Windrunner
Explorer
Sorry, old guy here, and I am trying to not sound grumpy, but I have been DM'ing since 1978 -- every edition except 4. I love 5E. And I love what I have learned and wish I had learned it earlier. Times when I had trouble with campaigns, both as a DM and as a player, was when the players lacked agency. The first couple of Dragonlance adventures were VERY railroading and my players hated them. Dark Sun had major changes to magic and players hated. A DM homeworld was set in a major city where the entire capital was under the effects of a Globe of Invulnerability and no spell casting. I and the other players hated it and quit.
I currently try to let the players play what they want to play and then adjust the adventure. That doesn't mean there aren't some places a drow could not walk openly, but it also doesn't mean I ban drow PC's. I simply talk with the player about some of the challenges they might face, but the choice is their's. And we do have a long session zero. Usually, a month or two before the current campaign ends, we start talking about the next one. I get player input on what they want to see included and I give information that would help them tailor their choices to the tone and setting. Now this is possible because I have a group that has played together weekly for five+ years, but it can be condensed for new players.
As for rules, I also think 5E is best. It's more consistently clear by using terms that help for consistent rulings. And not everything is RAW. There are interactions between effects that are not covered in the rules. I make my best ruling, we discuss it, and then we stick with it. The last question I ask: Are we ok with that? OR is there something I am missing? At the time, someone may not like the ruling, but everyone can input on the thinking, AND the ruling is applied consistently, both against the players and against the monsters. Players can trust that and adapt. I like how it works.
Now, this is just my opinion and I rarely have time to respond, so I will apologize in advance that I probably don't have time to respond to someone that wants to pick this apart point by point. This is not to argue how you should play, this is just to give a sense of what I found works well and feel free to steal anything that might help you. Good luck and Good Gaming.
I currently try to let the players play what they want to play and then adjust the adventure. That doesn't mean there aren't some places a drow could not walk openly, but it also doesn't mean I ban drow PC's. I simply talk with the player about some of the challenges they might face, but the choice is their's. And we do have a long session zero. Usually, a month or two before the current campaign ends, we start talking about the next one. I get player input on what they want to see included and I give information that would help them tailor their choices to the tone and setting. Now this is possible because I have a group that has played together weekly for five+ years, but it can be condensed for new players.
As for rules, I also think 5E is best. It's more consistently clear by using terms that help for consistent rulings. And not everything is RAW. There are interactions between effects that are not covered in the rules. I make my best ruling, we discuss it, and then we stick with it. The last question I ask: Are we ok with that? OR is there something I am missing? At the time, someone may not like the ruling, but everyone can input on the thinking, AND the ruling is applied consistently, both against the players and against the monsters. Players can trust that and adapt. I like how it works.
Now, this is just my opinion and I rarely have time to respond, so I will apologize in advance that I probably don't have time to respond to someone that wants to pick this apart point by point. This is not to argue how you should play, this is just to give a sense of what I found works well and feel free to steal anything that might help you. Good luck and Good Gaming.