D&D General Let's Talk About How to "Fix" D&D

[TheSword]

I think the FR naming conventions were fine early on, but as the years go on there have been so many writers that its gotten pretty varied and out of hand. The problem I have with any new campaign setting is learning the names and geography. Im currently reading the Midnight CS and compared to when I read the FR setting years ago FR seems rather tame name wise. Then again my attention span and memory while reading isnt what it once was.

It’s all the extraneous a’s e’s, h’s, s’s and l’s and sometimes wholely unnecessary syllables added in to make names sound fantastical. I much prefer names to trip off the tongue, than sound like they are struggling to free themselves from manacles somewhere in my oesophagus.

 

[Reynard]

People should play the way that makes them happy and increases the overall enjoyment of everyone at the table.

That said, I think there's a certain school of GMing that essentially amounts to telling the players a choose your own adventure story with, at best, binary choices. Of course there's no reason for players to take notes or draw their own maps when it is all going to turn out the same anyway.

But if the game is about real choices in a complex environment -- dungeon, wilderness or city -- there is going to be information the players will need to recall weeks or months later.

 

[TheSword]

People should play the way that makes them happy and increases the overall enjoyment of everyone at the table.

That said, I think there's a certain school of GMing that essentially amounts to telling the players a choose your own adventure story with, at best, binary choices. Of course there's no reason for players to take notes or draw their own maps when it is all going to turn out the same anyway.

But if the game is about real choices in a complex environment -- dungeon, wilderness or city -- there is going to be information the players will need to recall weeks or months later.

So railroads don’t need notes but sandboxes do need notes. Hmm. Either your DM makes you write stuff down and punishes you for not doing it, or they don’t. There is no difference between a linear story or a sandbox in that regard.

I don’t believe as many play in this theoretical linear railroad world you like to set up as a bugbear as you think. Most people play in a hybrid where there is choice up to a point. That point may be far more restrictive than you’re comfortable with but it’s fine for the hundreds of thousands of people playing published campaigns.

 

[Reynard]

So railroads don’t need notes but sandboxes do need notes. Hmm. Either your DM makes you write stuff down and punishes you for not doing it, or they don’t. There is no difference between a linear story or a sandbox in that regard.

I don’t believe as many play in this theoretical linear railroad world you like to set up as a bugbear as you think. Most people play in a hybrid where there is choice up to a point. That point may be far more restrictive than you’re comfortable with but it’s fine for the hundreds of thousands of people playing published campaigns.

I am not inventing railroading. It's been a "bugbear" for as long as there have been RPG adventures. And, yes, WotC has done really well with "illusion of choice" style adventures since 5e came out.

If you dig through old threads on this very site, about 10 years ago illusion of choice was all the rage and we were all debating its merits and discussing how to do it well.

The reason: it's less work. It makes the game flow more smoothly along narrative beats, which people like. But it isn't the only way to run a game and it doesn't mean actual choice is inferior.

On the subject of notes: there's a lot happening in a complex open world and players who take notes are rewarded for it when they discover connections. If there is an insidious cult slowly indoctrinating all the noble families, for example, the players suddenly realizing it the third time they have to engage with courtly politics is far more satisfying a reveal than the GM saying, "It's time for the evil cult adventure!" True player agency isn't just deciding whether and how to deal with the cult, it is being engaged to the point of seeing it is happening prior to The Night of Black Blades or whatever.

 

[R_J_K75]

the GM saying, "It's time for the evil cult adventure!" True player agency isn't just deciding whether and how to deal with the cult, it is being engaged to the point of seeing it is happening prior to The Night of Black Blades or whatever.

This seems somewhat exaggerated. Just because the players don't need to take notes, map or keep track of other things doesn't necessarily mean that a campaign is as one dimensional as you've made it sound. There are lots of times my players will remember stuff without me interjecting and even when I refresh their memories from time to time I don't give them the answers. Once in awhile I'll give them a clue or a nudge in the right direction, but I don't wear a sandwich board with an arrow at the table that reads "This Way to Adventure". Although "This Way to Adventure" sounds like a great title for my next adventure.

 

[TheSword]

I am not inventing railroading. It's been a "bugbear" for as long as there have been RPG adventures. And, yes, WotC has done really well with "illusion of choice" style adventures since 5e came out.

If you dig through old threads on this very site, about 10 years ago illusion of choice was all the rage and we were all debating its merits and discussing how to do it well.

The reason: it's less work. It makes the game flow more smoothly along narrative beats, which people like. But it isn't the only way to run a game and it doesn't mean actual choice is inferior.

On the subject of notes: there's a lot happening in a complex open world and players who take notes are rewarded for it when they discover connections. If there is an insidious cult slowly indoctrinating all the noble families, for example, the players suddenly realizing it the third time they have to engage with courtly politics is far more satisfying a reveal than the GM saying, "It's time for the evil cult adventure!" True player agency isn't just deciding whether and how to deal with the cult, it is being engaged to the point of seeing it is happening prior to The Night of Black Blades or whatever.

Several campaigns have moved away from Illusion of Choice portrayed in games like Storm Kings Thunder, Or Hoard of the Dragon. While some like Descent unfortunately propagate it.

Choice within agreed parameters is not the same as Illusion or Choice where nothing the players do matters. Beginning with the premise that the characters want to tackle a particular disaster, or find out why demons are roaming the underdark, or work out why IWD is undergoing nuclear winter is not railroading when it is agreed in advance. Any more than a writer setting their campaign in their homebrew setting is railroading characters because it isn’t a Wild West setting.

Tomb of Annihilation, Rime of the Frost Maiden, Curse of Strahd, Out of the Abyss, DotMM, Dragon Heist. All allow for wildly different journeys and outcomes. It’s a bit frustrating to hear you refer to products inaccurately or lump them in one box. I get that they are not your cup to tea so you don’t read them. Perhaps don’t dismiss them so lightly then. I have no issue with people choosing to play other styles: story-now, or total home brewed sandbox. Campaigns with a plot are not better or worse, they’re just a different flavor of spaghetti sauce.

Your claim that these adventures aren’t complex or involve choice is ill informed. Buy smooth or not. It’s your choice, just don’t make unfounded statements about chunky.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Exploration in 5e amounts to tracking encumbrance, rolling wandering monster/getting lost checks, and making Survival checks to find food. It's boring.

I don't know, we do a lot of exploration and I don't find it boring. We are doing exploration in Frostmaiden right now and in our online "monk only" game did quite a bit as well.

I find things like weather, natural obstacles such as rivers and cliffs, and moving through darkened forests and deep caves all interesting when presented as challenges against the PCs.

And, of course, you quickly get abilities coming online that make exploring trivial.

THIS is definitely more of an issue IMO, especially when magic is involved. I think this is why some groups restrict spells like Teleport, Goodberry, et al.

the pillars are killin', slayin', and murderin'.

We made a joke RPG call Kick, Kill, and Steal about 20 years ago. Our motto was "Kick in the door, kill the monster, steal the treasure!"

 

[R_J_K75]

I would hate to play in or run a campaign that was a railroad all the time. But every once in awhile they are a nice change. As long as its properly presented and not overly complicated, or too long they're good for a short trek where no one has to think too much. Out of the gate this is the adventure the DMs presenting, the current situation and how to solve, fail and this is what happens, now have at it. The key to making it work is to let the players know this up front. Obviously they have some choices on how they overcome the challenge but deviating from the challenge isn't an option. Who came up with "Illusion of Choice"? Sounds like a cop out to actually writing a decent adventure.

 

[R_J_K75]

We made a joke RPG call Kick, Kill, and Steal about 20 years ago. Our motto was "Kick in the door, kill the monster, steal the treasure!"

Pretty sure most groups have or had a similar joke. Ours was "Kill, Maim, Destroy", though not very creative of us IMO looking back on it all these years later.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Pretty sure most groups have or had a similar joke. Ours was "Kill, Maim, Destroy", though not very creative of us IMO looking back on it all these years later.

But did you build an RPG around it?