NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 7538350" data-attributes="member: 158">Quite true; I'm looking at the current generation of Crit Role watchers and stream viewers, and finding that a TON of people coming newly to the hobby are far more interested in the exploration and role play aspects than mechanical concerns, and IMO this has a lot to do with removing a lot of the complexity of the last twenty years, making it more approachable to those interested in it. Later, those same gamers may desire more rules complexity, but there's a lot in common with the structure of both D&D5 and Basic D&D from the late 70s and early 80s.However, you WANT the complexity of the GM side of the screen to be approachable to these new gamers, too. While I enjoyed the hodge-podge of rules on the DM side of the screen back in the 80s, it's NOT conducive to interest very many people in moving to that side of the table. Having the rules to be consistent, and above all VISIBLE to all participants I think is important to getting more first-time DMs to take the plunge, rather than blindsiding them with a ton of undisclosed complexity.The worst job assignments I have hated in my life have been the job opportunities where major components of the job were HIDDEN from me until I took the reins; my groups always considered the PHB and DMG as open, and knew the rules back and forwards as two parts of a whole, rather than (as Gary used to suggest) hidden from everyone except those select few who were DMs. If we had treated them as such, with the DMG for NO PLAYERS ALLOWED, then I might not have had as positive an opinion of it back then. I knew it was a lot of work going in, I didn't have to be the sole expert on the rules because we shared the "rules lawyer" burden among the group. Therefore, to me rules transparency was a positive forward step in development, not a negative thing, yet still tempered with the AD&D OSR aspect of "GM as final arbiter" to remove argument and facilitate a smooth game, rather than the trend of the 3.x days among the player base of making the GM beholden to all the rules to the expense of the game play. Part of this new renaissance in pop culture I think is in finding that balance of "rulings instead of rules" with "the DM is the only one who knows the rules".</blockquote>

Verification