D&D 5E Just a reality check.

[Umbran]

Or is this some sort of OCD type thing, where if every peg is not the same height it makes you uncomfortable?

Ah, the old, "well, maybe you're just weird in the head" form of dismissal. How about we step away from such characterizations, please?

Interestingly, there are games that don't have notable mechanical differentiation between various tools.

In certain FATE-based games, for example... a gun is a gun. A pistol, a rifle, a machine gun - *none* of them actually do damage. They just enable the character to use their Guns skill, which then does the damage. Similarly for melee weapons - to first approximation, what it is doesn't matter, because the damage is really done by the character's skill.

Differences between forms of equipment only come in on the second approximation. A character may be able to spend a fate point to gain a bonus to lay down cover fire with a tommy gun that he'd not get if he was using a snub-nosed revolver. He could still pull the same maneuver with the revolver, but he might not be allowed to spend the point for a bonus.

Why do they do it this way? Because having all that mechanical differentiation can be a pain in the neck to keep track of, and it encourages the player to think about mechanical optimization, in a game that really isn't about mechanical optimization. The game doesn't even pretend that it has statistics to cover all the game events the players might take, and instead leave that to the narrative sensibilities of the GM and players.

So, there's one possible answer for you - if you are trying to play a game that *isn't about* mechanical optimization, not enabling that can be a reasonable thing.

Now, using D&D for this is kind of like using a hammer to drive a screw - you can do it, but it isn't what the tool's built for. But let us not speak as if wanting to drive a screw is somehow weird.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I am completely distraught from what I'm reading here and on the wizards forums. It seems as though wizard has completely failed at this release, and that really sucks because I was hoping people would like this system better after 4e, or maybe everyone does like it and the complainers are just a vocal minority or something?

Strange, my interpretation of the general reaction is the exact opposite. I see most people really liking, if not loving 5e D&D. As a matter of fact this is one of the most positive releases I've seen in a long time. I think this bodes really well for the system and the genre.

This. OP, you're reading the wrong forums.

I will say from my own perspective, yes, I've been all, "Can't wait to fix this! Can't wait to fix that!" myself.

That's a good thing. 5e has re-engaged me in the broadly defined meta-hobby of "Giving a about D&D."

 

[Tony Vargas]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

 

[JonWake]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

Nah, mostly it's because we don't actually care that much.

 

[Abstruse]

Neither does a long backstory make a good roleplaying aid. I kind of fall with the Happy Jack's RPG Podcast crowd - the backstory is what your character did BEFORE they started adventuring - why would they be an adventurer if half their story has been told before you get to the table with your fellow players? Plus, as a DM, I wouldn't read somebody's 15 page fan fiction about their character, because if I did that, it means I'm volunteering to read 60 to 75 pages of fan fiction and make it work in my campaign, which is to much.

Perhaps if you were starting the game with 13th Level Characters, that might be different, but I can't conceive of a novice 1st level adventurer with 15 pages worth of life experiences that i'd want to read about - especially if he has so much more to contribute in conjunction with the other players!

You have to craft the backstory so it's not just a bunch of random stuff. Just like in a novel, every event has to serve some purpose. In my backstories, every event or line goes toward setting up a plot hook for the DM/GM to exploit or explains some aspect of the character. I also talk to the other players to see if I can find ways to work them into my backstory that fit their characters and give us a reason for knowing each other beyond what Elizabeth Bear called "The Glow of Player-Character-hood". I also try to make sure it's entertaining as well. They don't work well as short stories because there's no ending...it's more like the prologue to a novel. Here's the set-up, now let's see what happens next.

Also, I tend to do this more in games like Shadowrun, where you're expected to not be a 100% green recruit than D&D. My D&D characters have always had the life expectancy of mayflies thanks to a killer DM growing up and more time running games than playing them in my 20s and 30s.

 

[Sonny]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

I think now is the perfect time to give feedback. The DMG isn't finished and them noticing people unhappy with specific rules may convince them to ensure corresponding variant rules are present in the DM's Guide.

 

[Umbran]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

Yes, well, they had a playtesting period already, you know. A couple years' worth. If the thing was already in the playtest, they have something like 175,000 people worth of feedback.

If it wasn't in the playtest, then the time point makes some sense. Basic has been out less than a week. Critique now is largely about things in theory, rather than in practice.

 

[Mistwell]

I can't help notice after seeing multiple rev-rolls play out on-line, that there's a consistent pattern of some folks who complain about every little thing, and others who tell them not to: first because it's too soon to make judgements, then because it's too late to make changes.

:shrug:

It is both. It is too early to determine if your issue is dealt with using an option found in the PHB or DMG. And it is too late to change anything, as both books have already been completed.

So I am not really sure what the point is about complaining about every little thing. Either you are patient enough to see if there is something that addresses your concern in the DMG or PHB, or else you should just move on to something else to play. What is the point of complaining right now? I mean, if you really want to "send a message" to someone important - posting it here surely is not a good way to send that message anyway.

 

[Thaumaturge]

I mean, if you really want to "send a message" to someone important - posting it here surely is not a good way to send that message anyway.

Hey! I'm important!

My therapist told me to tell myself so every day.

Thaumaturge.

(It's ok, Thaumaturge, good buddy. He didn't mean it.)

 

[pemerton]

there are games that don't have notable mechanical differentiation between various tools.

In certain FATE-based games, for example... a gun is a gun. A pistol, a rifle, a machine gun - *none* of them actually do damage. They just enable the character to use their Guns skill, which then does the damage. Similarly for melee weapons - to first approximation, what it is doesn't matter, because the damage is really done by the character's skill.

Differences between forms of equipment only come in on the second approximation. A character may be able to spend a fate point to gain a bonus to lay down cover fire with a tommy gun that he'd not get if he was using a snub-nosed revolver. He could still pull the same maneuver with the revolver, but he might not be allowed to spend the point for a bonus.

<snip>

The game doesn't even pretend that it has statistics to cover all the game events the players might take, and instead leave that to the narrative sensibilities of the GM and players.

HeroWars/Quest is another RPG that handles equipment in this way. Also Marvel Heroic.

4e can easily be played so as to handle non-combat in this way, too - tools and the like affect the narrative space for permissible action declarations, rather than the mechanics of resolving actions once they are declared. (4e combat is closer to trad D&D.)

If you don't want gear, and optimisation around gear, to matter, then it is a good approach to adopt.