Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 6309929" data-attributes="member: 18">Sure, but I wasn't talking about players exclusively or even primarily, so... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Indeed! I suspect we might see something vague in the DMG, and nothing in the PHB, sadly. I really hope they at least give some mechanics suggestions, rather than just saying "Oh, deal with it however!" as most editions have done.EXACTLY! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />4E has about 20-30% as many general-case rules as 3.XE/PF had (i.e. not specific spells/powers), maybe less. 5E looks to have about 60-80% as many general-case rules as 4E (very rough estimate in both cases).My players picked up on this pretty quickly - I think in part because we'd be screwed over by trying complicated stunts involving looking up lots and lots of rules in 3.XE, and trying the same things in 4E involved so much less looking up - in large part because of Page 42 telling me "Just use meeeeeeeee!" (but also because the general-case rules are more simple).EDIT - Maybe this is all because my players had a DIFFERENT problem in 3.XE to a lot of people?In 3.XE, we tried stuff, the rules screwed us, because they could be applied to almost all situations and often demanded multiple d20 rolls (I was mostly a player in 3.XE, but did DM).I think what you're saying though is that for your group, it wasn't that the rules screwed you, necessarily, it's that people were so obsessed with the rules and what was on their sheet that they didn't think outside that.So going to 4E, my group, though "ground down", does try stuff again, and boom, it works, and suddenly we're rollin'!Whereas most groups continue to stare at the character sheet, perhaps even more intently, is that it? Sure, but that's been true in every edition. We can logically expect casters to be less creative in 5E, if it's really a strong influence.I don't think "how would my character deal with this" is typically the source of improvisation and awesome stunts, myself - more "what would be awesome is if..." - but perhaps that's semantics. Obviously no single thing can cause this - theatre of the mind vs battlemat helps, but it's not without cost. Similarly, not giving PCs ANY defined abilities forces them to improvise, but at the cost of the DM basically deciding what happens - with no guidelines, in most editions. As a DM, I've found I prefer a middle ground - where the PCs have a decent amount of on-sheet power (all of them, not a select subset - particularly as the subset is selected by class choice - which is often an aesthetic choice, not player gameplay preferences in that regard - if it was player gameplay preference I'd have less of an issue with it), and where improvised stuff has some decent guidelines that I can work from, rather than asking me to just make it up entirely - I suspect you feel similarly, given your hope that 5E also has some guidelines.</blockquote>

Verification