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="Drifter Bob" data-source="post: 1619063" data-attributes="member: 17723">I think Oourph gave a good general example with this post from earlier in the thread:IMO the rules DO make a difference in the maturity level of the game. More rules takes power out of the hands of the DM and the players. It discourages imagination and creativity by channeling thought into certain pre-determined modes. A mature game assumes maturity in the players. A mature ruleset provides a framework for challenge resolution without overburdening itself with the minutiae of each individual situation. A mature ruleset encourages maturity in its players by expecting it from the beginning.The problem with the current incarnation of D&D (in my crotchety old grumbling opinion) is that it has a very very strong framework for challenge resolution but ruins the simplicity and elegance of this sytem by including numerous situations and options that modify the simple base system sixteen ways from Sunday. This seems to have been a response to the immature gamer who either can't use the simple framework fairly and consistently or who can't trust someone else to use the simple framework fairly and consistently. Immaturity demands that codified rules take the place of good judgement because immature players are generally more worried about winning and/or getting screwed over than they are about having fun.  He also had a good more specific point about how the lack of bluff skill affected the outcome of an encounter he ran, which I think was an excellent specific example.Someone else mentioned how giving more ways to award experience points for things other than fights or trap de-activation might be a good idea.The interpretation of alignment and alignment detection spells were also mentioned...These are just a few points.  Ultimately, I can't mathematically prove that there is a problem in the rules which is leading to a problem with the way people are playing, it is a subjective opinion.  But I have definately seen many examples of this in my life, and several people have mentioned similar experiences to me.  I got two emails today about this in fact from two totally unrelated people.I would add to Ourphs observations my own experience that players well versed in the 3.X rules seem to generally approach the game as more of a contest between players and DM than I ever experienced in the old day.  Even though I know Gary Gygax is often accused of encouraging this vice himself with a lot of his killer DM dungeon crawls, even at that extreme the tone seemed to be different.  In the last year and a half that I have been back into DnD, and playing 3.0 and now 3.5, I have met more players with this sort of competetive, almost hostile approach toward the game than I ever did before.  It has led me to be much more careful about who I let into my campaign because I don't want to play with people like that.  It even partially cost me a friendship with one guy!  I do feel the rules have led to this phenomenon.DB</blockquote>

Verification