Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8340662" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I meant controversial in the sense that I don't think I'm saying anything that has not been advocated for by others. I would expect some disagreement. Like, I don't think it's controversial that many think that the GM has absolute authority. That comes up all the time. I think it's simplistic and misguided, but it's not controversial in the sense that I'm aware there are many who feel this way.I probably wasn't elaborate enough in that bullet point. I'd clarify it a bit to say "Focus more on creating a character who is interesting than on one that can 'win'" or similar. I think that compared to some editions (mostly 3E, but probably all of them to some extent) that 5E punishes lack of system knowledge the least. And for the instance of an entirely new group, that's one where the GM should indeed adjust things a bit to allow for the learning curve.I can see what you mean. I don't think that Adventure Paths must be the pure railroad that many often cite. I also don't know if I'd say that the 5E published adventures really qualify as Adventure Paths, specifically. Some more than others, for sure, but not in their entirety, and not all of them.The 5e PHB does this specifically, actually. It offers a "Primary Stat" for each character and suggests making that your highest ability score, and then offers suggestions about second choice, and also a suitable Background. It could do a bit more, I'd say, but the basics are there.I think that the DMG may offer some of this, but I don't recall off the top of my head. I certainly think more robust and (perhaps more importantly) more consistent advice on how to GM was offered. The DMG primarily consists of optional rules you can add to the game to kind of make it more X, or similar. There is some advice on GMing, but not nearly enough, from my recollection.This is kind of what I was implying by my first bullet point about this being a group activity.</blockquote>

Verification