Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6255212" data-attributes="member: 20323">I really like this, and think you're on to so something! Dungeon World really is a great game. Actually there are a lot of great indie games out there! One thing I liked about the later cycle of 4e was how Robin Laws wrote part of the DMG2 and they really seemed to be embracing some pretty forward-thinking design. I'd say after Gary's original 1e DMG, the 4e DMG2 was my favorite.And on the topic of group stealth, I'd like to quote my nephew...&quot;I'm hiding, uncle!&quot;I think they (WotC) and we (D&amp;D players) need to reframe it a bit. When the group all wants to snaeak, the question to ask may not be &quot;do they sneak?&quot; but &quot;what happens when they sneak?&quot; For example, if the PCs are trying to sneak past bugbears guarding prisoners in a dungeon...one or two bugbears might hear something and go to check it out, the bugbear gaoler might threaten the prisoners taking a head count thinking some have escaped, a prisoner might hear the PCs and begin pleading for help eventually becoming too loud unless satisfied or otherwise silenced, one PC might be taking longer and be caught by some bugbears who demand the &quot;prisoner&quot; come back with them (and turn over the loot they mysteriously scavenged), etc. Group Stealth is really about the whole group saying &quot;We want to engage a different set of challenges than combat here&quot;. To do that the Stealth system (and maybe the greater ruleset) has to embrace fail forward design &amp; non-binary success/failure.The group Stealth check (if half or more succeed, then party succeeds) is more of an &quot;in retrospect&quot; solution than a really well designed one. At the bare minimum 5e should include that, but I'd hope for a more progressive design that takes into account 40 years of dealing with PCs wanting to sneak past bugbears <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 6255212, member: 20323"] I really like this, and think you're on to so something! Dungeon World really is a great game. Actually there are a lot of great indie games out there! One thing I liked about the later cycle of 4e was how Robin Laws wrote part of the DMG2 and they really seemed to be embracing some pretty forward-thinking design. I'd say after Gary's original 1e DMG, the 4e DMG2 was my favorite. And on the topic of group stealth, I'd like to quote my nephew... "I'm [size=5]hiding[/size], uncle!" I think they (WotC) and we (D&D players) need to reframe it a bit. When the group all wants to snaeak, the question to ask may not be "do they sneak?" but "what happens when they sneak?" For example, if the PCs are trying to sneak past bugbears guarding prisoners in a dungeon...one or two bugbears might hear something and go to check it out, the bugbear gaoler might threaten the prisoners taking a head count thinking some have escaped, a prisoner might hear the PCs and begin pleading for help eventually becoming too loud unless satisfied or otherwise silenced, one PC might be taking longer and be caught by some bugbears who demand the "prisoner" come back with them (and turn over the loot they mysteriously scavenged), etc. Group Stealth is really about the whole group saying "We want to engage a different set of challenges than combat here". To do that the Stealth system (and maybe the greater ruleset) has to embrace fail forward design & non-binary success/failure. The group Stealth check (if half or more succeed, then party succeeds) is more of an "in retrospect" solution than a really well designed one. At the bare minimum 5e should include that, but I'd hope for a more progressive design that takes into account 40 years of dealing with PCs wanting to sneak past bugbears ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification