Search results

But it still requires some adjudication. What objects qualify as improvised weapons? And if all improvised weapons do not have same rules, (I for example might expect a frozen herring and a heavy shovel to have somewhat different rules) someone has to decide which rules each object gets. Same...

I just don't want to be telling to the players that their characters cannot try to cut a rope with a frozen herring just because the rules do not cover it!

Which makes "Purple Dragon Knight" a bad name. But that the subclass is a relatively generic knight-commander instead of some super specific and gimmicky thing is absolutely great in my book. Subclasses should be archetypes that represent several character concepts and fit to most settings.

But what this has to do with me or 5e spell rules?

So I am not quite sure we understand "incomplete" in the same way. I think it is a salient feature of RPGs that you can try to do anything that you can imagine the fictional person you're portraying to try. I do not think we can have complete rules that do not require any adjudication (and thus...

Disagree with me on what? What you think my opinion on D&D spell rules is?

Yes, this happens. This on the other hand doesn't. To do this fully is impossible in any RPG, and not even desirable. However, one certainly could (and I'd argue should) have far more structure than 5e does. I think 5e would benefit from having far more detailed skill rules. But I do not...

Yeah, this is my experience as well, there is not much of it going on in my D&D game. On the other hand in the Blades in the Dark game I play in, negotiation is almost constant. Part of it of course might be due different approaches of different GMs, but I doubt it is just that.

Nope. The fact that a lot of players are clueless about the written rules as well doesn't mean those are subjective either.

What? What is? Whether player and chracter decision space is correraled? No. Whether one likes it? Of course! How games are played is often informed by unwritten rules, yes. But this doesn't make it subjective.

Yes, perhaps. But that has nothing to do with the persuasion check. The cleric need to exist to be persuaded!

I mean yeah, this is just really perplexing and frustrating. I have hard time believing that someone could have genuine trouble understanding this. o_O 🤷 No wonder this thread is well over 2000 pages long! @clearstream where are you trying to get with this? A this point it must be clear what...

But not to decide what that information is. No. The character decides that they try to persuade the cleric to cast the spell, and they speak words to do that. It is all in-character, there is no divergence to meta decisions like there obviously is in the rune case. Like this exact thing...

Also why I bristle when someone suggests that the rest of the game should be structured more like the combat, wanting some tactical "social conflict" mechanics and whatnot. No thanks! The combat minigame is fun and I'm fine with it, if it is just a part of the game, but I absolutely do not want...

I just do not believe you're thinking this logically then. The player has the ability to dictate reality to solve the character's problems, the character doesn't. The difference obviously is there and it not a small one.

This is good example, as players having access to plenty of tactical information their characters wouldn't and then discussing it midst of a rapid battle and making decisions based on it absolutely is a thing that causes the character and player decision space to diverge. Like no question about...

They did though. And so does the GM in almost every RPG. No, that's called collaborative storytelling. It might be playing RPGs as well, but to be that it takes more than people contributing to shared fiction. It isn't, and I have never said it is or should. All am trying to do is to get you...

Of course is different! The player operates under knowledge that they can dictate reality, the character does not. Like if you knew your hopes and conjectures would have high chance of becoming reality without you taking actions that causally make them so, would that not affect what you hope or...

It's not. They are just completely different things resulting different decision spaces. How is that hard?

I think more general "warlord" subclass is far more usable that some super specific and weird thing*, so this seem like a good direction. * A lot of the newer sub classes unfortunately are like this.