Yes.While rules are one factor, should we also consider the effects of settings and adventures on the player experience?
I don't see how this could be controversial.
Yes.While rules are one factor, should we also consider the effects of settings and adventures on the player experience?
Can you elaborate a bit?This is an insanely bizarre thread.
Some of the questions being asked here are huge red flags.
<snip>
I have trouble believing the people that are asking some of these questions are really thinking about what they are asking
If i knew what a ragoon was, I'd have something of an answer.
That guidance might boil down to 'trial and error', which when it comes to developing one's style has IMO always been the best method anyway.But there’s no guidance on how to develop one’s style. That’s my point.
"...what they might mean...", as no two players are the same and nor are any two DMs.The text should discuss the different ways and what they mean for the player experience.
Or they get to do whatever they want/whatever it takes in order to make their players' experience better.The second possibility is one I hope isn’t the case, but which I just can’t dismiss. It’s that people DMing just want stuff to be vague and fuzzy so that they don’t have to adhere to any kind of standard of play. They get to do whatever they want without concern how the experience is for the players.
Yes, though perhaps there's an argument saing the rules will have the most overall impact as they are a bit more universal than any one setting or adventure.While rules are one factor, should we also consider the effects of settings and adventures on the player experience?
I too am wondering what you're seeing here that's raising flags.This is an insanely bizarre thread.
Some of the questions being asked here are huge red flags.
This doesn't seem right to me. I would have thought that it's possible to describe different likely consequences of different methods. For instance, one likely effect of telling players DCs is that it creates a sense of correlation between the challenges in the fiction, and the mathematics of difficulty. (I take this point from Luke Crane, who makes it in relation to Burning Wheel; the same method, and purpose, is carried over to Torchbearer.)That guidance might boil down to 'trial and error', which when it comes to developing one's style has IMO always been the best method anyway.
The best a DMG could do would be to offer conflicting suggestions (e.g. to tell the DCs or not to; to roll in the open or not, etc.) and tell DMs to choose, which would open the designers wipe to accusations of not being able to make up their minds.
I suspect that 95% of the confusion and disagreement in this thread is due to the word "transparent" regularly being treated as if it means something along the lines if "clearly quantified, ranked and priced".So, wouldn't a transparent system be similar to the monster building guidelines in the DMG? A list of many of the most common effects ranked as to how they impact a magic item.