D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[hawkeyefan]

I don't think they do, as many of them just autowork, so I think by RAW they would just skip this sort of "do me a favour" thing. I think it is cool gameplay opportunity, but not something I need the feature for, nor something that is aided rather than hindered by their existence.

I would say that there are many DMs who need a reminder that they shouldn’t say no as often as they do. And 5e has brought in a lot of new folks to the game… so it’s probably good for them to include auto-yes elements of play.

Everything in combat, just like the rest of the game, starts with action declaration: ie, the fiction. We then use the mechanics to adjudicate it.

So do the background features, though.

“I want to seek aid from the local nobility.”

“I’d like to get a message to my contact in Waterdeep. I seek out caravans heading to the west.”

“With the sheriff on our tail, we’re gonna need a place to hide. The commoners love me… I’ll see if any will provide us with a place to hide.”

Then we use the mechanics to determine what happens, and then we narrate accordingly.

 

[TwoSix]

Dave's boss wasn't very bright. Instead of picking famous people who Dave might want to get to know, he should have picked Sarah Little from some small town in North Dakota.

Gotta lock Dave in a room, and then ask to meet a 2 hour old baby in Equatorial Guinea.

 

[Mort]

by knowing the messengers, not by recognizing a mailbox…

It can also be because you recognize a "mailbox" for what it is - maybe it wouldn't be obvious to the uninitiated.

when why does denying the feature even once result in such pushback…

I doubt me saying ‘it takes a month to reach your contact and another for you to receive the answer’ is all that different from a denial when you need the help in two days

Because, like much of D&D, it relies on the DM not being a jerk. If the one and only way really REALLY would take 2 months then ok, the PCs need to find a different solution. But if it "takes 2 months" because the DM just doesn't want the feature to work (the famous soft no) then, no, that's not ok.

 

[Maxperson]

There are things within combat that automatically succeed though. You can automatically move your base rate to get into close quarters with someone, for example (barring some sort of legendary interrupt action I guess). You can draw your sword automatically. You can use action surge automatically. These things just don't resolve the actual fight.

Movement can run afoul of issues like being on ice, or being in mud up to your chest, or... Movement is not automatic over the fiction. It usually works, but is not guaranteed to work. You can draw your sword automatically or use action surge automatically. Oh, wait. No you can't. You can't do those things when you are asleep or unconscious in the fiction.

There's nothing in the game that always works without exception. Especially in D&D which is an exceptions based game.

 

[Bae'zel]

you do not need to have a class to commit crimes, and it is not limited to Rogue either…

Your ‘forced to take on a life of crime late in life’ did sound like they fell on hard times to me, not like they were a criminal for the last 30 years already

Guess I understood you wrong then

Sorry, to clarify, I was responding to your comment about the implausibility of a 50-year old level 1 Rogue having that Background trait. I was in agreement: anyone in the setting can have a background and its associated benefits, without a level in a particular class.

Commoner (level 0) priest at a local temple would benefit from the general effects of a "Sage" or "Acolyte" background, even if they never adventured in their life. It's just common sense.

I think? I don't know, I'm often awful at expressing myself in a forum properly.

 

[Maxperson]

Gotta lock Dave in a room, and then ask to meet a 2 hour old baby in Equatorial Guinea.

I mean, you don't even have to lock him up. The flight to get there would be longer than 2 hours!

 

[mamba]

It can also be because you recognize a "mailbox" for what it is - maybe it wouldn't be obvious to the uninitiated.

and maybe it is not a mailbox at all but just a hole in a tree and your message sits there for years…

Either you know or you don’t, ‘potentially recognize’ is not ‘knowing’ and not what the feature describes

Because, like much of D&D, it relies on the DM not being a jerk. If the one and only way really REALLY would take 2 months then ok, the PCs need to find a different solution.

you are 500 miles from where you assume your contact is and you just handed something to a camel rider, do the math…

 

[Mort]

and maybe it is not a mailbox at all but just a hole in a tree and your message sits there for years…

Either you know or you don’t, ‘potentially recognize’ is not ‘knowing’ and not what the feature describes


you are 500 miles from where you assume your contact is, and you just handed something to a camel rider, do the math…

This is exactly what I meant by looking for reasons to say no, or looking for reasons to make the feature useless.

If the DM is going to do this - then the best route is to instead just not allow the feature in the first place. Use the new backgrounds that have eliminated all of these features in favor of purely mechanical (mostly feat) bennies.

 

[prabe]

This is exactly what I meant by looking for reasons to say no, or looking for reasons to make the feature useless.

If the DM is going to do this - then the best route is to instead just not allow the feature in the first place. Use the new backgrounds that have eliminated all of these features in favor of purely mechanical (mostly feat) bennies.

I think that if the DM is just going to nope-out background features--and it's clear there are a lot of DMs who do exactly that--then the change in both 5e2024 and ToV to feats/talents instead of more-narrative background features is probably going to work out better all around. DMs won't have to worry about players getting their sticky fingerprints on their precious settings; players won't have to worry about whether the DM will allow their background features to do what they say they do.

 

[Bae'zel]

It might be valuable to inform players during the campaign pitch (or session 0) of the effectiveness, or "realism" of non-magical concepts. Eg, communication, contacts, physics etc...

Might help to avoid mis-matched expectations with players, especially those who might assume that their "mundane" character traits (eg, Background features) are grounded in real-world plausibility rather than high fantasy tropes.

I can see some players being cool with that. Be clear to discourage them from relying too much on mundane concepts, rather to encourage them to seek out magical tools and assets. Could be interesting, if that's the goal.

Wanna connect with your contact thousands of miles away? Okay that will be 20 gold and a 2 month wait. Can't wait that long? Do a job for the local Wizard to get this done faster. Or steal that Sending Stone from the temple of Set.

Something like that?