D&D General Ignoring the rules!

[MichaelSomething]

Follow the quotes back, you literally quoted my post which quoted your post which commented that if people want a certain playstyle, there's always 4e.

When it comes to 4E, the perception among many is that it's a game that tightly controls playstyle. It's the most common complaint about 4E to many.

I, however, am so empowered, that even the 4E books that have straightjacketed dozens of DMs on this very forum is no match for my creativity! For example, when it comes to skills challenges, I do not adhere to the concept that a skill challenge should only contain the skills listed in said challenge. I simply IGNORED those limitations. I would allow almost any skill if a player made a convincing enough argument or felt it possible in the fiction.

During a Living Forgotten Realms adventure, there was a skill challenge where the players had to navigate a dangerous swamp. While Endurance wasn't listed, a player wanted to try to use that skill complete the challenge. I thought, "he's gonna walk straight and just tank all the swamp gas trap? Time to hose him over." But he rolled a nat 20 so I went, "You literally just walk straight through. Swamp gas traps trigger but you brace yourself so well, you just don't care."

 

[Retros_x]

I have actually found having a meta goal is far more important to open world games than including XP. YMMV.

What do you mean exactly? I would understand it at some bigger goal where there is no clear line of quests to reach it. And it should not be to pressing IMO (if I understood you correctly). "Stop the demon king from destroying the world in 2 weeks" for example would be way too pressing for a sandbox campaign. There is no real room for free exploring.

In general there are lots of different things more important for sandbox campaigns than XP - and yet I think XP is the better character progression mechanic than milestones for sandbox for the reasons I stated.

 

[Oofta]

What do you mean exactly? I would understand it at some bigger goal where there is no clear line of quests to reach it. And it should not be to pressing IMO (if I understood you correctly). "Stop the demon king from destroying the world in 2 weeks" for example would be way too pressing for a sandbox campaign. There is no real room for free exploring.

In general there are lots of different things more important for sandbox campaigns than XP - and yet I think XP is the better character progression mechanic than milestones for sandbox for the reasons I stated.

I run a more-or-less sandbox campaign, but I also have mini-arcs that are relatively small goals. There are overarching threats and obstacles, the arcs can be part of dealing with the long term or not. For that matter they can ignore any of the bigger threats if they aren't interesting and pursue something else they deem more important.

But ultimately it's just that I don't really care about "earning" anything. Class levels just allow us to have different types of encounters and adventures. As they level up, they're facing bigger and more dangerous threats, typically issues that have a broader impact. It's fun to see growth, but I DM so people have fun, I don't need a carrot to get them to do things the way I want them to do it.

 

[Jaiken]

Archers and ranged attackers don’t need to keep track of their ammo. Players also do not need to keep track of feeding their characters unless they so desire.

 

[Oofta]

Archers and ranged attackers don’t need to keep track of their ammo. Players also do not need to keep track of feeding their characters unless they so desire.

That's another one I've forgotten I ignore. Probably because I never paid any attention to it. For that matter, I'm not overly concerned about living expenses for downtime. I want to play D&D, not Budgets & Bookkeeping.

 

[Umbran]

Look we have been over this before. It doesn't make sense to you becasue you are incapable of understanding any play style philosophy other than the one you hold.

Mod note:
If you are getting frustrated, making it personal is not going to make things better. Please take a break until you can engage without insulting people.

 

[payn]

What do you mean exactly? I would understand it at some bigger goal where there is no clear line of quests to reach it. And it should not be to pressing IMO (if I understood you correctly). "Stop the demon king from destroying the world in 2 weeks" for example would be way too pressing for a sandbox campaign. There is no real room for free exploring.

In general there are lots of different things more important for sandbox campaigns than XP - and yet I think XP is the better character progression mechanic than milestones for sandbox for the reasons I stated.

Yes, an openly undefined meta goal. For example, Pirates of Drinax is an empire building sandbox campaign for Traveller. The players can choose whatever interests them to build toward that goal with no direct or optimal line to it. Travellers can build a dominant trade line, form a diplomatic alliance, or become notorious pirates. That is the point, nothing out weighs the other, its just all adventure to pursue naturally as to what is interesting to the characters first and players second. XP turns that on its head, determines optimal paths, places player interest over character.

Ultimately its a matter of taste, and my philosophical take is that XP is a distraction from what I want out of my RPG. I do think XP works well for an old school skill play set up where the character is more of an avatar the player shuffles around and tries to keep alive. The challenges are for the player, not the character, so this works out fine. I dont mind that experience for a one shot or short campaign. It is not, however, what I want long term and find it moves the game int hat direction no matter how I try and apply XP. YMMV.

 

[Lanefan]

I have actually found having a meta goal is far more important to open world games than including XP. YMMV.

Can't speak re your specific group, of course, but IME there's some players (and groups) for whom if you give them a meta goal they'll do absolutely nothing else except beeline straight to that goal and get it done. The world can be as open as you like but they'll ignore all of it while that goal is still out there; hardly conducive to a broad-based exploration-for-exploration's sake type of campaign.

Put any sort of time pressure on that meta goal and it gets even worse.

 

[payn]

Can't speak re your specific group, of course, but IME there's some players (and groups) for whom if you give them a meta goal they'll do absolutely nothing else except beeline straight to that goal and get it done. The world can be as open as you like but they'll ignore all of it while that goal is still out there; hardly conducive to a broad-based exploration-for-exploration's sake type of campaign.

Put any sort of time pressure on that meta goal and it gets even worse.

Well, if exploring the entire world is part of the meta goal then there won’t be any problem. The idea is the meta goal isn’t something simple like get rich or stop this one evil dude. Also, there shouldn’t be any timing on the meta goals just short term adventures on the way.

 

[pemerton]

When it comes to 4E, the perception among many is that it's a game that tightly controls playstyle. It's the most common complaint about 4E to many.

I, however, am so empowered, that even the 4E books that have straightjacketed dozens of DMs on this very forum is no match for my creativity! For example, when it comes to skills challenges, I do not adhere to the concept that a skill challenge should only contain the skills listed in said challenge. I simply IGNORED those limitations. I would allow almost any skill if a player made a convincing enough argument or felt it possible in the fiction.

Now if only the DMG had said that this is the proper way to run a skill challenge! (Oh, wait a sec . . . )