Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
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="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7759702" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>Sure. It's D&D. There's going to be fighting in nearly all games. The importance of the fighting or the frequency of it may change, but I think in most cases, combat is an expectation. </p><p></p><p>There's also going to be exploration and interaction with NPCs. There are rules for these things, but they're less codified than the combat rules, generally speaking.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Individually, who can say? A group of PCs may not contain any casters, or may never run into a vampire. But under the larger umbrella of combat actions, yes, very likely. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think this is pretty accurate, overall. There's no doubt that past editions and the play experiences they created were a consideration. There are certain elements that have become fundamental to D&D, and I wouldn't expect them to go anywhere. Most of these....HP, AC, Saving Throws....are related to combat. The game has its roots in war gaming, and that sensibility has informed every edition. Combat is expected to be a fundamental part of the game. </p><p></p><p>I don't think that the "preference for GM decision-making" makes the game incomplete, though. Perhaps this is semantics, but again I see that as a feature, not a bug. I prefer the flexibility that design choice allows. I prefer the creative approach it fosters in my players. They're less likely to resort to what the rules allow and instead attempt ideas that they come up with at the table. This is the piece of the puzzle that I think perhaps you are overlooking. My players are coming up with all manner of ideas that aren't covered by the rules, and we adjudicate pretty quickly and smoothly, and we find out play (both in combat and outside of combat) to be more varied than we did in recent previous editions. </p><p></p><p>Could things have been done differently? Sure. Are there games with specific systems for other areas of the game that could have been mimicked here? Sure. But I don't think that means they are better. </p><p></p><p>I can understand people who feel that is the case. Many folks want as much structure as possible. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. This is purely a matter of preference. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What mechanics did I use? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How is it absurd? The PC needs to influence a noble, the PC has X amount of gold, the PC buys the fine attire, the PC receives a bonus on his attempt to influence the noble. The GM has little input on this. Sure, the narration of this sequence may vary from GM to GM, and some may elaborate to create a whole scene around it. But the results of what happen don't require the GM's judgment, unless the rules indicate that the advantage gained by the fine attire is up to the GM or something like that. </p><p></p><p>And again, as far as who decides what happens, I think you're leaving out the role of the player here. It's not just the DM deciding. The player has an idea. Instead of consulting the rulebook, or instead of the DM saying "per the Persuasion rules on page 210..." the DM is able to take the player's idea, the other prevailing factors of the current fiction, and then determine how things proceed from there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 7759702, member: 6785785"] Sure. It's D&D. There's going to be fighting in nearly all games. The importance of the fighting or the frequency of it may change, but I think in most cases, combat is an expectation. There's also going to be exploration and interaction with NPCs. There are rules for these things, but they're less codified than the combat rules, generally speaking. Individually, who can say? A group of PCs may not contain any casters, or may never run into a vampire. But under the larger umbrella of combat actions, yes, very likely. I think this is pretty accurate, overall. There's no doubt that past editions and the play experiences they created were a consideration. There are certain elements that have become fundamental to D&D, and I wouldn't expect them to go anywhere. Most of these....HP, AC, Saving Throws....are related to combat. The game has its roots in war gaming, and that sensibility has informed every edition. Combat is expected to be a fundamental part of the game. I don't think that the "preference for GM decision-making" makes the game incomplete, though. Perhaps this is semantics, but again I see that as a feature, not a bug. I prefer the flexibility that design choice allows. I prefer the creative approach it fosters in my players. They're less likely to resort to what the rules allow and instead attempt ideas that they come up with at the table. This is the piece of the puzzle that I think perhaps you are overlooking. My players are coming up with all manner of ideas that aren't covered by the rules, and we adjudicate pretty quickly and smoothly, and we find out play (both in combat and outside of combat) to be more varied than we did in recent previous editions. Could things have been done differently? Sure. Are there games with specific systems for other areas of the game that could have been mimicked here? Sure. But I don't think that means they are better. I can understand people who feel that is the case. Many folks want as much structure as possible. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. This is purely a matter of preference. What mechanics did I use? How is it absurd? The PC needs to influence a noble, the PC has X amount of gold, the PC buys the fine attire, the PC receives a bonus on his attempt to influence the noble. The GM has little input on this. Sure, the narration of this sequence may vary from GM to GM, and some may elaborate to create a whole scene around it. But the results of what happen don't require the GM's judgment, unless the rules indicate that the advantage gained by the fine attire is up to the GM or something like that. And again, as far as who decides what happens, I think you're leaving out the role of the player here. It's not just the DM deciding. The player has an idea. Instead of consulting the rulebook, or instead of the DM saying "per the Persuasion rules on page 210..." the DM is able to take the player's idea, the other prevailing factors of the current fiction, and then determine how things proceed from there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top