Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 7094785" data-attributes="member: 48965">Are we really doing that if we slectively pick and choose which tools we will emphasize from the PHB and DMG. They are corebooks and thus are meant to be used and digested as a whole not piecemeal. I'm having a hard time believing that a 320 page rulebook of dense text can be summed up in 8 bullet points but ok i'll address these as best I canDidn't see a quote for this but found the relevant passage in the PHB... I think it's more important to figure out how 5e is defining an adventure by looking deeper into the components it states are part of an adventure.Honestly I'm finding this hard to label as defining fo D&D since adventure as defined in the context of this passage seems to encompass very broadly what takes place in the majority of roleplaying games (traditional and indie) during play in the moment. The only thing I find possibly defining is the assertion that the adventure is created or purchased by the DM... it seems to point to a DM driven game. Of course if we look at the DMG we get an optional rule to subvert this assertion...So now we have a mechanism in 5e where the players help to create the adventures and even take on the role of DM... and even a little advice on what may be a warning sign about this particular playstyle with some players. this is what I am speaking to when I talk about flexibilityYeah since downtime is presented as a totally optional activity (even in the PHB) I'm not sure it's really a defining feature of 5e play. But, I'd be interested in hearing why you think it is... And yet in the same book are rules to allow players the power to...1. ...add some element to the setting that the group must accept as true2. ...add a complication to a scene3. ...switch off as DM during playI find number 3 especially interesting since if it is selected for a camapaign it means everything you are citing as DM duties or goals are actually shared by all players since they are all running and playing the game. Again with a less than a full page of optional rules 5e becomes a shared narrative game driven by all who are playing... that IMO is flexibility.These are catchy titles for headings of passages in the first 5 or so pages of the book. I'm not sure what is supposed to be taken away from this... that they decided to play on the title Dungeon Master to make them catchy?? I'm going to need more explanation as to what this is supposed to impart before i can address it.We must be reading different books then I see...It doesn't say anything about defining their goals... it says to create your adventures around something that will hook the players interests... which IMO is just common sense...I also notice you conveniently choose not to highlight this, IMO, very important assertion in the passage you quoted...The fact that you are clearly reading these closely to highlight specific statements but choose to ignore this pretty big one makes me feel like you're cherry picking to suit your own preconceived idea of how D&D is supposed to be run...Well the playstyle section references the player motivations section... where they explore 7 different player motivation types. And they also again stress that the game is just as much the players as the DM's. IMO this seems to support that 5e puts emphasis on catering to your players motivations as more important than a traditionally defined playstyle. In other words it seems to advocate designing a customized playstyle based on what you players desire... and as i said earlier in this thread is exactly what I do through varying techniques when running D&D.There is also session based advancement... but again all this does is show flexibility in the advancement schema of 5e... And significant portions have nothing to do with combat, dungeon exploration and traversing the wilderness... especially in the DMG, again you seem to be cherry picking as opposed to really taking the time to look at what options the books actually present.Honestly I mostly agree with the defualt being static characters... but there is no penalty for changing ideals, personality traits, and flaws. that said, I'm not sure how this precludes playing to find out about your ideals, flaws, bonds and personality traits. There are no penalties for choosing to change these things Or are you saying that in order to play to find out we need mechanics that force them to change at some point? Perhaps it's a matter of preference but I'm not sure I agree. If we all want to play to find out then I would think the players would be the best judge as to when something has affected theor characters to the point where something as significantr as a change in ideals or your very personality takes place... what i don't want is a couple rolls and you're a different person... tadaa!!I think you feel that way because you chose to actively ignore the numerous options presented and the advice about using them in conjunction with the advice you cherry picked to support your own view. I think a much more thorough and neutral reading of the DMG would find that said voice is full of concessions but in isolation so that different groups can run the game they want to with 5e.</blockquote>

Verification