Xamnam]

Metagame, I know I pushed the DM a little bit with the request for divine intervention; I'm not going to push my luck by escalating. I'm going to narrate my character changing in such a way that further requests of that magnitude wouldn't make sense.

Seriously. Of the things likely to make the game difficult for myself, constantly testing the limits of their good-will and patience seem like an incredibly direct avenue.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Thanks for that @Manbearcat, just a question to get your perspective.

In certain RPGs, if you succeed in an action, the rules state the player gets to narrate the success.
Is that more or less immersive in your opinion?

 

[FrozenNorth]

As I've said, 4e is the least traditional version of D&D, and many people do not view it as especially representative of D&D in general. Beyond that, do you believe your play was as the designers of 4e intended, or simply allowed by the text and extrapolated on your part?

That’s just an opinion though. In a lot of ways, 3rd edition is the outlier, with a definitive shift of power from the DM, RAW as a meaningful interpretive tool, dozens of classes, thousands of feats.

1e didn’t even have skills!

Saying 4e is the outlier feels like a way to dismiss 4e as « not D&D ».

 

[FrozenNorth]

What a wonderful phrase!

Does it mean no worries, until the end of your days?

 

[TwoSix]

Fair enough, but don't try and tell me that I'm doing anything wrong by not doing it your way. Accept that you don't understand what I do and I don't understand what you do.

Well, I would challenge that I don't understand what you do. My game tonight, for example, is heavily derived from old-school principles, to the point of having GP = XP. If characters die, the player starts at level 1 again. It has much heavier loss conditions than a normal 5e game.

When I say there are lots of way to play, I mean it. I'm just as happy to play FATE with heavy player-authorship, or GM-less Fiasco, as I am to play a dungeon crawl using OSE.

Actually, that is an example were you cannot WIN. Whatever happens, you always lose money. It just has varying degrees of failure.

That's a fair perspective.