D&D General Can we talk about best practices?

[Fanaelialae]

But, no particular use of it is "holistic". So, while you, in a seat of looking out at the vista of games, may find it makes sense to look that way, that mode is of little use when considering actual use for one table.



Sure. But that means it takes the place of the multi-tool - the thing you use when you don't have your full toolbox at hand.

Holistic essentially means to look at it as a whole. I think looking at the whole game is the only way to figure out if it has use for your table.

I might love the spellcasting rules in DCC and want to use them, but if I'm running an intro game for newbies or children (and I don't want their first experience to be a meat grinder) then it might not be the right game for this purpose, because it can be fairly deadly, particularly at low levels.

Sure, if you have an entire toolbox, then the multi tool serves no real purpose. But I've yet to find an individual RPG that is the entire toolbox, so unless you intend to switch systems mid campaign, the multi tool is still extremely useful, and in some cases outright preferable.

 

[Mort]

I would like to respectfully disagree.

You are 100% right that there is a real danger of "badwrongfun". BUUUT... I think there can be things we all can agree upon are best practices. For example, here are some player best practices:

1: Show up at the game on time, and if you can't make it, advise the DM as soon as possible.
2: Do not threaten the DM with a knife.

Surely, this is not "onetruwayism"...

And no, these are not joking, "this never happens" examples... they come from personal experience.

It boggles my mind how many players, in this age of instant communication, don't think to send an email or text that they will be late or absent.

I GET personal emergencies, life comes first. But I'm talking about something like knew weeks before game that they would be late/absent but didn't say a word until day of/or not at all.

But yes, something like this should definitely be communicated as best practices!

 

[Umbran]

1: Show up at the game on time, and if you can't make it, advise the DM as soon as possible.
2: Do not threaten the DM with a knife.

The list of "don't dos" is nigh infinitely long. If you want a list of outright illegal things you shouldn't do at the table, those have been suitably listed by Federal and State laws that shouldn't bear repeating unless they are of particular interest in a gaming context.

 

[loverdrive]

I think that arguing that it needs a DM to work is a fairly weak criticism.

I never made any claim that 5e is the ideal game for running a narratively focused game. I said that it was capable of running either a narratively focused game or an old school dungeon crawl. Not that it was the best at either. Heck, you could have a game where you do both (delve deep tombs in an old school manner, but also have segments that ditch the procedure and focus on the narrative). Not every game can do both, IMO.

Yes, some of that comes down to leveraging the GM, which is something that most games do. Maybe 5e relies on the GM more heavily than some other games, but (as in all things) there are trade-offs in game design. A flexible design is likely to rely more on the GM than a more focused design, much like a sandbox adventure is likely to expect more of the GM than a linear adventure. Assuming that the players engage with the linear adventure, the DM can read the box text and move from A to B to C. Whereas the sandbox is naturally going to expect the GM to need to improvise, and is simply going to provide aids to that end, because the players' engagement is open ended (within the scope of the sandbox).

What I'm saying is, if there's little difference between using system [X] for the purpose [Y] and not using a system at all, then can we really say that [X] can handle [Y]?

 

[CleverNickName]

The list of "don't dos" is nigh infinitely long. If you want a list of outright illegal things you shouldn't do at the table, those have been suitably listed by Federal and State laws that shouldn't bear repeating unless they are of particular interest in a gaming context.

At our gaming table, it's poor form to...

• Use your cell phone at the table
• Not keep your character sheet updated (seriously, track your ammo and slots!)
• Not read the intro e-mail
• Roll your dice before the DM prompts you to roll them
• Call actions after a roll is made (such as the infamous "...and I cast guidance!" whenever the cleric hears a d20 hit the table.)
• Fudge your rolls (we've seen it all: the drop-snatch, the cocked die, the nudge, "woops it fell off the table...")
• Argue with the DM (no rules lawyers, plz.)
• Argue with, or dictate to, the other players (no table captains either, thx)

And it should go without saying that all the other basic social etiquette stuff still applies: show up on time, don't smoke indoors, practice good hygiene, dress appropriately, don't get plastered, don't act like an ass, etc.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Personally, I think it makes more sense to look at D&D holistically. If all someone wants to do is criticize the lack of narrative rules in the ruleset, okay. It hasn't stopped people from running narratively focused games and enjoying the experience.

Sure, a different game might be a better "script". I never suggested otherwise.

In an earlier post, I compared D&D to a multi tool and bespoke games to a set of screwdrivers. If what you want to do is drive a bunch of different screws, then obviously the screwdrivers are the way to go. However, if you want to carry a tool around with you that's good, but not ideal, for a lot of different jobs, you take the multi tool. The multi tool has different utility than the set of screwdrivers. Criticizing it as not being a good screwdriver might technically be accurate, but I would say it's missing the forest for the trees.

Monopoly has about as much support for a narrative game experience as 5e does, which is to say none at all. So, holistically speaking, Monopoly is as good a choice to run a narrative game as 5e. This is the point being made -- not having any rules or support for a thing does not mean that that system can do it. The system isn't doing anything, it's the players at the table making it up as they go along.

And, further, lots of what 5e actually does fights against a narrative game -- the specificity and nature of the combat rules, how ability checks are framed and used, the spell system, the class system. You can freeform something in that space, sure, but you're likely ignoring 5e system to do it, certainly not using it to do it. Unless we're using narrative game as more of a normal 5e game but with some dash of narrative spice, which seems likely.

 

[Fanaelialae]

What I'm saying is, if there's little difference between using system [X] for the purpose [Y] and not using a system at all, then can we really say that [X] can handle [Y]?

I get what you're saying, but what I'm saying is that if people are using it for that purpose and are satisfied with the experience then yes, it is fair to say that it can handle [Y].

No one is claiming that [X] is the best for [Y], or that [X] does [Y] better than [bespoke system designed to do Y]. The claim is simply that it can handle it.

People have used 5e to play narratively focused games as well as old school dungeon crawls, and just based on posts I've read on ENWorld, at least some of them were satisfied with the experience. Therefore I think it's fair to say that 5e can handle those styles of games. To put it another way, 5e is sufficient if you want to run those types of games.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Monopoly has about as much support for a narrative game experience as 5e does, which is to say none at all. So, holistically speaking, Monopoly is as good a choice to run a narrative game as 5e. This is the point being made -- not having any rules or support for a thing does not mean that that system can do it. The system isn't doing anything, it's the players at the table making it up as they go along.

And, further, lots of what 5e actually does fights against a narrative game -- the specificity and nature of the combat rules, how ability checks are framed and used, the spell system, the class system. You can freeform something in that space, sure, but you're likely ignoring 5e system to do it, certainly not using it to do it. Unless we're using narrative game as more of a normal 5e game but with some dash of narrative spice, which seems likely.

5e has more support for narrative focused games than Monopoly. Inspiration, though certainly not the greatest mechanic ever conceived, is leagues ahead of Monopoly in terms of narrative.

 

[Ovinomancer]

5e has more support for narrative focused games than Monopoly. Inspiration, though certainly not the greatest mechanic ever conceived, is leagues ahead of Monopoly in terms of narrative.

Um, Inspiration can be spent before a roll to gain advantage on that roll. Please explain how this rule enables narrative play, because I don't understand it.

If you mean that you can get Inspiration if your GM thinks you've shown one of your BIFTs in play, then, again, I don't follow -- that doesn't look narrative, it looks like a minor mechanical benny for entertaining your GM, not any mechanic with teeth that enforces narrative outcomes.

I'm not sure we're using narrative at all similarly. To me, this means play such as what you find in Powered by the Apocalypse, Forged in the Dark, Burning Wheel, FATE, and Cortex Prime games. What do you mean?

 

[Fanaelialae]

Um, Inspiration can be spent before a roll to gain advantage on that roll. Please explain how this rule enables narrative play, because I don't understand it.

If you mean that you can get Inspiration if your GM thinks you've shown one of your BIFTs in play, then, again, I don't follow -- that doesn't look narrative, it looks like a minor mechanical benny for entertaining your GM, not any mechanic with teeth that enforces narrative outcomes.

I'm not sure we're using narrative at all similarly. To me, this means play such as what you find in Powered by the Apocalypse, Forged in the Dark, Burning Wheel, FATE, and Cortex Prime games. What do you mean?

BIFTs are like an extremely watered down version of the traits from Fate. Hence, a mechanic that encourages you to play your BIFTs for a mechanical reward encourages narrative, in the same sense that Fate does. That's not to say that it's anywhere in the same ballpark as Fate (it isn't), but it's leagues ahead of Monopoly in this sense (since Monopoly has literally nothing).