Search results

"My magic has yet to recover. We may still face significant peril, so I say we wait a day or two before we face the enemy head on." The characters know that their magic, health, stamina etc has not been restored so in absence of time pressure they have perfect rationale to wait. Yes, but he...

I think they must know something like it. They know that their powers restore by resting, but that it cannot happen repeatedly right after they've already done so. So chilling and waiting a bit makes perfect sense.

Characters do not need to be aware of exact minutiae of the rules, but they must be aware of things the rules represent and assuming otherwise is just bizarre. If they don't the character become unable to make decisions about anything governed by the rules. If they are not aware that they are...

Right, so another indication that modern means moving away from simulationism. It is not an aspect I like, and the PCs and NPCs working (roughly) the same is something I feel is a good thing. But it is true that this is becoming rarer. I was particularity disappointed when I learned this...

Perhaps. Though it ties to the whole "intentionality of design" thing that a lot of people saw as indicative of modern game.

In my group I am the one who plays most recklessly (I even took trauma to justify it!) But as a lot of that fallout is communal, I don't want to cause too much crap to the whole team the other players would like to avoid. And they're playing more carefully. And I am not at all surprised they do...

Yeah this is distinction I've also alluded to in the past and it does not have proper agreed upon nomenclature. And tension between these can exist in any game, but I have been very aware of it in the Blades in the Dark game I've been playing in. Like on one hand the game probably expects you to...

What is this? Why there are only two possibilities? In pretty normal trad approach the players decide where to go, what goals to pursue, who to bed, marry or kill etc, etc. Hardly just two possibilities. That certain details of the external world are predetermined, does not mean we are not...

To reiterate: if the rules incentivise unfun gameplay, it is a rules issue, not a player issue. In well a designed game playing optimally will lead to fun gameplay. (Which is not to say that people need to play games optimally or that playing sub-optimally should lead to lack of fun.)

I'm kinda between you guys. I think 5e monsters are weaksauce, but the sort of stuff @Zardnaar talks about still sounds rather outlandish to me. But I think one can design game that suits both of you, and I think the designers should aim for it. This is done by simply limiting how much one can...

Me? I will procrastinate to the last minute! But yeah, if the characters are hurt, exhausted and missing some magic, I would expect them to wait to those things to recover before undertaking a dangerous task if there is no pressing need to not to do so. So you do not think the rules represent...

But it is not a time sensitive scenario and all the players agree to it. So what's the issue? And you did not answer my question: why would the character in the setting not do this? Do the characters need to behave suicidally for the players not to be TFGs? It makes sense from in-character...

Mediocre. Not a lot. Though dispels and restorations are available. Yeah, there obviously are ways to counter the characters. Various ways to disable or posses them are effective. They also are not fun for players if used frequently. This is not really a that kind of a problem, it is just an...

Perhaps, but I think it was bizarre to assume that people want a ton of low stakes combats. You can have fast combats that are still challenging and consume significant portion fo character resources: just give the PCs less HP, spell slots and other resources. Now this makes things somewhat more...

Ah, I totally had missed that in 5.0 the budget is minimum and in 5.5. it is maximum! That certainly changes the things a bit. Though 5.5 encounter is still about twice as hard if both were to feature multiple monsters due the lack of the multiplier. Perhaps, I was only looking at the DMG...

How is it TFG behaviour? If there is no particular time pressure, and the characters know that waiting one more day heals all their wounds, replenishes all their magic and powers, why would they not do that before wading into a dangerous situation? Are they suicidal?

Right. Older editions had a lot of things that were not fixed by having a good night's sleep, including the very basic loss of HP. In 5e such things are very rare, thus controlling that rest that resets basically everything and cramming stuff before the reset is crucial in a way it just wasn't...

I think you're still low balling the impact quite a bit. Even if we have only two monsters per character the impact is still huge. That's probably 8-10 monsters, so would have had difficulty modifies of 2.5. And tow monsters already had a modifier of 1.5, three qualifying of 2. Suddenly having...

But removal of the multiplier is a huge deal. In horde encounters you can have four times the amount of same monsters for the same budget. And especially on higher levels the budgets have gone up a lot too; level 20 medium on 5.5 has more than twice the budget of level 20 moderate in 5.0, so...

No it does not, it handles it way worse. Because in attrition model how well you do in the "warmup fights" actually matters. Yes, you are almost certain to win, but you might need to burn more resources than you wanted to do so. Then you no longer have those in the "boss fight," so it matters...