S
Sunseeker
Guest
I have found the exact opposite in every edition.
really? I find creative combat and Rping said creativity takes a lot longer than rolling a few d20's and adding up some damage.
I have found the exact opposite in every edition.
really? I find creative combat and Rping said creativity takes a lot longer than rolling a few d20's and adding up some damage.
Yes really. Did you read the DMG? Probably would have helped if you didn't. Not too clear on why you felt that restriction as a DM. If you read the two DMGs there is pretty explicit encouragement of saying yes to player innovation.Totally agree.
Really? I actually had the opposite effect. I was in the "Say Yes" mode before 4e, the more I played 4e, the more I found that becoming "Say No". I guess we had a different experience.
As to the topic at hand, I am a huge advocate for creative play. To me, thats the big drawcard of tabletop play, and if a system doesnt do that your better off playing Dragon Age on the PC.
This is where I want 5e to do something a little different. No just "less mechanics", leaving it to DM fiat, but more mechanics to support creative play. My big love in this way goes to FATE and the players ability to creative narrative, it not only allows creative play...it has a mechanic for creative play. Very cool.
We will see what they can come up with.
I would argue that giving them a DC and damage expression designed to be makeable but generally less effective then just using a power isn't really saying "yes", but "who cares?".4e taught me to "say yes". This meant stopping stifling my players creativity by projecting DCs upon them I believed what was realistically achievable for characters of their level. "Sure, try ... DC 35..." is the same as saying no.
I'm not quite sure I understand your first paragraph. My reading is that you have understood that I said yes by setting an achievable DC, but made the action less effective than just using a power. And you're opinion of this is that I wasn't saying yes to my players, I was saying 'who cares'.I would argue that giving them a DC and damage expression designed to be makeable but generally less effective then just using a power isn't really saying "yes", but "who cares?".
As a player I don't get creative just to hear the sound of my own voice. I don't "refluff" just to express myself. I get creative to get my butt out of a situation I by all rights shouldn't survive, or to earn rewards my character wouldn't otherwise be good enough to receive if they were played more predictably.
To me getting creative means to break the game, and I might go so far as to say that the game should push players into doing this, because it's really fun. One of the salient features of tabletop roleplaying is if you "break the game" it will keep going, because the DM is there to smooth over the holes and use their judgement. So this should happen a lot imo.
I would argue that giving them a DC and damage expression designed to be makeable but generally less effective then just using a power isn't really saying "yes", but "who cares?".
As a player I don't get creative just to hear the sound of my own voice. I don't "refluff" just to express myself. I get creative to get my butt out of a situation I by all rights shouldn't survive, or to earn rewards my character wouldn't otherwise be good enough to receive if they were played more predictably.
To me getting creative means to break the game, and I might go so far as to say that the game should push players into doing this, because it's really fun. One of the salient features of tabletop roleplaying is if you "break the game" it will keep going, because the DM is there to smooth over the holes and use their judgement. So this should happen a lot imo.