D&D 5E (2014) DM imposed restrictions to the game (+)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest 7037866
  • Start date Start date

What things do you restrict when running a D&D game?

  • Nothing. Anything and everything goes.

    Votes: 21 8.7%
  • Some books (official)

    Votes: 126 52.3%
  • Some matieral (non-official 3PP)

    Votes: 177 73.4%
  • Some races

    Votes: 141 58.5%
  • Some classes

    Votes: 75 31.1%
  • Some subclasses

    Votes: 95 39.4%
  • Some features

    Votes: 55 22.8%
  • Some magical items

    Votes: 88 36.5%
  • Some non-magical items

    Votes: 40 16.6%
  • Some rules

    Votes: 91 37.8%
  • No (or restricted) feats

    Votes: 42 17.4%
  • No (or restricted) mulitclassing

    Votes: 57 23.7%
  • No backgrounds

    Votes: 7 2.9%
  • Some alignments

    Votes: 75 31.1%

I don't think people don't act, dont get me wrong, especially in LARP. I just deny the notion that acting for a character happens on the same level as talking in "real life" when you are just yourself. There is always a margin of creative thinking involved - unless you did years of hard theatre training or are a rare super-talented actor, but I think its fair to assume that this is not true for most RPlers. Or you do actually talk as in real life, meaning you are not actually acting at all, just adding a slight "Aragorn" flair to your own.

Also RPGs are improvisational which is even harder to act. Theatre and movie actors do extensive scene and character studies, improvisational actors don't have that luxury. This makes it even more clear to me that the average Joe RPGler don't think and speak on the same natural level as when being out of character - if they actually try to act and roleplay and not just be themselves.

So it's perfection or nothing? Occasionally I am getting as close to thinking as my character as is practical, so similar to when I'm really engrossed in a book for example. Is it perfect? Do I get to the point of actually believing I am my character? Of course not. But when I'm really into playing a character I sometimes surprise myself a little bit by what I say but it's also exactly how my character would react.

You seem to be belittling other peoples preferences and experiences because they aren't good enough to meet a bar set so high that only a small percentage of actors could ever achieve. But I think I also disagree your criteria. If a method actor is speaking lines from a script they may be feeling the emotions, riffing off how they think the character would feel while saying those lines but they're still quoting words someone else wrote. They have a version of that persona in their heads but they aren't creating the persona, they're implementing a persona. With improv you both inhabit the character and create them as you go along.

Of course I don't forget I'm playing a character, I'm not delusional. But I'm also not thinking "What would Klank say", I'm responding as Klank, at least some of the time. That's good enough for me.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


While I see your point, I think there's a difference between insulting a game and telling someone they're deluded or lying. Doesn't mean the former is going to go over well, of course.
Sometime, not always. Depends on the precise criticism of the game and whether that pushes against what those defending it say about it.
 


I think there is some difference between criticizing something that someone likes and criticizing them for liking it. Unless they are the creator of the thing being criticized.
Sometimes, not always.

Example:
P1 - Game works X way.
P2 - You’re deluded for thinking that, it works Y (negative) way.

Edit: better example
P1 - The game’s mechanics encourage strategic play
P2 - I don’t think that’s true, the systems are too shallow to support real strategy
 
Last edited:


Sometime, not always. Depends on the precise criticism of the game and whether that pushes against what those defending it say about it.

My observation is when you're doing it against a whole broad group of games its not liable to go well, especially directed at the whole underlying principal of parts of their mechanics. I don't think it matters much here because its directed at a whole approach to gaming a couple of the participants are up-front about how hostile they are to (so anyone liable to get worked already is), but its not a tone-neutral kind of statement.
 



My observation is when you're doing it against a whole broad group of games its not liable to go well, especially directed at the whole underlying principal of parts of their mechanics. I don't think it matters much here because its directed at a whole approach to gaming a couple of the participants are up-front about how hostile they are to (so anyone liable to get worked already is), but its not a tone-neutral kind of statement.
Yes but it’s also implicitly personal when your criticism starts challenging their personal judgment. That’s what I’m pointing toward.
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top