Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr Simon" data-source="post: 2065802" data-attributes="member: 21938">Completely fair. Here's a quote from Monte Cook (from a Design Diary about Arcana Unearthed, but relevant to design decisions behind DMG 3rd Ed.:"To try to explain some of the things I'm attempting to do with Arcana Unearthed (and the books that follow it), I'll occasionally have to back up a bit and explain some things that we did with the core rules. One thing, for example, that we tried to do was to "take the DM out of the equation" as much as possible. Now this has caused its own share of problems, but the reason we did it was to make the game as easy as we could for new players. If the DM has to make a lot of judgment calls, the game is more difficult to learn. However, it's my belief that it's also more satisfying. So with Arcana Unearthed, I've intentionally backed away from that approach a bit. The champion of freedom, to use him as an example again, might get a bonus on attack rolls, saves, and checks in all situations pertaining to freeing captives or struggling against an oppressor. Although the book does provides guidance on how to judge such situations, it's ultimately up to the DM to decide when the champion gets the bonus."One may or may not agree with him that the DMing making judgement calls makes the game "more difficult to learn". A possible counter-argument would be "so does making the DM remember rules for every situation". I think therein lies the root of the 1st vs. 3rd preference-schism. That, and the tendency of 1st Ed DMG to turn into Schott's Miscellany.</blockquote>

Verification