Search results

I didn't include this part in my quoted text, but @Minigiant also said: Hence my comment about not needing to define every spell.

I was responding directly to a discussion of using the loose wording to insert unwanted toilet humour into the game. At best, this a problem of mismatched expecations; it simply is not a problem with wording of the spell. In general though, I agree it's not necessarily about "problem players"...

It's bizarre to me that anyone would conclude that the way to keep toilet humour out of their game is tighten the definition of a spell that in no way implies it should be used in that way in the first place. How about the other infinite number of ways this kind of thing could be done in any...

Oh, OK. That makes much more sense to me now. Given @jayoungr understood you, I will assume the failure of communication was at my end. :cool:

"Most loudly ran back to..." Your overall point seems mostly reasonable but, again, you're phrasing this in a way that seems to imply some kind of moral failing by those GMs who weren't interested in 5e, and I'm not sure why you'd do that.

It sounds like we disagree on Command, but I will die beside you on the hill of the "expands to fill volume, 33,000cu' " fireball. :LOL:

Traditionally, the target falls down catatonic for one round.

Fair enough, if that's your experience. In my own case, I've never experienced games that bogged down this way, no matter the system (even when we were all in our early teens), which leads me to assume that if it's happening to other groups, it must be the people and not the rules.

Can you clarify what you're saying here? It sounds like you are suggesting that experienced GMs should have played and taught games they didn't enjoy out of some sense of responsibility to a wider community of new gamers?

I suspect demographic for smaller games tends towards "interested GM's with groups who are willing to try different games". I don't see any reason to assume players of such games are more likely to have similar interpretations of ambiguous text than anyone else. In any case, you don't need to...

If you have a group that are going to grind the game to a halt arguing over semantics every session, nothing written in the book is likely to change that fact.

I agree with this. The most tactical games I've played tend to be B/X and AD&D and the like, where characters have very few options once they're locked in melee, but formation, manoeuvre and decisions about when and how to engage are critical. That said, whenever I see people mentioning...

Then the barrier that needs to be removed is the idea that the opinion of someone on Reddit or EnWorld should have any bearing on your own, private table.

All good. I may quibble with your original terminology, but that's an entirely reasonable restatement.

"Supposed to" is, in my opinion, a very flawed way of looking at it, and suggests a third party had some right to dictate what happens at a private table. This isn't a Magic tournament rule or an MMO running on a public server; the only time anyone is "supposed to" allow a particular class or do...

Fair enough. As someone else mentioned the SRD should have you mostly covered. Save an offline copy if you worry about it disappearing (although I expect it will be somewhere online indefinitely; other people who care will keep it alive). If there's anything important missing, you can always...

Why would you expect all DMs to allow the same particular set of classes? Why would you claim they are supposed to? Supposed to according to who? Lots of DMs are going to curate the options available in their game, and this has always been the case.

So find like minded players or, even easier, those who don't really care, and play the rules you want. What is your actual concern here? Edit to add: I have a 1st Ed AD&D PHB, DMG and MM that are in good condition, plus a huge pile of 1st and 2nd edition boxed sets, as well as other non D&D...

As best I can tell, the assertion is that in order to qualify as a True Crime RPG, the game would have to exactly follow the historical events, with no allowance for dramatisation, alternative theories or anything that diverges in any way from the known events. Assuming such a narrow definition...

Or, more broadly, unsuited for any activity where you don't actually wish to participate in an RPG. An RPG would certainly make for a poor art class.