NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N0Man" data-source="post: 5051792" data-attributes="member: 64066">I'm not sure what you are suggesting here... that the DMG shouldn't waste space with stuff that is useless to people who are experienced enough that they don't need the DMG?Not really, because otherwise it's all a matter of what actions *you* think should have been explicitly defined, which is completely different than what other players think should be defined.  What comes up and is useful varies greatly from group to group, and it's impossible to accommodate for everything people want to do, and so they offer some very good guiding principals.No, which is why I've stated many times in this thread that just because some people really dislike some design choices doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate reasons for them and that others don't believe they are an improvement.It's also a good reason to help teach DM's some guiding principals to start with, so that they can then decide what works best for them and their group and adapt it as needed.  The DMG does not discourage DM's from making the game their own, quite the opposite.Absolutely, but uninformed and poor GM calls can really ruin the fun too.  Again, the DMG offers a lot of suggestions, advice, and guidelines.  I wouldn't consider P. 42 (or most other parts of the DMG) to be hard rules, but rather helping DM's get a feel for the art of DM'ing and learning to make their own calls by giving examples of generally balanced resolutions.Now this is a question that is completely subjective, because it hinges on personal preference.I personally think that having a bunch of confusing subsystems that have I (personally) would frequently have to reference and re-reference when they occur to not really be a huge advantage to a game system where I am not really trying to run a simulationist style game, but rather just want to focus on story, drama, characters, fun and action.I think that teaching guiding principals of how to resolve the vast majority of things is a better approach than how to resolve a small number of things hand picked by the designers, which may or may not apply to your particular game.Over time, these resolutions will likely tend to become increasingly more consistent and solid as a GM learns from experience and learns to apply resolutions from the past to new unexpected actions in the future.Giving me a better grasp of principals makes me feel a lot more free to improvise and feel confident about it.In my opinion, P. 42 fits right in with the old adage, "Give a man to fish, feed him for a Day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime."However, I realize that some people want everything to be defined in explicit detail.  It's a matter of taste and what people feel comfortable with.</blockquote>

Verification