Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 9474330" data-attributes="member: 58172">I find 3e to be the most difficult of all D&amp;D versions for the DM. &quot;Simulationism&quot; in the sense of many, gratuitous rules for worldbuilding, makes the game needlessly complex for the DM. For example, consider how difficult it is for the DM to design a 3e monster or balance a 3e encounter. Simulationism is the opposite of DM friendly.I do want 5e to simplify the mechanics of monster creation and balance. But 5e DMing is much easier than 3e DMing. 4e offers the easiest DMing.In terms of the mechanical system mastery that a DM is responsible for, 5e can do better. 2024 helps the DM by putting all the Core Rules in the Players Handbook. Thus players share the burden of knowing all the rules − and following the rules properly when interacting mechanically.At the same time, my 5e DM style is narrative adjudication. This means that most of the game is either &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no&quot; in response to how players interact narratively with a scene. Only in a context of a &quot;maybe&quot;, where a player effort might or might not work, do dice rolls ever happen. This narrative emphasis is for &quot;immersion&quot;, but it also radically simplifies life for the DM who can focus on what makes sense narratively in a particular scenario rather than focus on rules mastery. Meanwhile the DM is the referee who understands the encounter scenario, and has the authority to say &quot;yes&quot; or &quot;no&quot;.And, at the same time, because the DM is responding to player decisions, it is player interests that steer and decide the campaign of the game.If the players want to do something cool with their bastion, no problem. The DM can riff stories and adventure encounters from what is going on in there.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yaarel, post: 9474330, member: 58172"] I find 3e to be the most difficult of all D&D versions for the DM. "Simulationism" in the sense of many, gratuitous rules for worldbuilding, makes the game needlessly complex for the DM. For example, consider how difficult it is for the DM to design a 3e monster or balance a 3e encounter. Simulationism is the opposite of DM friendly. I do want 5e to simplify the mechanics of monster creation and balance. But 5e DMing is much easier than 3e DMing. 4e offers the easiest DMing. In terms of the mechanical system mastery that a DM is responsible for, 5e can do better. 2024 helps the DM by putting all the Core Rules in the Players Handbook. Thus players share the burden of knowing all the rules − and following the rules properly when interacting mechanically. At the same time, my 5e DM style is narrative adjudication. This means that most of the game is either "yes" or "no" in response to how players interact narratively with a scene. Only in a context of a "maybe", where a player effort might or might not work, do dice rolls ever happen. This narrative emphasis is for "immersion", but it also radically simplifies life for the DM who can focus on what makes sense narratively in a particular scenario rather than focus on rules mastery. Meanwhile the DM is the referee who understands the encounter scenario, and has the authority to say "yes" or "no". And, at the same time, because the DM is responding to player decisions, it is player interests that steer and decide the campaign of the game. If the players want to do something cool with their bastion, no problem. The DM can riff stories and adventure encounters from what is going on in there. [/QUOTE]

Verification