D&D (2024) DMG adventure design advice - a bit contradictory?

[doctorbadwolf]

None of the ideas in the quoted text of the DMG being discussed here are actually novel.

What would be novel is having the DMG acknowledge the innate tension in adventure path style play, and be direct that while the players have some freedom to diverge, there's a tacit social contract that the players won't try to derail the DM's overarching plot.

When did I say anything about anything being novel?

 

[TwoSix]

When did I say anything about anything being novel?

Here.

the only thing that doesn’t bode well for improvement here is the attitude of a chunk of the community toward new things.

I assumed by "new things", you had meant that the text being debated was the "new thing".

If you didn't, then I'm not sure what particular attitude that a chunk of the community holds that you view as problematic (or at least, "doesn't bode well for improvement").

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Here.

I assumed by "new things", you had meant that the text being debated was the "new thing".

If you didn't, then I'm not sure what particular attitude that a chunk of the community holds that you view as problematic (or at least, "doesn't bode well for improvement").

A new thing needn’t be novel. The newest model of Toyota Camry is new, but it’s far from novel.

Novelty isn’t the issue. There is a pervasive attitude toward anything new from wotc that doesn’t show any signs of getting less toxic.

 

[TwoSix]

A new thing needn’t be novel. The newest model of Toyota Camry is new, but it’s far from novel.

Novelty isn’t the issue. There is a pervasive attitude toward anything new from wotc that doesn’t show any signs of getting less toxic.

Somewhat ironically, it's the lack of novelty from WotC that has been steadily pushing me away from their products.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Somewhat ironically, it's the lack of novelty from WotC that has been steadily pushing me away from their products.

I mean, yeah, a lot of people are dissatisfied that wotc isn’t pushing any envelopes (as if that is somehow inherently better than a stable game that remains the same game for decades), that’s part of the attitude I’m referring to.

So not so much ironic as…the point.

There is a pervasive attitude of negativity toward anything new from wotc. Again, that has nothing to do with novelty, it is merely a matter of a thing being new.

 

[TwoSix]

I mean, yeah, a lot of people are dissatisfied that wotc isn’t pushing any envelopes (as if that is somehow inherently better than a stable game that remains the same game for decades), that’s part of the attitude I’m referring to.

So not so much ironic as…the point.

There is a pervasive attitude of negativity toward anything new from wotc. Again, that has nothing to do with novelty, it is merely a matter of a thing being new.

I feel like those are two opposing points.

I'm not against anything new from WotC. In fact, I'd love to see WotC make more new stuff. But, to use your metaphor, all I keep seeing is WotC producing yet another Camry.

But we've extended very far from the point of the thread, and the relative utility of the new products has been debated ad nauseum elsewhere.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I feel like those are two opposing points.

I'm not against anything new from WotC. In fact, I'd love to see WotC make more new stuff. But, to use your metaphor, all I keep seeing is WotC producing yet another Camry.

Which is a new Camry. Please understand the difference between new and novel.

But we've extended very far from the point of the thread, and the relative utility of the new products has been debated ad nauseum elsewhere.

Would have been really easy to not try to nitpick my statement in the first place, but sure. (Also I haven’t made any comments about the relative utility of the new products, so…okay?)

 

[TwoSix]

Would have been really easy to not try to nitpick my statement in the first place, but sure. (Also I haven’t made any comments about the relative utility of the new products, so…okay?)

I would never try to out-nitpick you. I'm aware I only adopted the darkness.

 

[pemerton]

They are told to determine encounters and events that take the characters from the beginning to the end. They are not told to determine the outcome of those encounters and events, and are in fact specifically told not to do so, but to let the outcome of those encounters be determined by play.

If one pre-determined encounter/event (A) takes the characters to another pre-determined encounter/event (B0, then there must be very significant limits on the outcome of (A). Any outcome that would not lead to (B) is precluded.

Unless the DM is running an entirely random campaign, making it up as they go along, they are going to determine the start of an adventure, an endpoint/final goal, and some possible steps in between.

This claim isn't true. I don't run entirely, or even primarily, random campaigns. And I don't determine the things that you say I am going to do.

There are techniques for establishing what happens next, including framing techniques, that do not depend upon pre-determination and that are not random. They're well-known RPGing techniques these days. In the world of D&D, some 4e D&D books at least gesture towards them.

 

[pemerton]

Why start a thread if you aren’t even kinda open to hearing that the answer to the question in the title might be, “nope”?

Why read and reply to the thread if you aren't even kinda open to hearing that the answer to the question in the title might be, "yep"?