Search results

How, exactly, you're reconciling an irreconcilable conflict between fudging and players being challenged? What's the point of executing smart plans, managing risks and picking your own battles, y'know, addressing the challenge, if you're doing too well enemies will get stronger, and if you're...

I'm not talking about stealth here. I'm talking about the whole package, the rules system. How does a working ruleset look for you?

I'm not entirely sure, what you're responding to?

Something being possible doesn't mean that the rules support it (read: make it easier). But, before I continue. How do you define "the game working"? What should it be doing to be considered "working"?

It's still a discussion stopper, though. What's even the point of talking about rules, when we assume that they can be just changed on a whim? That said, now I'm thinking Oberoni principle doesn't apply here, but "the rules say [X]" still isn't a valid argument in a discussion about whether the...

I'd appreciate if you stopped arguing with mod team about me.

Good ol' Oberoni principle still applies to fudging.

They can. In D&D (and all old- and mid- school games), yeah, rules operate strictly with in-universe stuff, story concerns be damned. This allows for undesireable, from a storytelling (in this context, read as: creating a story that can stand on its own legs and isn't a collection of anecdotes...

Y'know, a proper storytelling game, where story concerns are taken into account by the rules without someone unilaterally deciding to do some cheating behind the screen.

From a bottom-line, money-making perspective? No value, of course. From a design, better-game-making perspective? A lot. You wouldn't be handcuffed to anything by the designers choosing to speak the truth. Every game has a method of play it was designed for, there's no way around it. The only...

How this arbitrary decision is different from an arbitrary decision to ignore the rules and save the character? And, y'know, the alternative is losing the character alltogether anyway. Well, if you don't like it, another option: Action movie: when the rules say your PC is dead, they're knocked...

Yes, using opaque ad-hoc fixes instead of solving the problem for good with a transparent rule is an inferior style of gaming in my view. Even if one is using D&D for a story-driven game (which, itself, is an enterprise of questionable efficacy), the correct solution is to eliminate the issue...

RE: houserules. My stance is quite simple: if you introduce house rules, you're playing your own game now. Give it a name of its own because it deserves one. RE: the "problem". Yeah, there is one, and I'd say it's very deliberately created. WotC have a financial interest in keeping players...

Managing risks is probably the most important part of player skill. If they ain't happy with that, they're welcome to play a game where death by randomness isn't a thing that happens.

Well, vidya game designers have the exact same issue, so it's not exactly surprising. Dear Goddess above, how much do I hate bullet sponges...

I don't. If I think that I screwed up and asked for a roll where there was no need for, I'll just say exactly that. Fudging dice/numbers/whatever, for any reason, pretty much defeats the reason I'd use D&D instead of a proper storytelling game.

Being "Treasure Planet: the Role-playing Game". That's pretty much it.

If hitpoints aren't meat and high HP count doesn't represent superhuman durability, why exactly can you swim in acid, somersault from skyscrappers and all that, and then just shrug off and get back to fight as if nothing happened? No amount of luck, stamina and will to live are gonna help with...

I suppose you could use 5e rules to simulate superpowers... Which is like the least important thing about superhero genre.

If you want to make a point, make a point. If you want a clarification, ask a clarifying question.