Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8314838" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Absolutely I agree that for this to be normal play, you'd need a chapter in a book dedicated to explaining how to do it, and it would benefit from a little more mechanical help (though not a lot. mechanise every part of it, and I lose interest. As I've said in other threads, physical challenges are the only place where I want hard-coded mechanical process like combat has. I wish 5e had a little more of it for non-combat physical challenges, but not for social or investigative challenges).The thing is, DnD's specific identity is that any given group makes it their own, and the process described in teh books is just advice.Right. Exactly. And yet nothing breaks. Because DnD can easily handle huge departures from the default processes, as long as you aren't severely changing the rules, and even then the rules are more robust and open to change in 5e than either of the last two editions before it. Wizards could put out a book that assumes the same level of departure from the "process of play", and it would work fine. A heist game in 5e departs nearly as much, and running heists in 5e is wonderful. I've run a investigative game, and contrary to what someone told me "will inevitably happen" when trying to run such a game with 5e...its just works. Out of the box. No houserules but those we use in every 5e game, just a different process of play than we use for a more standard adventure game. This is pretty tangential to the thread topic, though, which is about focus. Since I see any particular "focus" people see in 5e (beyond "fantasy adventure roleplaying game") as almost entirely illusory and based on social expectation, not on how the game is designed or even presented/marketed (see the huge difference between what the DMG presents as a balanced day vs the playstyle of every single popular actual play show, for instance), I don't think I have much to contribute that I haven't already said, on that topic, and engaging with it seems to inevitably lead to several streams of novel length reply chains, so I'll stick to tangents I think. I'd be happy to try to have this discussion in more depth in a new thread, if you want to start one, and if we can keep it from becoming another "what kind of game is more flexible and also what does flexible mean" argument like we were having previously. I find this particular line of discussion interesting, just not in a context that is directly relevant to the thread topic.</blockquote>

Verification