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

[Emerikol]

I feel like the supposed rules modules have given 5e a bit of a pass so far from a lot of people. When something someone really wants isn't in the rules, there's always, "Oh, maybe it will be in a module!" This way, 5e can be the perfect game everybody imagines in their heads... up until the day the DMG is actually released.

Is there going to be some disappointment on that day? Oh yes.

I remain skeptical that a short section in the DMG can really do justice to, for instance, robust gridded combat rules. But I guess we'll find out soon enough.

This is my gut feeling too. I suspect the grid will be good for people who want a few extra basic rules that apply to everyone. Kind of how 1e,2e,3e handled the grid. People were playing grid long before 4e. If though you want a bunch of powers that really mesh with the grid, I doubt you'll get those. I just don't see them providing what would practically be entire class rewrites in the DMG.

I do think they will have some nice campaign domain rules. They will have some healing alternatives but they'll be gritty vs heroic and not really martial vs magic-only.

 

[Sir Hawk]

I kinda wish that on the very first page they say something like, "If you don't see something in here, then make up your own damn rule. This game is about imagination, so try using it for once instead of complaining about what is or isn't in some rulebook."

 

[RotGrub]

This is my gut feeling too. I suspect the grid will be good for people who want a few extra basic rules that apply to everyone. Kind of how 1e,2e,3e handled the grid. People were playing grid long before 4e. If though you want a bunch of powers that really mesh with the grid, I doubt you'll get those. I just don't see them providing what would practically be entire class rewrites in the DMG.

I do think they will have some nice campaign domain rules. They will have some healing alternatives but they'll be gritty vs heroic and not really martial vs magic-only.

There are many of people who just can't accept fantastic martial powers that function like magical spells. Just look at all the DoaM threads... heck the subject had to be given it's own temp forum here.

I think the designers would have done well to read forums and blogs to get sense of all the pain points the fans of D&D are discussing. Without that knowledge it's rather impossible to write great a DMG that will make most of the community happy.

 

[Dungeoneer]

This is my gut feeling too. I suspect the grid will be good for people who want a few extra basic rules that apply to everyone. Kind of how 1e,2e,3e handled the grid. People were playing grid long before 4e. If though you want a bunch of powers that really mesh with the grid, I doubt you'll get those. I just don't see them providing what would practically be entire class rewrites in the DMG.

I do think they will have some nice campaign domain rules. They will have some healing alternatives but they'll be gritty vs heroic and not really martial vs magic-only.

Right, this is what I'm talking about.

And I think people have different ideas in their head about what 'modular' means. You might think that that means I can swap out whole sections of the rules, like combat or healing. But what WotC seems to mean by it is more that you can take those rules and tweak them. At least, that's the impression I'm getting so far.

 

[Paraxis]

I kinda wish that on the very first page they say something like, "If you don't see something in here, then make up your own damn rule. This game is about imagination, so try using it for once instead of complaining about what is or isn't in some rulebook."

If that were true, what would you want any of the books for? If you can just use your imagination and come up with your own damn rule, why bother with a rule book or a new edition in the first place?

 

[JonWake]

If that were true, what would you want any of the books for? If you can just use your imagination and come up with your own damn rule, why bother with a rule book or a new edition in the first place?

Wow, how'd I know you'd ask this?

Okay, let's lay this out, kiddies.
1. I don't have time to write a whole game. It's harder than it looks.
2. Not liking one element of a game does not translate into hating the whole game, despite what idiots on the internet tell you.
3. The designers do not know you or your group. Thus:
A) You must wait for the Perfect System for you and you group. Or,
B) You must ignore things that you and your group dislike. Or,
C) You can make changes you and your group wish to the base system to bring it into like with your tastes. Or,
D) You can hang out on internet forums and seethe, jealous of all those people who seem to be having fun.

 

[GX.Sigma]

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.

 

[Emerikol]

Wow, how'd I know you'd ask this?

Okay, let's lay this out, kiddies.
1. I don't have time to write a whole game. It's harder than it looks.
2. Not liking one element of a game does not translate into hating the whole game, despite what idiots on the internet tell you.
3. The designers do not know you or your group. Thus:
A) You must wait for the Perfect System for you and you group. Or,
B) You must ignore things that you and your group dislike. Or,
C) You can make changes you and your group wish to the base system to bring it into like with your tastes. Or,
D) You can hang out on internet forums and seethe, jealous of all those people who seem to be having fun.

All valid possibilities. Another might be to just pick another game that seems to respect your playstyle and make a few minor adjustments to that game.

I figure if I support companies that totally reject and ignore my playstyle to the point they don't even offer an optional rule for it then I'm going to see the companies that actually do support me not get any support.

 

[MechaPilot]

Are we setting ourselves up for disappointment here? How much actual content can one book have -- and can it possibly satisfy the different needs that we all have?

Gosh, I hope so.

I think it depends on what exactly we expect from the DMG.

If we think that the DMG will spoon-feed us all the options that we want then we are very much setting ourselves up for disappointment.

Certainly, there will be some options that are already fleshed out for us. However, I think the focus will lie a lot more on giving us the tools and insight into the way the game has been built so that we can alter it to fit our tastes with a higher degree of competence than we otherwise would have.

 

[jodyjohnson]

I have 35 years worth of options I can scavenge from other DMGs, 2 different Unearthed Arcanas, genre books, player handbooks for spells and casting methods.
Several item compendiums, spell compendiums, setting books. Other games. There are a trove of options out there and it will only get bigger.


The hardest thiing 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.