Search results

Yes, as I originally said, For the players to be properly challenged (assuming that's what the group actually wants, many don't), the DM must (and must know how to) control the pace of play. This isn't railroading or fiat, it's running the game and game management. Your position seems to be...

It matters because the players want to complete the quest. If they don't, why exactly are they playing? This, again, assumes complete disengagement for the game and the setting. If this is the case, why are the players even playing? How are setting incentives not "credible incentives?" You are...

Of course the players have to "choose to care," Player engagement is absolutely key in any gaming experience. System design can certainly help in rewarding players engagement. But you seem to be saying it can force it? That the system can force the players into better system engagement and...

You've completely lost me. I just don't understand. The players are presented with the choice of failure of their objective if they choose to fully rest. If the objective is important to them, they'll power forward, if not they'll rest. So the point is to make sure they actually care about the...

I'm sorry, but who the heck are you playing with? My players absolutely care if their objectives fail - that's one big reason they are playing the game. They also understand consequences resulting from their actions. I've never DM'd for or played in a group that just simply "didn't care." Why...

I don't really understand this statement. The group almost certainly cares about accomplishing whatever objective they set out on. Let's say that objective is to bring in a certain fugitive. They learn the guy is at a certain location. If they choose to rest for 8 hours (to be at optimal...

From a strictly mechanical stand point (assuming the rest is finished), sure taking a rest of optimal. But that's not at all true from an actual game perspective. There can be all sorts of problems for a group that rests "whenever they want," as opposed to wisely picking their spots.

That actually tracks. The biggest difference, for me, has been sticking to a more 4e approach to NPC'S, which is still quite easy with 5e. Namely that they just need to serve the purpose they are for. Where 3e really preached designing the monsters and NPCs just like PCs. Which got more and...

I've found 5e much more DM friendly than 3e. Specifically, DMing 3e to high level (tier 4) became a difficult slog for me. I've found DMing high level 5e significantly easier, and have enjoyed DMing through tier 4 a lot.

You're missing a major part of the 5e market, young people. When my son was in 7th grade (about 6 years ago) he joined the D&D club, it was BY FAR the biggest club at his middle school. It was so big they had to get a bigger room for it, and there was even a wait list - with parents calling and...

I think Campaign 1 had some things really worth emulating. For example, the way Mercer world builds. Starting small and then expanding from there (both in terms of the physical world and the lore) is a great way to do it, not the only way, but a pretty good one. Exandria is now very developed...

I've always been a big fan of alternate abilities for skills, as long as there's a good explanation and it's not absurd. Sure that means results by table may vary, but since I'm only concerned about my table when I DM, it's generally not an issue With the History skill, I consider it not just...

At the end of the day, it's usually about space issues, pretty hard to fit everything in. WoTC picked a side. They wanted to present (even showcase) the game as written. Can't blame them at all, one of the biggest complaints of prior DMGs (Certainly of the 5e one) is that they are opaque for...

Unlike prior DMGs, the 5.24 one seems much more a new DM primer than a DM Toolbox. From what I've seen "alternate" rules are all but gone in favor of much more advice on running the game as presented. It's a more focused supplement. Which, of course, doesn't help those looking for an alternative.

It's sad you assume such an adversarial relationship. I guess I've played with the same group of players for a long time. We all trust each other enough to know we have each other's fun in mind. I strongly disagree that players only like playing their PCs when they are at full strength. That...

Players will fight the passage of time tooth and nail? Players will fight obvious time constraints (not unnatural ones, obvious ones) tooth and nail? So if you're chasing the BBEG, and you've found his stronghold. The group gets through the grunts and cannon fodder. The group progresses and...

Really? Again, I've never had players try to rule lawyer me on consequences from time passing. I've never even had to explain (as far as I recall) that the world isn't a collection of scenes frozen in time waiting for the PCs to get there. From my experience, people seem to easily understand...

This is interesting. I've NEVER had players who refuse to accept that some things are time sensitive. And that there are consequences for delaying. I mean are you telling me that if you set up a challenge where there are 5 groups going after the treasure, the players will not understand that...

For me, if a new group misreads a spell THAT badly (missing that it's a 1 minute casting time), I will prompt them. "That has a minute casting time, you sure about this?" Last time this came up (Can't remember the spell but it was something with a minute casting time) - the player realized had...

If you look at the threads here, there are MANY people who understood what the DMG said perfectly. But here is not a representative sample. And a bigger problem, many of the people writing adventures didn't seem to get it!