Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8558681" data-attributes="member: 16814">Pulling these both in for reference.[USER=83242]@dave2008[/USER], are you using the pacing and encounter building rules for 5e unchanged, or did your hacks require you to also hack that system?&nbsp; I ask because while your hacks look simple, I can see a host of downstream other things that need to change to make these work well.&nbsp; I think that we all quite often underestimate the level of actual work that goes into a change in play because we're doing it and it seems like running the game to us, but there's often a number of things that change and require constant tweaking on the backside to maintain hacks.&nbsp; D&amp;D has, largely, instructed us that this is normal, but it's not.&nbsp; It's literally the overhead that exists and that is ignored.&nbsp; D&amp;D in general has a massive overhead for the GM to manage the game.&nbsp; So moving bits around doesn't really feel like that much more work than the massive work already done and gets ignored/assumed to be normal.Also, the way 4e enabled hacking was to make sure every systems was clear and in the open -- you knew what and how it did what it did.&nbsp; It was still a tightly constrained game, yes, and patching out AEDU was a major undertaking (Essentials did it, though) if that's what bothered you.&nbsp; Kinda like bounded accuracy would be lots of work to remove from 5e.&nbsp; 5e, though, buries a lot of the assumptions of the game and doesn't call them out.&nbsp; Resting, for instance, is so deeply rooted in the encounter assumptions, and that also feeds into recovery types and class abilities, and so on.&nbsp; This is why touching resting never quite works out with a lot of work.&nbsp; And, honestly, your hack of resting is a major departure from 5e core such that encounter balance has to change and resting cycles have to change.&nbsp; I expect that's a large part of the HD class ability recovery system you have -- did this emerge through play as a patch or did you start there?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8558681, member: 16814"] Pulling these both in for reference. [USER=83242]@dave2008[/USER], are you using the pacing and encounter building rules for 5e unchanged, or did your hacks require you to also hack that system? I ask because while your hacks look simple, I can see a host of downstream other things that need to change to make these work well. I think that we all quite often underestimate the level of actual work that goes into a change in play because we're doing it and it seems like running the game to us, but there's often a number of things that change and require constant tweaking on the backside to maintain hacks. D&D has, largely, instructed us that this is normal, but it's not. It's literally the overhead that exists and that is ignored. D&D in general has a massive overhead for the GM to manage the game. So moving bits around doesn't really feel like that much more work than the massive work already done and gets ignored/assumed to be normal. Also, the way 4e enabled hacking was to make sure every systems was clear and in the open -- you knew what and how it did what it did. It was still a tightly constrained game, yes, and patching out AEDU was a major undertaking (Essentials did it, though) if that's what bothered you. Kinda like bounded accuracy would be lots of work to remove from 5e. 5e, though, buries a lot of the assumptions of the game and doesn't call them out. Resting, for instance, is so deeply rooted in the encounter assumptions, and that also feeds into recovery types and class abilities, and so on. This is why touching resting never quite works out with a lot of work. And, honestly, your hack of resting is a major departure from 5e core such that encounter balance has to change and resting cycles have to change. I expect that's a large part of the HD class ability recovery system you have -- did this emerge through play as a patch or did you start there? [/QUOTE]

Verification