D&D 5E New L&L When Adventurers Aren’t Adventuring

[Zustiur]

Re: New L&L When Adventurers Aren’t Adventuring

Downtime works for me. I was already looking at ways to force characters to have a break between adventures and downtime was exactly the word I chose. I was working on the rough assumption that adventuring was energetic and so characters would have to spend a number of days recovering from their fatigue based upon how long they'd been away.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

 

[ExploderWizard]

I am not convinced that rigid mechanical implementations for every aspect of gameplay is a desirable outcome. It means that the game is no more than the operations of the rules and that nothing the players do has any meaningful impact on the campaign unless it is resolved via a mechanic.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[ExploderWizard]

I think it's far too early to tell if these mechanics will be rigid or not...and since all rules are de facto optional, I'd have a hard time believing they will be.

True enough. I guess what I'm trying to convey by the use of "rigid" is every facet of gameplay being handled by /choose menu item/ make a roll. I think guidelines for the DM about handling off adventure time activities would be cool though.

 

[I'm A Banana]

True enough. I guess what I'm trying to convey by the use of "rigid" is every facet of gameplay being handled by /choose menu item/ make a roll. I think guidelines for the DM about handling off adventure time activities would be cool though.

You can probably have your cake and eat it too, like they do now with exploration rules in the playtest.

"Hey, here's some broad advice on how to handle it. And if you want more detail, here's the bits you can use to do it mechanically."

 

[Derren]

"Hey, here's some broad advice on how to handle it. And if you want more detail, here's the bits you can use to do it mechanically."

The problem with such an approach is that the players then start to expect that mechanic.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The problem with such an approach is that the players then start to expect that mechanic.

I don't think this is the case. A modular game teaches players by its very nature that they cannot make assumptions beyond the "basic game."

 

[Derren]

I don't think this is the case. A modular game teaches players by its very nature that they cannot make assumptions beyond the "basic game."

Theoretically yes. But previous editions, especially 3E, have imo shown that this is not the case.
Many players will look at the rules, and they will expect the rules to be used. Prestige classes started out as something optional mainly for NPCs and members of specific orders. And yet players demanded to have them and tailored their PCs towards them (supported by WotC to sell more books). They also looked at magical items and started to expect certain items to appear, even without crafting as they tailored their PCs for it.

In the same way, those players will look at the downtime rules, decide which offers more advantages and tailor their characters to succeed there. Some minmax more than others and some use more or less RP to influence decision on downtime skills, but in the end, modular or not, the players will expect either the rules or no downtime at all.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If the players like and want such a system, they should probably find DMs willing to use such a system.

If the DM doesn't want to use such a system, they should probably find players who are OK with not using such a system.

If there's a strong difference of opinion either way, it's going to be messy.

(this is true for any system, also)

 

[GX.Sigma]

It just occurred to me--different worlds have different definitions of a week. In the Forgotten Realms, a week is ten days, and there are three of them per month. How's that going to work?