D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[FitzTheRuke]

It utterly baffles me why DM's insist on faffing about on a bunch of completely forgettable, utterly trivial scenes. We are at point A. We need to get to point B because that's where our adventure is. Why would I bother wasting the table's time on talking to random stranger who has nothing to do with the story?

I think the answer would be: Because a lot of people find those scenes fun.

I'm a little with you (though not nearly anywhere as extreme): I like to throw in a line or two of fluff in those sorts of scenes, but I don't prefer a lot of in-character back-and-forth in funny accents. I'm okay with it when a player likes it that way, though - it's a well-loved way to play D&D.

And like you say, my ego isn't important enough to me to have play be "my way only" - not here, and not even at my table, not as a player, and not as a DM.

Naturally a table I DM at will lean toward my preferences, but I've certainly played with method actor-types, and I'll interact with them as long as there isn't someone who feels your way, getting too bored. Though you'd have to be patient and put up with a reasonable amount of it.

All of this is what I call "Playing Nice With Others". I think that there's room for everyone, as long as they're willing to work with other people.

 

[Oofta]

Well, I'd like to point out that this particular sub-thread started when I was talking to someone else about roleplaying their features--and how if a player doesn't want to RP, that's on the player, not the feature--and you decided to say that requiring RP here was stupid and pointless (because you could RP as a chimp, remember?).

So why couldn't you accept that my style and preference were different than yours?

You may want to read what I said again.

I said RP didn't change the outcome and was not at all required, adding RP does not change the outcome. I did go on to say that if a group doesn't care about RP the feature still works.

Nothing in the feature mentions RP, checks, or even restrictions of any kind. But yes, following the letter of the rules you could RP a hungry chimp and it would still work.

 

[James Gasik]

I think the answer would be: Because a lot of people find those scenes fun.

I'm a little with you (though not nearly anywhere as extreme): I like to throw in a line or two of fluff in those sorts of scenes, but I don't prefer a lot of in-character back-and-forth in funny accents. I'm okay with it when a player likes it that way, though - it's a well-loved way to play D&D.

And like you say, my ego isn't important enough to me to have play be "my way only" - not here, and not even at my table, not as a player, and not as a DM.

Naturally a table I DM at will lean toward my preferences, but I've certainly played with method actor-types, and I'll interact with them as long as there isn't someone who feels your way, getting too bored. Though you'd have to be patient and put up with a reasonable amount of it.

All of this is what I call "Playing Nice With Others". I think that there's room for everyone, as long as they're willing to work with other people.

Eh? I said that? That doesn't sound like something I'd say. Has an evil doppleganger been impersonating me again?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I think the answer would be: Because a lot of people find those scenes fun.

I'm a little with you (though not nearly anywhere as extreme): I like to throw in a line or two of fluff in those sorts of scenes, but I don't prefer a lot of in-character back-and-forth in funny accents. I'm okay with it when a player likes it that way, though - it's a well-loved way to play D&D.

And like you say, my ego isn't important enough to me to have play be "my way only" - not here, and not even at my table, not as a player, and not as a DM.

Naturally a table I DM at will lean toward my preferences, but I've certainly played with method actor-types, and I'll interact with them as long as there isn't someone who feels your way, getting too bored. Though you'd have to be patient and put up with a reasonable amount of it.

All of this is what I call "Playing Nice With Others". I think that there's room for everyone, as long as they're willing to work with other people.

Man. It’s really about the group and preferences.

We do roleplay and say some things with some character style but often it’s “Slag asks the bartender where there is an armorer in town.”

If we had to argue over every copper while buying provisions…I would tear my eyes out. I think we sometimes take cues from the DM. If my DM or me as DM sort of summarizes the result of the interaction without a lot of flourish it’s a good cue that it’s time to advance.

 

[Clint_L]

I think the answer would be: Because a lot of people find those scenes fun.

Random scenes with NPCs that originate with the players making unexpected choices are the best. Those are often the highlights of game, and sometimes spawn completely unexpected story arcs. As a DM, I love them - I love when I don't know exactly where the story is going.

In one of my games at school, a player had her character walk into a pirate tavern looking for directions, decided that she saw her long lost sister sitting in the corner, and the story took a huge swerve. It was great!

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Random scenes with NPCs that originate with the players making unexpected choices are the best. Those are often the highlights of game, and sometimes spawn completely unexpected story arcs. As a DM, I love them - I love when I don't know exactly where the story is going.

In one of my games at school, a player had her character walk into a pirate tavern looking for directions, decided that she saw her long lost sister sitting in the corner, and the story took a huge swerve. It was great!

The game does deliver that way at times.

I had a group of hobgoblin mercenaries led by a “Commander Krag” and the next thing I know a few PCs are talking to him about honor and duty and…he became a well liked partner.

Did not see that coming…thought he was a little detail and then they wanted to ally with him did so!

 

[soviet]

In one of my games at school, a player had her character walk into a pirate tavern looking for directions, decided that she saw her long lost sister sitting in the corner, and the story took a huge swerve. It was great!

What were the chances that her sister would be in that bar? One in a million? Sounds very unrealistic to me.

 

[Clint_L]

What were the chances that her sister would be in that bar? One in a million? Sounds very unrealistic to me.

After we worked it into the story, it made all the sense in the world. The player had the "smuggler" background, and we worked out that both she and her sister were working off a debt, so now she had to figure out how to free her sister, on top of the overarching story.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Eh? I said that? That doesn't sound like something I'd say. Has an evil doppleganger been impersonating me again?

Weird. I meant to quote @Hussar, and thought that I had. The strangest part, is that I even looked at his specific wording when writing that reply. If I was somehow quoting you, how did I even do that?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

After we worked it into the story, it made all the sense in the world. The player had the "smuggler" background, and we worked out that both she and her sister were working off a debt, so now she had to figure out how to free her sister, on top of the overarching story.

I have a theory about the game and DM enjoyment. Well when it’s my turn anyway.

I want to know the parts and systems but I like not knowing everything. I have a patron and a world shaped by a cataclysm.

I don’t actually know all the “whys” and it keeps me interested in my own creation.

As things progress I will “learn” more of the whys but not being open to discovery as a dm is not as fun.

I think the chaos serpent was defeated for a time by the world shaping cataclysm, but I am not sure and I like that.

In a more day to day adventuring level, I like that some emergent things become more and I did not plan or expect it! Fun for all…