D&D General Alternate thought - rule of cool is bad for gaming

[TiQuinn]

No answer is the best one, if, in practice, people aren't going to use it, and that's one where clearly a lot of people aren't.

I guess that’s their problem then.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There’s no “problem” here. I’m speaking for myself. If I’m not enjoying the game, I will stop playing it, just like if I’m reading a book that I’m not enjoying, I won’t finish it just to say I finished it. Of course, this doesn’t happen immediately - I give things time to change or to determine if they’re an outlier from the usual.

I once left a campaign because it turned out to be too focused on elves for me at the time. Came back when we started something else. No harm, no foul.

 

[tetrasodium]

.... aren't they mostly previewing the Player's Handbook?

Not going for rhetorical jabs or anything, honest question here... Do we play a different game?

I've always found that the PHB for recent editionscontains mostif not all of the rules that provide mechanical structure to the game. The MM & DMG might discuss or expand on those rules, but I can't remember reading througfh the last few editions & seeing phrases like

Spoiler: these

• " Although your DM has the rules for handling spell research, there are some things you should know about how to proceed. " Ad&D2e phb Pg113
• "This can mean one of two things, depending on whether the standard or the optional rule is used (this is discussed in detail in the Dungeon Master's guide. The choice is left to the DM and he must tell the players how he wants infravision to work. " -- AD&D2e PHB Pg155

.
[/spoiler]

As far as I know, they haven't previewed that much from the DMG yet, other than a few glimpses (such as Greyhawk). All of these recent videos have been hyping the PHB.

To be honest, that's usually where the hype goes. In addition, given that it is going to be compatible with 2014 5e, we shouldn't be expecting a major rules revamp. Improvements? Sure. But if you fundamentally don't like 5e, I don't think that anything will make you change your mind.

I think it's bizarre to the point of honestly wondering if we play the same game every time someone defends the lack of DM "pain points" being addressed by bringing up the idea that this is just the PHB while suggesting or implying that anyone with concerns about DM "pain points" should just sit tight till the dust settles & the DMG rolls around.

Heck the 2014 PHB even contained the full rules for ability checks, the DC ladder, contests, skills w/different abilities, passive checks, group checks, & working together. Not sure about 4e but 3.5 was the last edition where I recall the PHB including a barebones version of those while the DMG contained a much more flexible & expansive toolset built for the GM's needs.

 

[TiQuinn]

I once left a campaign because it turned out to be too focused on elves for me at the time. Came back when we started something else. No harm, no foul.

We ended a western based campaign early that I was loving the heck out of but apparently myself and the GM were the only ones. It happens.

 

[Thomas Shey]

There’s no “problem” here. I’m speaking for myself. If I’m not enjoying the game, I will stop playing it, just like if I’m reading a book that I’m not enjoying, I won’t finish it just to say I finished it. Of course, this doesn’t happen immediately - I give things time to change or to determine if they’re an outlier from the usual.

Yeah, but I'm talking generally, because the "no gaming is better than bad gaming" gets waved around a fair bit when people have complaints, and the person using that often seems to have a definition of "bad" that seems to be binary. Perhaps you aren't among those, but there's nothing to tell me that in what you've posted that I responded to here. "Enjoyable" doesn't say much by itself; how often does it have to be enjoyable? How mixed with annoyance can it be? That could range anywhere from "I have to be getting at least something out of it" to "If there's any significant annoyance I'm gone" and those are pretty different beasts.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I guess that’s their problem then.

And people complain when they have problems. That's how that works.

 

[TiQuinn]

Yeah, but I'm talking generally, because the "no gaming is better than bad gaming" gets waved around a fair bit when people have complaints, and the person using that often seems to have a definition of "bad" that seems to be binary. Perhaps you aren't among those, but there's nothing to tell me that in what you've posted that I responded to here. "Enjoyable" doesn't say much by itself; how often does it have to be enjoyable? How mixed with annoyance can it be? That could range anywhere from "I have to be getting at least something out of it" to "If there's any significant annoyance I'm gone" and those are pretty different beasts.

Um. Sorry, man. I don’t keep a chart or journal of my enjoyment of TTRPGs.

 

[DEFCON 1]

To be fair, a lot of people have strong preferences towards codification and clarity. Playing a game where the rules mutate based on personal preference and whim make them feel less attached to the game.

The move from the DIY nature of early AD&D to the "Let's just play RAW" mindset of 3e wasn't a weird aberration; it was popularized because a large portion of the player base was more comfortable with a fixed ruleset.

Absolutely. But as the designers were quite clear when 5E was being made and came out that it was going back to the DIY aesthetic... people should have listened to them. And if that meant sticking with 3E or PF or 4E so that they had their established and set rules, then they should have done so... rather than continually try and get 5E to also go in that direction.

Mike, Jeremy et. al. never once tried to cover over what 5E was doing. Rulings, Not Rules. Always there, always the focus of 5E. If people didn't want to believe them or didn't want to go along with it, that was on them. And no one was under any obligation to try and make them feel better for going against the type of game 5E was.

 

[TiQuinn]

And people complain when they have problems. That's how that works.

Do you have a goal in this conversation? Is there something you are expecting of me?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Not going for rhetorical jabs or anything, honest question here... Do we play a different game?

...

I think it's bizarre to the point of honestly wondering if we play the same game every time someone defends the lack of DM "pain points" being addressed by bringing up the idea that this is just the PHB while suggesting or implying that anyone with concerns about DM "pain points" should just sit tight till the dust settles & the DMG rolls around.

Yeah ... look, I don't think you understood what I wrote. But given that you responded by asking if I am playing the same game, I am not sure that further discussion is helpful. I hope you find your happiness wherever it may lie!