D&D 5E Are we banking too much on the DMG?

[MechaPilot]

The hardest thing is understanding exactly what you want from the rules, and many of the players not liking certain rules sound like they know exactly what they want. I don't see an insurmountable problem to move forward from there.

I think knowing what you want really is key. The actual modification of rules isn't that hard as long as you know what you want to accomplish with the modification.

 

[Tovec]

I think a lot of people might be forgetting that the DMG is not the end-all-be-all of rules customization. There's the magazines, the website, splats, third-party products... If there's a demand for something, it'll show up soon enough.

The DMG is likely to be the widest released version. When I first started I was part of a group of gamers probably 30-40 large, almost ALL had the core three. Some had the major splatbooks, fewer had the second-fifth PHB,MM,DMGs and the lesser splatbooks. No one I knew had the magazines. The DMs who were open to the idea would allow basically ANYTHING written by WotC that was legal to the system, but that still meant the splatbooks and core books. Trying to sneak anything from a website (even theirs) or from a third party got you automatically on the bad side of the DM and the group.

I guess what I'm saying is that somebody will eventually come up with a houserule that is true. Whether or not it makes it into the common consciousness is an entirely different debate. If they want to get people on-board with their ruleset to show how it can be easily adjusted to accommodate things that people may not initially like - then it should probably be in the DMG. Putting that online, or in mags, or any supplement (even most splatbooks - I'm assuming those are what you mean by "splats") ain't going to cut it. UA MIGHT be an option but it is still considered rather on the fringe from where I'm sitting. If we want to modify HP and a lot of the base systems then UA fixes probably aren't going to cut it for us.

Just a though, another point of view rather than anything else. DMG requirement? Probably not, but a book is certainly a must for me and mine.

 

[Jester David]

It won't have everything, and so some people are bound to be disappointed. And some people will never be happy a just set impossible expectations so they can express their displeasure. But so long as the DMG has the expected content things should be fine.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

It's nice when the DMG has the house rules you want as a codified part of the game. It's easier to hand your players a list of which variant rules are in play, than to give them a list of all of your own house rule. I can make my own games from scratch, I much prefer if I don't have to house rule a game I'm paying someone else to make for me.

 

[Agamon]

I'm only expecting the DMG to have what they've said is going to be in there. Everything else would be gravy.

 

[Derren]

I'm also somewhat concerned that modules are going to be too reminiscent of the material in 3e's Unearthed Arcana - barely play tested, not integrated with other parts of the system, etc.

That is what will likely happen. Not to mention that the modules will probably never be referenced again by WotC.