A "Why Oh Why" RPG Thread [+]
- Thread starter Emoshin
- Start date
johndesmarais
Explorer
Because 'psionic' sounds exotic and 'psychic' makes people think of the Psychic Readers Network.
Gradine
The Elephant in the Room (she/they)
Tradition. And Gygax. But I repeat myself.
Etymologically, it was first coined to give a more scientific name to the study of the paranormal (-onic as in electronic). Never really gained traction outside of the sci-fi genre, however.
johndesmarais
Explorer
Why oh why does ChatGPT want my phone number in order to create a login?
Davies
Legend
That particular one is ironic, because it's from Gygax that I learned that latter definition. (He rants a bit about it in Dangerous Journeys as the reason he uses "psychogenic" ... but I digress.)
Why oh why is it so hard to have a good Session Zero?
I've tried this from both sides of the screen. You get the group together, you give them the elevator pitch for the game, share the house rules. Someone asks "who is healer?" Someone else might ask "who is melee?". And suddenly everyone is sharing their character, built without any further input from the rest of the group! I've tried to stress I don't now how many times that "party creation" is even more important than "character creation", but if synergies happen, it seems almost by accident that they do!
I've tried this from both sides of the screen. You get the group together, you give them the elevator pitch for the game, share the house rules. Someone asks "who is healer?" Someone else might ask "who is melee?". And suddenly everyone is sharing their character, built without any further input from the rest of the group! I've tried to stress I don't now how many times that "party creation" is even more important than "character creation", but if synergies happen, it seems almost by accident that they do!
The Shadow
Hero
Try requiring each PC to already know at least one of the others. Ask them how they know each other and how they feel about their prior interactions.
Or heck, sometimes it's fun to have them all come from the same small village! "You've known each other your whole lives. What made you decide to adventure together?"
That won't necessarily lead them to create a balanced party, but it has a way of getting them to think as a team.
CreamCloud0
One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
i'd say the most obvious answer to me is that they simply don't need to coordinate their characters like they needed to in earlier editions, characters are well rounded enough to not immediately fail outside of their class' specific niche and the adventures are flexible enough to not require a specific class as the solution to a given problem, a party of four wizards is a viable party in 5e whereas in earlier editions they probably would have been reduced to salsa by the first pack of goblins they encountered, you don't need the designated cleric pumping out heals and the fighter up front tanking the hits for the rogue and the wizard, so the players can all just design the character they want in session 0 and figure that it'll all work out whatever they bring to the table.
Emoshin
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
Why oh why is the next edition of D&D codenamed OneD&D?
Has WoTC revealed any clue as to what the "One" part means? Is it going be modular, like WoTC used to talk about in the days of D&D Next? Or is it going to be "One" united multi-media ecosystem? Or we just don't know?
Has WoTC revealed any clue as to what the "One" part means? Is it going be modular, like WoTC used to talk about in the days of D&D Next? Or is it going to be "One" united multi-media ecosystem? Or we just don't know?
I don't think WotC has revealed anything other than a general desire for everyone who thinks of "D&D" to think they're included whenever Wizards is talking about D&D (there may be different different editions, but it's all "one game" is definitely a thing I've heard someone say, possibly Jeremy Crawford?). But the obvious answer to this one for me is because the branding is there to pre-emptively stop people from calling it "sixth edition" - they really want people who have invested in 5e to keep playing the game as they change things around and so they don't want the language around the upcoming release to preemptively turn into an edition war and schism the wonderfully large new player base they've built up.
(This contrasts with previous edition shifts where a new edition coincided with a nadir in sales for the previous edition. So advertising the game as "new and improved" was a way to draw players who had wandered away back to check out the changes.)
They need to cover what is going to happen in a 6 part adventure that will fill many sessions. (Although I doubt the 3 part APs have introductions that are any shorter!)
So the background feels the need to explain why the PCs will eventually end up in location X, meet monster Y etc. (And there might be some reverse engineering going on as well, in that if one of the authors comes up with a cool scene then it might get foreshadowed in a revision to the introduction.) It helps the GM to tie all the various parts together.
There is no doubt truth here, but I've been having this problem ever since my first 3e campaign, where I intentionally had everyone meet me at the local Denny's so the could strategize their character creation.
I had no idea what a "Session Zero" was back when I played AD&D, lol. Though by late 2e, it wasn't like playing a Specialty Priest was any kind of punishment, given how ludicrously powerful they were at that point, with huge lists of bonus spells and granted powers, and the ability to poach whatever ability they liked from other classes.
In the typical old-school D&D setting, humans and their allies live in enclaves of "civilization" nestled in large regions of wilderness (4e called this "Points of Light", but the idea goes back to early D&D). A significant portion of play, particularly at mid-to-high levels ("name" level in AD&D and BECMI) consists of some local authority deputizing PCs (particularly fighters) to expand their territory by building a stronghold and pacifying the nearby wilderness by killing off all the monsters.My own take is, just rip alignment out of the game entirely, except maybe for extraplanar beings. There, done.
I do have to say, though... Have people seen a lot of, "Let's go kill some orcs!"? Because in my experience, fighting orcs is almost always something a lot closer to self-defense.
Is killing an orc band that's trying to kill you worse than killing a group of human bandits that's trying to kill you? Darned if I can see how. Though depending on the situation, maybe the orcs would be easier to negotiate with.
In that situation, are the orcs really the bad guys?
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I mean, Jer hits on the core reason - a pre-emptive attempt to stop fans standardizing the name to 5.5E or 6E, because apparently not really referring to the edition caused 5E to happen (rather than "D&D" which was no doubt the goal).
But the specific decision to use OneD&D seems to me was caused by hardcore corporate echo-chamber tone-deaf naming. It's not an easy name to type, it's not particularly catchy, and there's a long trend in human history of things which start with "One X" being bad things. I'm not joking or trying be a jerk when I say literally about a second after I read it was called OneD&D my brain went "Ein reich, ein volk..." (not saying that was fair or appropriate of my brain!).
It's definitely also intended that we see all parts of the 1D&D "ecosystem" as a collective whole, too. Specifically the 3D VTT has been referred to by WotC as "OneD&D", for example, and has no other name I'm aware of. So I think the idea was basically everything they're introducing was going to be under one umbrella.
Personally I would colour-comment that this whole this is absolutely bonehead in the same exact way trying to delete the OGL was. Fans aren't going to go along with it. It's a clunky name, and in practice, fans will need/want to distinguish between the different elements of the ecosystem, so you just keep trying to call them "OneD&D", people will just figure out their own names for the parts, and it'll probably get called 6E in the long term regardless of anything else because that's not only 1/3rd the keypresses and more memorable, it also sounds less weirdly corporate and creepy, and it has that nerd cache where you have to be a little tiny bit "in the know" to know what is being referred to (just the slightest smidge but still). Black Flag is smarter because it can be shortened to BF and likely will be.
I think the whole thing is a great demonstration of how profoundly significant parts of WotC don't really understand D&D's audience, despite having a wealth of data, experienced designers, and so on.
The Shadow
Hero
Re: OneD&D, it's marketing, pure and simple. They tried the same thing during the 5e playtest, if you recall: "D&D Next". Which thankfully didn't stick.
No matter what they say, OneD&D is 5.5e. And no doubt there will be a 6e down the road.
No matter what they say, OneD&D is 5.5e. And no doubt there will be a 6e down the road.
CleverNickName
Limit Break Dancing
Why oh why are druids adverse to wearing metal armor, but have no problem at all with metal weapons?
I mean, I'm gonna handwave it anyway (chitin and bone and shell etc. instead of iron and steel, same cost and stats) but it would be nice if they were at least consistent with the druid's equipment. Sheesh.
I mean, I'm gonna handwave it anyway (chitin and bone and shell etc. instead of iron and steel, same cost and stats) but it would be nice if they were at least consistent with the druid's equipment. Sheesh.
Last edited:
The Shadow
Hero
Why do they have a problem with metal armor in the first place? Is metal somehow not part of the natural order?
Maybe they have a problem with iron, specifically, for somewhat the same reason that the fey traditionally do.
So the way this was explained to me is, Druids gain their powers from a pact made with primal spirits of nature. While allowing Druids to use some weapons is "fair", as most Humanoids lack claws or a bite, having access to better "hide" than animals have naturally is not kosher. You want nature powers, you have to abide by nature rules.
The Shadow
Hero
Interesting. I can kinda see it. Fair is fair!
Why don't rangers have the same limitation, though?
