Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 7681497" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya!Pretty much the exact opposite of how I like to DM. To each their own I guess! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> One of the things that makes RPG's so cool... diversity in play.I ignore 99.9% of all Sage Advice. I just don't need it. There is absolutely nothing they can say that would have me say to my group "Well, we were running it this way, but Sage Advice says we're doing it wrong so I guess we have to change". And as for Twitter... what's a "twitter"? Some kind of new-fangled interweb talkie thing? ...huh...  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I don't have a "twitter", so...uh... yeah.It's that "exactly as it's intended" part that I think you are miss reading. You do realize that the intent of 5e is for the DM (that'd be you) to make up his own rulings and clarifications? You are most definitely not playing the game "as intended" if you adhere so strictly to just the rules published in the books...and Sage Advice...and Twitter ( <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f635.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt="o_O" title="Er... what?    o_O"  data-smilie="12"data-shortname="o_O" /> Really? Twitter? ... ... ). From what it sounds like to me, you are taking 3.x/4e/PF style "a rule for everything, and everything, a rule (and if there isn't one, go buy a book that has it)" and subconsciously applying it to 5e. That is a mistake, IMHO.One of the main reasons for 5e's success, again IMHO, is that is specifically doesn't adhere to the 3.x/4e/PF design paradigm of "only go to a DM's rulings as a last resort" type of play style. At least, that's how I've seen them and experienced them when playing with other DM's and players with 3.x/PF. With 5e, Miraiah the DM from down the street can rule on some particular interpretation of something, and her ruling has just as much weight as anyone else's... and that includes the actual designers of the game as far as I'm concerned. The fact that the rules are intentionally left "fast and loose" is one the the (if not THE) key reasons me and my group are still playing it after all these months (getting close to a year now I believe; every Sunday, every Month...sometimes with an extra Monday or Tuesday tossed in; a LOT of playing, basically <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ). I also firmly believe that it is this fast-and-loose play style that has rocketed 5e back up to the #1 RPG spot. I'd bet coppers to platinum that D&D's climb back up to that spot was not because of "strict rules, used exactly as intended". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Anyway, I just wanted to point out the oddness of saying "...exactly as it's intended" when referring to written rules in 5e when one of the big selling points (pushed by WotC back when it was in development, roll-out, and even still) of the game is it is intended to specifically give the DM free reign to interpret rules or make them up as he/she sees fit. ^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

Verification