D&D 5E Does/Should D&D Have the Player's Game Experience as a goal?

[pemerton]

I saying folks dislike the entire concept altogether, not that there is some mechanic problem that needs to be solved with it. It doesn't matter if the game tells you to, folks don't want to be told that. Also, no this doesn't make 4E bad, this is a matter of taste.

Well, if in 4e the GM ignores the treasure parcel rule then the game will tend not to work, as its maths will break down.

I think it's useful for a rulebook to point this out rather than keep it secret!

 

[payn]

I think the point being made is that if people don’t want to be told when the right time to dish out treasure may be, then why is not knowing when to dish them out described as an issue?

I’d much rather have a transparent system I can choose to ignore than an opaque system with zero guidance.

Well, if in 4e the GM ignores the treasure parcel rule then the game will tend not to work, as its maths will break down.

I think it's useful for a rulebook to point this out rather than keep it secret!

The issue is folks both do and don’t want to be told. So the base was made where magic items are not expected. Eventually, modularity was supposed to dial up the expectation. However, that never materialized and I understand that is disappointing.

 

[Imaro]

Not interested in beating this particular dead horse.

Then why reply... I mean I guess it's easier to just declare everyone's problem was with transparency as opposed to listening to the actual problems they had with the implementation.

point is that the magic item system in 3e and then 4e were both transparent and explicit.

Didn't disagree with that fact.... I disagreed with you then extrapolating that the problem people had with 4e was based around transparency... though they didn't have the same reaction to 3.x

5e has backed away from that and I would argue that this has not been a positive step. DMs are largely left in the dark as to how adding items will affect play.

They increase your PC's power...

Take flaming weapons forex. A flaming weapon in 5e effectively doubles a fighter’s dpr. Not quite but very close. Players are very quick to realize that at uncommon (rare?), flaming weapons are the best magic weapon for the value.

Good thing they can't buy them then because every fighter would have one... feels familiar.

It’s a very badly done system and basically relies entirely on the dm to sort it out.

No it's not a very badly done system. It's a system where magic items are an actual reward, are under the DM's purview, solved the magic item Christmas tree and the game runs fine with a baseline that excludes them. If you're unsure be conservative with what you hand out as you learn... the great thing is that they aren't necessary for the math of the game to function.

 

[Hussar]

Then why reply... I mean I guess it's easier to just declare everyone's problem was with transparency as opposed to listening to the actual problems they had with the implementation.

Simply not interested in yet again repetition your edition warring when it’s not the point I was making.

No it's not a very badly done system. It's a system where magic items are an actual reward, are under the DM's purview, solved the magic item Christmas tree and the game runs fine with a baseline that excludes them. If you're unsure be conservative with what you hand out as you learn... the great thing is that they aren't necessary for the math of the game to function.

And thus the point. I have to “learn” what to give instead of having a transparent system where I have clear guidelines and suggestions.

This we see people having completely different experiences with the game where one crowd claims DnD is hostile to giving out magic items and another side seeing no problem at all.

And even the suggestion that guidelines would be an improvement is immediately jumped on with more “oh you just hate 5e” rhetoric.

 

[payn]

On the topic of magic item guidelines and more, I really think all of this is on hold because of the VTT wait and see. The future of D&D really depends on what happens there.

 

[Imaro]

And even the suggestion that guidelines would be an improvement is immediately jumped on with more “oh you just hate 5e” rhetoric.

Who claimed you hate 5e??

 

[Imaro]

Simply not interested in yet again repetition your edition warring when it’s not the point I was making.

I don't think correcting a faulty assumption is edition warring...

 

[Oofta]

On the topic of magic item guidelines and more, I really think all of this is on hold because of the VTT wait and see. The future of D&D really depends on what happens there.

I guess I don't see any connection. They didn't want to repeat the magic mart from previous edition(s) and get away from the treadmill. They wanted low magic campaigns to be an option if it's what the group wanted. I think they went too far, but I understand where they were coming from. But VTT? How would that affect anything?

 

[payn]

I guess I don't see any connection. They didn't want to repeat the magic mart from previous edition(s) and get away from the treadmill. They wanted low magic campaigns to be an option if it's what the group wanted. I think they went too far, but I understand where they were coming from. But VTT? How would that affect anything?

They are building the VTT out on the existing system. They are not going to make big changes right now until its delivered and ready to accommodate. If its wildly successful, I wouldnt hold out hope for more changes to the system. If its a big failure I think thats bad news all around. Though if it hits a comfortable middle, there could be push to make updates to sell.

 

[Imaro]

I'm not adverse to guidelines for magic items... though I'm stumped on how they could do this and keep them optional.

What I dont want is the fallout of those guidelines being magic items become expected (either through purchase, wishlisting or whatever) by players and/or they become part of the math of the game.