Corinnguard
Hero
Does there need to be a rule when finding a way to escape your captors could be a mini adventure in and of itself?
D&D General D&D 2024 does not deserve to succeed
- Thread starter Zuranthium
- Start date
Paul Farquhar
Legend
The current rules work. Characters are more likely to be downed than killed outright, and non-lethal combat is as much an option for NPCs as it is for players. The DM just has to rule that the PCs are KOed, dragged off and imprisoned somewhere. Just as happens in the genre D&D emulates.
Corinnguard
Hero
Exactly. And then the PCs get to exercise their creativity while trying to escape.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Or are very happy they had long friendly chats with those NPCs earlier when they stage a rescue!
KYRON45
Hero
There's quite a few rules for inflicting harm on others. I'm no mathamagician but i think like 98.63487% of the rules are combat related. Maybe not a wargame, but definitely a "kill the other guy" game.
AnotherGuy
Hero
Mathamagicians are the new subclass we deserve, but not the one we need right now.
Speak for yourself. I have yet to find combat boring. The game continues to be popular and growing after a decade, how long does it take to become veteran? Two years? Five? If so many people were bored there would be a drop off of sales, just like every other version of D&D as seen for decades. The game can't be for everyone and that's fine. If something like Level Up doesn't add the complexity you want (but we don't), there are plenty of other games out there. But for me and my group? We've been playing for years and we aren't bored yet.
Neither do we have games slowly die or end in TPK. I've been in a few games that went to 20th level now, others ended because the DM wanted to run Curse of Strahd or similar that had a logical end point. I can't explain what the difference with the games I've been involved in and and every time I try to get any idea, it's just "It doesn't work". Not much can be done with that kind of response.
If no one found it boring why did they add weapon mastery to the game. Well crippling strikes or brutal strikes?Speak for yourself. I have yet to find combat boring. The game continues to be popular and growing after a decade, how long does it take to become veteran? Two years? Five? If so many people were bored there would be a drop off of sales, just like every other version of D&D as seen for decades. The game can't be for everyone and that's fine. If something like Level Up doesn't add the complexity you want (but we don't), there are plenty of other games out there. But for me and my group? We've been playing for years and we aren't bored yet.
Neither do we have games slowly die or end in TPK. I've been in a few games that went to 20th level now, others ended because the DM wanted to run Curse of Strahd or similar that had a logical end point. I can't explain what the difference with the games I've been involved in and and every time I try to get any idea, it's just "It doesn't work". Not much can be done with that kind of response.
This means someone felt it boring and it was enough someone that I got to Wizards to the point that day added that to the game.
This is what I talking about fans personalizing discussion of the game instead of realizing that D&D is a very old game and has a lot of different factions in it.
Therefore providing content for every faction and access to resources for every faction is very difficult. And thus other games peeling off D&D fans to themselves.
Unfortunately you do get some so then come back to badmouth D&D afterwards once they find the combat focused D&D clone they like.
I never said the game can't use improvement. But things like weapon mastery look like they're going to have pretty minimal impact. Admittedly I've only played one session so far. D&D has almost always been (with the exception of 4E) a game that people tweak and adjust to suit their needs.
No, you're wrong. It's 92.832%. Get it straight.
For me, I don't want a ton of rules for things not directly related to combat because it would take away the dynamic nature of interactions. That's not for everyone, and it will be interesting to see what they do in the DMG, but if I wanted to play "Politics and Bureaucracy" I'd play a different game. Maybe I'd find some supplement out there if there are any.
I actually think combat vs non-combat is a bit less than my 92.832% guess, but my point is that for a lot of stuff I don't need rules for outside of combat. Rules would just get in the way if people start thinking of everything as a skill challenge with influence and reputation points. Meanwhile I need rules for combat because I wouldn't know where to start. I did buy Matt Collville's Strongholds and Followers and while it's well put together, nobody I play with cares about that kind of stuff.
It just depends on what kind of game you want. When I play D&D I primarily want a Saturday matinee action movie.
Similar Threads
