Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is 5E Special
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8714744" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>"Use this optional rule and it isn't a problem anymore" is a classic Oberoni fallacy: just because the problem can be addressed, even with official optional things, doesn't mean the problem isn't there.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Considering the designers themselves got caught by surprise with stuff like this (the infamous "Ghoul Surprise"), I think it's much more likely than you give credit for.</p><p></p><p>Particularly if you have players who aren't making wise tactical decisions because they are still inexperienced. Doubly so if you actually do start the players at 1st level, where the game is so punishingly swingy, a single minor mistake can quickly lead to character death.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I legit do not understand this statement. At all.</p><p></p><p>1. If you are a player, how do you know what level the fight is? How do you determine how the combat "should" go? Doesn't the influence of dice, tactics, and terrain usage make a sufficient level of variation? How are you achieving such perfect levels of prediction with so little information?</p><p></p><p>2. If you are a DM, why are you using identical combats? Are you not providing rich opportunities (to both sides, to be clear) to do tricksy or dangerous things? Are you not using creatures with interesting actions or secondary effects so that even victory itself becomes a complicated affair? Are you including traps, terrain features, and other interact able/dynamic features to leverage (again, for both sides)? Are you making sure to throw some lower-level and highest-level combats at the party, or to have recurring opponents who don't gain levels and thus get weaker relative to the party as they grow?</p><p></p><p>This is why I legit do not understand these comments. People constantly grouse about "white room theory," but that's exactly what many of those same people use to denounce 4e- and PF2e-like effective and useful balance, while ignoring the techniques the books literally tell you to use in order to produce fun and engaging combats, completely stripping away anything except perfectly lockstep combats on flat, empty terrain. Of course if you do that the combats will be predictable and boring! That would be just as true in 5e under these conditions!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8714744, member: 6790260"] "Use this optional rule and it isn't a problem anymore" is a classic Oberoni fallacy: just because the problem can be addressed, even with official optional things, doesn't mean the problem isn't there. Considering the designers themselves got caught by surprise with stuff like this (the infamous "Ghoul Surprise"), I think it's much more likely than you give credit for. Particularly if you have players who aren't making wise tactical decisions because they are still inexperienced. Doubly so if you actually do start the players at 1st level, where the game is so punishingly swingy, a single minor mistake can quickly lead to character death. I legit do not understand this statement. At all. 1. If you are a player, how do you know what level the fight is? How do you determine how the combat "should" go? Doesn't the influence of dice, tactics, and terrain usage make a sufficient level of variation? How are you achieving such perfect levels of prediction with so little information? 2. If you are a DM, why are you using identical combats? Are you not providing rich opportunities (to both sides, to be clear) to do tricksy or dangerous things? Are you not using creatures with interesting actions or secondary effects so that even victory itself becomes a complicated affair? Are you including traps, terrain features, and other interact able/dynamic features to leverage (again, for both sides)? Are you making sure to throw some lower-level and highest-level combats at the party, or to have recurring opponents who don't gain levels and thus get weaker relative to the party as they grow? This is why I legit do not understand these comments. People constantly grouse about "white room theory," but that's exactly what many of those same people use to denounce 4e- and PF2e-like effective and useful balance, while ignoring the techniques the books literally tell you to use in order to produce fun and engaging combats, completely stripping away anything except perfectly lockstep combats on flat, empty terrain. Of course if you do that the combats will be predictable and boring! That would be just as true in 5e under these conditions! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is 5E Special
Top