NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7826521" data-attributes="member: 996">Because you feel the current system can't be improved, you have no useful contribution to make to a thread about improving it. And, AFAICT, a moving spotlight doesn't wouldn't really address the issue raised in the OP. Spotlight balance is something of a zero-sum approach:  if you have 6 players, you try to engineer 6 moments to shine, and ration them one to a player, sometimes that can be a literal moment (a critical hit or failed save or whatever that finishes the BBEG) sometime it can be more of a 'scene' (the 'face' brings an important ally on-board; the netrunner retrieves the vital data; etc).  Like niche protection, it means the choice of class/build at chargen/level-up are choices that mattered, not choices made in-play.  In D&D, generally regardless of edition, in most situations, the spotlight will be on the fighter or rogue or any other non-caster that might've been available in the ed in question, when the encounter is the one sort that turns on their abilies - a stand-up fight, a treasure to be extracted from clever hiding place among fiendish traps - while the caster's time to shine comes when the player decides a given challenge is 'worth' expending a spell to resolve.  While I doubt either of those would score high as what Campbell's looking for, the latter is closer - the in-play decision, even if it's just whether to pull the pin on an I-win grenade or not, at least matters. It's designed for a range, sure. But a lot of gamers - and a lot of potential gamers - might enjoy things outside that range.Thing is, no amount of discussion of 'fixes' to the issues D&D raises will result in D&D no longer serving the agendas of its' current fanbase.But, the intellectual exercise of examining how it might be - in some more tolerant quantum-alternate-universe community, perhaps - well, interesting.  If it could ever be undertaken without being shouted down.Certainly, 5e tried hard to embrace the wants/needs/expectations/concerns of the whole of the existing fanbase, to at least be broadly acceptable to everyone, so we could all stand in the big tent without burning like vampires in direct sunlight - while, miraculously, also being acceptable enough to new players that enough of them can get through their early play experiences with an appreciation for the hobby to continue the tend.  But, there were a /lot/ of compromises made to get there, so, while 5e is an effective gatekeeper of the RPG hobby that defends its own traditions valiantly, there's still a whole lot it doesn't do, or could do better for certain goals of play...…a discussion like this is not, even in the most terrifying worst-case scenario, going to result in even one tiny official change to D&D.  It might generate some ideas that get used as house rules in some home game, somewhere.</blockquote>

Verification