Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AmerginLiath" data-source="post: 7407214" data-attributes="member: 777">I absolutely am NOT trying to Edition War here, but I note that the OP mentioned only D&D experience from 3e onwards. That strikes me as important to this question, because there are assumptions within the ruleset beyond the rules themselves, as well as matters of zeitgeist that inform how different game systems are played. I’ve noticed that, because 5e is a remix of sorts of the assumptions of multiple versions of the game, those who were introduced to the brand with different rule sets think of underlying assumptions very differently.As someone who started in 1st Edition and still laughs at how I played 3e by 2nd Edition assumptions well into 3.5, I wouldn’t imagine having fewer than a dozen encounters per day — how else could a dungeon level be plausibly clearedor the area around a campsite be plausible secured? The issue about standard attacks strikes me that attacks have (in the text) been standardized in categories and thus treated accordingly.You don’t need to firebolt every turn or encounter any more than you need to swing your sword. That same action can be used to pull a bookcase down on a group of goblins or to set fire with your torch to the rug that the skeletons are standing upon. The action economy and action taxonomy are toolsets for the DM to use to fit players’ ideas into a sequence that can be rolled for or against, it’s not meant as a straight jacket of specifically limited options of programmed algorithms.The attribute check on down is designed in 5e to offered a free reign of player options to interact with the environment (consider how some classes even are built to benefit with this, as is the very Advantage/Disadvantage system). Outside of a white box battlefield, one is never limited to spam the “I stab him with my sword” “I shoot a fire bolt” virtual button (and it’s part of the DM’s job to teach this if the players aren’t fully understanding their total freedom).</blockquote>

Verification