D&D (2024) Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

[Parmandur]

While I think those things do happen, I also think that the "natural language" of 5E invites confusion, misunderstanding and opposed interpretations. What you gain in readability you potentially lose in clarity, and there is no better example that the 1400 post long argument about perception we just had.

Honestly it seems to me that people just want to argue about stuff like that. The rules are clear and easy in practice.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

There is A point on the graph which 5e is balanced similar to how process is designed with an 80-20 rule.

If we agree with the Designers on that point and measure...is a different story.

what point on the graph is that? (and I don't mean this to be 'lets fight over this' I mean this to be 'if there is a level or way to balance this game I would love to know it')

 

[Aldarc]

While I think those things do happen, I also think that the "natural language" of 5E invites confusion, misunderstanding and opposed interpretations. What you gain in readability you potentially lose in clarity, and there is no better example that the 1400 post long argument about perception we just had.

When Gorsuch joined the Supreme Court, he was mocked by his fellow justices for his simplistic view of "natural language" when it came to its value in making rulings.

 

[Reynard]

Honestly it seems to me that people just want to argue about stuff like that. The rules are clear and easy in practice.

Reasserting a premise doesn't make it any more true.

 

[Parmandur]

you can make stuff up all you want but half or more of the game is hidden behind spells, and the most versatile characters fall ever so slightly behind the most dedicated focused ones in what the dedicated focused ones specialize in, with out giving up all of there versatility. I don't call that balanced at all.

the fact that MULTI full casters can go level 1- level 10 with the same number of attacks same damage on melee attacks as the fighter AND still have there spells is something that speaks for itself... but when Adventures in Middle Earth made non casters, they took BARD, took it's spell casting and said "Gee without that it is 98% balanced with rogue and fighter" shows a bigger issue.

I'm not making anything up, it's right there in the books and the designers have explained it many times. You might not like the balance, but it exists and it works.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I have only seen that online,

okay, so you, 1 person have not seen it... but I am sure you will not believe when others tell you they do... but you WILL expect us to take at face value you don't. Do you see the problem here?

And in 5E arguably almost always easily resolved, usually by reading the DMG.

again, maybe you can go solve the 'what is suprise' and 'what is active vs passive perception' or the SUPER long running 'what is a hit' questions.

 

[Parmandur]

Reasserting a premise doesn't make it any more true.

No, but it doesn't make it false, either. I remain unimpressed by 5E "rule arguments" by and large. They are usually resolved near instantly if approached reasonably.

 

[Charlaquin]

I have only seen that online, it never comes up in play, unlike 3E. I still don't know how grappling was supposed to work and we read the 3.x books nearly every session to figure that out. And in 5E arguably almost always easily resolved, usually by reading the DMG.

And I’ve only seen people claiming 4e is hard to read online. These are still real things people encounter.

 

[Parmandur]

okay, so you, 1 person have not seen it... but I am sure you will not believe when others tell you they do... but you WILL expect us to take at face value you don't. Do you see the problem here?



again, maybe you can go solve the 'what is suprise' and 'what is active vs passive perception' or the SUPER long running 'what is a hit' questions.

Passive perception is what the DM rolls against as a DC when the player isn't actively looking.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Honestly it seems to me that people just want to argue about stuff like that. The rules are clear and easy in practice.

so you don't trust people you are talking to, at least not to present the problem they have in good faith... BUT you expect that those same people should take YOUR answer as good faith?