D&D General DM Authority

[Lanefan]

I'm just going by people I've seen who had problems with metacurrency who would absolutely have expected to treat things like the variable hit points as actually describing the world (and it sounds like maybe the ones you're talking about would too), and I think that's sometimes a problem; a lot of people don't really want to deal with the idea that hit points really are meat points either, but at the end of the day, variable hit points are not any more "realistic" than one where people have someone can get lucky and luck is represented by metacurrency at least.

(As I acknowledged in another post, I'm aware some people can deal with that and not with scene editing, and I understand the distinction there. People who can deal with level variable hit points but not "I didn't take all that damage" metacurrency I kind of can't.)

I'm one of those, as I simply dislike 'metacurrency' rules or systems in any form yet can deal with hit points - or at least fatigue/vitality points - increasing by level. (I also think falling damage rules in all versions of D&D have been unrealistically generous to the faller at any fall distance greater than about 10 feet)

Luck is represented by rolling the dice in the first place.

 

[prabe]

And, somewhat sadly, in this he is largely correct; at least when speaking of 4e and 5e.

1e and 3e, and to some extent 0e, were pretty straightforward in their focus on dungeon-delving, killing, and looting. 2e wishy-washed all over the place (typical for 2e). The tone of 4e and 5e, though, has moved rather sharply away from the hack'n'slash megadungeon model - 4e's earliest official adventures notwithstanding - to something less kill-and-loot oriented.

I don't think the shift you're describing here is necessarily a bad one, but then I don't enjoy dungeoncrawls (my taste, not a judgment on people who do--it's like not liking cilantro or something) so it's probably not a shock that I kinda prefer that 5E has shifted its focus away from them.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't think the shift you're describing here is necessarily a bad one, but then I don't enjoy dungeoncrawls (my taste, not a judgment on people who do--it's like not liking cilantro or something) so it's probably not a shock that I kinda prefer that 5E has shifted its focus away from them.

My point was that the original assertion, regarding megadungeons not being what the game's designed for, is these days correct.

Me, I like dungeoncrawls as long as there's some non-dungeoncrawl adventuring mixed in sometimes.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm going to take that analogy one step further if I may:

Fishing - however you do it - is the activity. (roleplaying)
Catching a fish you can eat for dinner (story) can be either an intended goal or a happy side effect of that fishing activity, depending on one's approach.
Maybe I've done all my research as to where the fish are, bought the latest fishfinder tech, and timed my expedition to suit their feeding hours; cause dammit, I'm bringing fish home come what may. (story as goal)

Maybe I just want to drift around in a boat on a nice summer day with a beer, and tossing a line over the side is a fine excuse to do so; and if any fish happen to jump into the cockpit then so be it. (story as side effect)

I'm not sure that makes a difference. So Fishing(roleplaying) is the activity, Fly Fishing(method acting), Spear fishing(gamist), etc. are how you go about the activity, and story can be a goal or side effect, but will happen. You've added story to my example, but it doesn't really change what I said.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Nope, you are just trying to associate "therapy" with "bad", while I was pointing out that the example you provided as "not roleplay" can clearly be roleplay, and that this is an established idea (probably older than ttrpgs).

No, I am not trying to associate "Therapy" with "bad"

However, I do have expeirence with someone who tried to use DnD as therapy. It wasn't pretty. So, I am much happier to say that the role-playing of Therapy is done with different intent and different style than the role-playing of an RPG, and we should not get too comfortable with the idea of them being "close enough".

Personal issue, I know, but still.

Huh? You were talking about puppets.

Like a puppet.

Analogy and metaphor. But, still the same concept even if you take it literally. Jokes said in the story are part of the story.

Nope, not what "crafting" means.

Really? I think most comedy writers would heavily disagree with that. Especially for all of those comedy shows with a story they are writing for.

Is it in-character and part of the narrative? Then it is part of the story you are creating in the game.

The problem is, you are acting like making a decision in a game is the same as crafting a story.

Yes. Because it is.

I mean, literally, I am writing a story right now based off DnD, with a chat and vote system where they are deciding what happens next and what actions we take in the story.

There are differences in terms of speed and everything else, but the core resolution mechanic? Still the same. Saying "Robert the Brave moves 30 ft and swings at the goblin" is still making the story. It is dry, wouldn't be a fun novel, but all that takes to change is some word choice, and working in the results.

Making decisions is the main point (outside of more story-telling type games where the story can be the main point). Of course it's entirely possible to have a game where "making a decision for what your character is doing" isn't a part of the game, and despite what you say, there is still a game, it just isn't a roleplaying one (see; storytelling games).

Okay sure, if you want to move those goalposts to a game like "The Quiet Year" where the players don't have characters, then you are right.

You want to talk about DnD though? Then making decisions for characters is the point, and without that, you can't play DnD. And when you make those decisions, then you are crafting a story. I don't know why that is a bad thing that people don't want to do, but it is what it is.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That it's just a label? That we simply disagree and you admit that I've never told you you're doing it wrong?

IMHO what you describe is a board game with an ad-hoc board. There's nothing wrong with that, I enjoy board games too. But even dungeon crawls (which honestly I don't much care for, but to each their own) has a give-and-take, an element of surprise, tactics, encounter balancing and on-the-fly decisions that a DM provides.

You consider it D&D? Okay. I'm done with this conversation.

"It isn't DnD" is not telling people they are playing DnD wrong? Huh. I feel like if I was cooking and someone came up to me and said "I don't know what that is, but it certainly isn't cooking in my opinion" they'd be telling me I'm doing it wrong. After all, they are saying I'm not doing the action I've said I'm doing.

And I love how you try to defend this by saying "I enjoy board games". Well, I'm glad you do. But it was clearly meant in a derogatory fashion to call this style of DnD "a board game"

Heck, I love white noise when I'm sleeping. If I went to a band and said "That isn't an instrument , it is some sort of ad-hoc white noise generator" don't you feel like that would... probably be an insult?

What am I saying, of course you don't. That would be admitting to being insulting towards a style of play you don't like. You're just going to continue declaring yourself done with the conversation, because you said "in my opinion" and that makes everything okay.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That's simply not true.

"Your way is not D&D" is a statement of fact and One True Wayism. It's a declaration.

"In my opinion your way is not D&D." is a statement of opinion and NOT a declaration, therefore it cannot be declaring your way to not be D&D.

"In my opinion" is not a set of magic words that removes judgement. If it is your opinion that something is not DnD, then you consider it to be a fact. Acknowledging that it isn't a fact, means you recognize that it is DnD. Which means that in your opinion, it is DnD, it just isn't a version you like.

 

[Chaosmancer]

And, somewhat sadly, in this he is largely correct; at least when speaking of 4e and 5e.

1e and 3e, and to some extent 0e, were pretty straightforward in their focus on dungeon-delving, killing, and looting. 2e wishy-washed all over the place (typical for 2e). The tone of 4e and 5e, though, has moved rather sharply away from the hack'n'slash megadungeon model - 4e's earliest official adventures notwithstanding - to something less kill-and-loot oriented.

Moving away from the model in terms of support isn't the same as it not working. Nothing in 5e prevents it, it just isn't the default.

 

[Maxperson]

"In my opinion" is not a set of magic words that removes judgement. If it is your opinion that something is not DnD, then you consider it to be a fact. Acknowledging that it isn't a fact, means you recognize that it is DnD. Which means that in your opinion, it is DnD, it just isn't a version you like.

Does it remove judgment? No. Does it render that judgement only his opinion and not a declaration? Absolutely.

And your notion that an opinion is viewed as fact is bupkis. I hold the opinion that cake is better than pie? I do not hold that as a fact, because.............subjective!!! Just like what is or is not D&D. My belief is mine alone, just as your opinion on which is better is yours. You don't get to turn someone's opinion into a declaration.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's simply not true.

"Your way is not D&D" is a statement of fact and One True Wayism. It's a declaration.

"In my opinion your way is not D&D." is a statement of opinion and NOT a declaration, therefore it cannot be declaring your way to not be D&D.

“Your way is not D&D” is a judgment. Appending “in my opinion” to it doesn’t make it any less of a judgment, it just acknowledges the fact that other people may judge it differently. Which counts for nothing, because of course other people will judge it differently, you would have to be deluded to think otherwise.

Now, there are certainly things that aren’t D&D. Football. The Avengers. Club soda. These things are not D&D, and saying so is a statement of fact. But when someone plays the game Dungeons and Dragons in a different way than you do, judging that way of playing to be “not D&D” is an act of One-True-Wayism, whether you acknowledge that others’ opinions may differ or not.