Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6883242" data-attributes="member: 996">That's become something of treasured myth in the community, but it's not that one-sided.  A system that provides you more options is simply going to leave fewer options that require improvisation, so you'll need to improvise less often.  A system that provides you with good, or even merely viable options, is not going to leave you desperate enough to try the hail-mary that often. Less need is less need, not subtle discouragement.  Desperation is desperation, not encouragement. ;PWhat 5e does is not so much encourage (subtly or otherwise) improvisation, as it puts more latitude in the hands of the DM whether the player improvises or not.  Whether that encourages improvisation on the part of the player depends on how the DM tends to handle it.  Actually, 5e has a lot of codification in some areas, particularly when it comes to spells, and spell mechanics get used and re-used a lot, with every class referencing them in some way.  Spells have always been codified in D&D - yet, IMX, magic-users have always done the most improvising and out-of-the-box tricks, because spells, though codified, do a much wider range of things than can be accomplished without magic, offering more starting points to riff off of.</blockquote>