Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9785666" data-attributes="member: 93670">Yes and that side is the one defending 5e design choices that removed or designed against d&d elements that would otherwise have given the GM tools that would have made those narrative tactical and extremely nebulous "magical" consequences to come later into a credible concern for players choosing to rest rest often .   Instead we are treated to an endless string of ignore that and learn2gm basic gm advice that in many cases has only really been relevant to the lowest levels of play where players lack enough nova punch for rest early rest often to really matter.The trouble stems from d&d having two sides of the GM screen with different needs, 5e was almost exclusively designed for one side of that screen and bringing in players familiar with dogs from video games was one of the big goals.  If needed tools are lacking for one side of the screen it pretty much requires the other side to agree on some level for the other side to homebrew or rule of cool in some kind of substitute & players have no incentive to compromise on what they view as an overreaching nerf.Don't take my word for it, mearls talks at length about various aspects of it over and over again in <a href="https://youtu.be/aeQOVk-FDPI?si=3FgRALJDZ5WHqgME" target="_blank">this</a> questing beast interview from a few months ago.  Normally I'd link to a particular timestamp in the interview but I'm not doing that for two reasons.  Firstly is the goal of bringing in players who know rpgs from video games comes up so frequently and in so many topics through the interview it's hard to choose any single one as more relevant than the others.  Secondly is part of why the gm can't force the house rule/rule of cool changes through without players agreeing... In the interview he talks about "players" or "playing" many many times but not once do GMs DMs or running the game come up.  Sure it's possible to say that the GM falls under a term like "player" if you define it loosely enough within the context of ttrpgs, but players (with PCs) who are new to ttrpgs &coming from video game rpg backgrounds do not have that loosely defined sense of the term because the gm is not "playing" like they are & is simply running it but running the game is an equal among many that lacks any particular power to the point that wotc has spent over a decade failing to support or even acknowledge the gm as distinct from "players". The result of any disagreement often winds up being similar to three wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for lunch by vote.[Spoiler][MEDIA=youtube]aeQOVk-FDPI[/MEDIA][/Spoiler]The closest he comes to talking about those in the GM/dm role running the game is a single reference to "users" in a context that really says nothing about who they are or recognizing that their needs are different from those of "players"</blockquote>

Verification