Kinder reader Inflection wanted
Can you point to a specific one? I know the rules pretty well but I can't think of one. Not saying your wrong but It feel like even when D&D has them they are suggestions. The Zanthar's down time activities for example are specific but if you read the first part of the chapter is explaining the thinking and different things to consider but does not tell the GM how. All the specific down time activities are examples not rules. They are a good place to start, but I had another player tell me I could not do something one time because Zanthar's didn't have "rules" for it. Me and my GM laughed and had him read the first part... followed by ...oh! ... well then... I guess you can. The only rigid design I know is character creation which GMs still control which classes, subclass, and sources players can pull from so this is really only rigid for players.When I'm talking about these rules, I'm thinking of a hypothetical where the rules may be deeper than even the spellcasting or regular combat rules.
I'm talking about rules where the DM doesn't decide. Maybe the designers added a table, so it's no longer the DM's choice about crit fails. Maybe there's now a step-by-step procedure to bring someone anyone into your bed with a set DC and a set number of rolls, like a skill challenge.
These rules take away DM adjudication in favor for a more algorithmic process.
I don't think we disagree with anything you said here but that doesn't actually change that "The rules helping to have everyone on the same page is about the best starting point for conflict resolution you can have." In fact, rules being a starting point implies continued communication.Nothing good ol' fashion communication can't fix. Ultimately, communication errors exist with rules as-well. A DM might believe you're casting the "friends" cantrip when you say you want to make an NPC your friend. It's easy to say "Oh, that wasn't my intention, my intention was this..."
The DM is the final arbiter, though. If you disagree with the DM, know that it just might be because the DM has other things in motion that you can't see, assuming they're a good DM.
I am glad you do. Enjoy.Let me be clear: I'm not complaining about anything. I personally find combat extremely fun and don't feel the need to change it one way or the other. I'm enjoying 5e for what it is and so are my players.
Uh... welcome to the topic of the thread, I guess? lol. Though I generally don't think you need tell people to make it easier on them selves if its too hard on them. People tend to find that naturally. Let me be clear... you are not wrong at all in this advice. Where this thread varies is that its focused on the consideration that some times combat is not hard at all to run for the GM and they still fine it painful because its boring. My GMs have all had this problem. The pain was not tacking combat but their lack of engagement. So the suggestions are how to re-engage the GM to make if more fun for the GM, not easier when its already easy enough.I'm talking about in-general if you aren't feeling combat, it isn't the holy grail of a good campaign in a game. If combat is painful for a DM, maybe adjust the rules to be easier to track. Use tokens for spells areas, reduce HP, reduce AC, increase damage, etc.