November's SAGE ADVICE Is Here!

November's Sage Advice column by WotC's Jeremy Crawford is up. This month deals with lightfoot halfing and wood elf hiding racial traits, some class features, backgrounds (you can have only one!), muticlassing, surprise rounds in combat, and more. Check out this month's Sage Advice here. The advice here has been added to the Sage Advice Compendium.

 

[garnuk]

The game has rules for long distance travel and how long it takes. Those rules aren't affect by bonus dash actions. They have different rules for chasing people, and those rules also aren't affected by bonus dash actions.

 

[Minigiant]

You don't have to make the right ruling. You have to make the ruling that results in the most fun at your table. Blindly following the Sage Advice is quite possibly going to mean you fail to make a ruling that results in the most fun.

The issue is that some DMs fail at making the most fun choice or attempt it only to have that choice be unfun later.

This isn't Basic DMing, its Advanced DMing. Many of the questions and situations in the Sage Advice column have huge effects on the game. Many DMs are not up to that level of DMing, good at adjudication of interlocking systems, or outgoing powergamers and rules lawyers.

The majority if these questions arent "filling in the missing pieces" DMing like potion brewing. A lot of it is "How does X+Y work because I have a player wanting to do X+Y+Z"

A simple house rule can have huge effects. Many DMs find comfort in using the rulings and rules of the designers since those people should have thought of it and designed the game accordingly already.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As I said, I understand that D&D speed limitations are not realistic. Using ki and action surge is using a limited resource for a temporary burst of speed. I'm fine with that. Move-attack-dash is what rogues are about, I'm fine with that.

I'm not fine with a mobile rogue keeping up with a mounted horseman indefinitely or, if a wood elf, outpacing said horse. That's what I find cheesy. A burst of speed once per short rest or on spending inspiration I'm fine with. It's the ability to outpace pursuers or fleeing enemies at-will that I have an issue with. That's not particularly rogue-like. It's a cheesy side-effect.

Then it sounds like your real problem is with horses, not with running. Dashing 90 feet/6 second round is 15 feet per second, or 4.572 m/s. The current record-holder(s) for the 30k run had a time of about 87 minutes, which translates to an average speed of ~5.81 m/s. While a reduction of only ~21.4% seems a little small for a character wearing heavy armor and carrying a weapon rather than wearing nothing but a thin track uniform and running shoes, a slight suspension of disbelief doesn't seem out of place here. Though, as others have said, this stuff is theoretically only appropriate for combat, as speed is defined differently for overland travel.

Edit: And just so this is noted, 4.572 m/s is about half the speed of the world-record 100 meter dash...from a century ago. Usain Bolt's current record is 9.58 sec, or 10.44 m/s. Very similar, though not precisely identical, records exist for the 200 and 400 meter as well (slightly slower average speeds, naturally, but all still more than double the speed of a double-Dashing Rogue). People can absolutely do these speeds in real life; if a horse can be matched by a Rogue, it is only because horses move too slowly in the rules.

 

[JohnLynch]

since those people [developers at WotC] should have thought of it and designed the game accordingly already.

The entirety of 3rd edition, 3.5e and 4th ed demonstrates the WotC game designers are only human and make mistakes or bad decisions that then get published all the time.

The issue is that some DMs fail at making the most fun choice or attempt it only to have that choice be unfun later.

It's alright to fail. It's what happens after you fail that separates out the ok DMs with the great DMs.

Many DMs find comfort in using the rulings and rules of the designers

Running a game RAW or following Sage Advice can certainly make things easier. But if doing so results in your players not having a fun time then a great DM is going to say "Alright, this isn't working. Why don 'to we change it to X and see if everyone enjoys that more." X might not be more fun. It could be Y or Z that's right for your group. But you won't know unless you try. If you always stick to Sage Advice though, you might have an okay game, but stepping out of the comfort zone could certainly make it a great game. 5th edition encourages DMs to try to be great rather than just being happy with being ok.

 

[Minigiant]

The entirety of 3rd edition, 3.5e and 4th ed demonstrates the WotC game designers are only human and make mistakes or bad decisions that then get published all the time.

But many trust their designers' judgement over their own. Which is sad.

However 3rd and 4th edition house rule forums does show that some people should be NOWHERE near a game design chair. The amount of broken, under or over powed stuff, and ill advised variants and rules changes I have seen over the years could no way provided fun in all the tables they ever appeared in.

It's alright to fail. It's what happens after you fail that separates out the ok DMs with the great DMs.


Running a game RAW or following Sage Advice can certainly make things easier. But if doing so results in your players not having a fun time then a great DM is going to say "Alright, this isn't working. Why don 'to we change it to X and see if everyone enjoys that more." X might not be more fun. It could be Y or Z that's right for your group. But you won't know unless you try. If you always stick to Sage Advice though, you might have an okay game, but stepping out of the comfort zone could certainly make it a great game. 5th edition encourages DMs to try to be great rather than just being happy with being ok.

Sadly the fear of failure is high in our community. And constant fairue loses your groups trust. We have a lot of jaded players and DMs with low group confidence out there.

This goes to one of D&D social flaws. It is afraid to teach. So almost every DM has learned from throw stuff at the wall and hope it neither blows up or stinks.

Teaching via failure is bad. It only ensures that DMs will fail a lot.

We need to teach the DM process. Explain all the logic behind the game. Help DMs understand "why" so they can do it themselves.

 

[Pauln6]

Then it sounds like your real problem is with horses, not with running.

People can absolutely do these speeds in real life; if a horse can be matched by a Rogue, it is only because horses move too slowly in the rules.

Ha ha - no that's exactly where my problem isn't. My problem is with parity. I'm fine with people and horses being slower in game. The speed ties in with distances of spells, missiles etc. It's all good. I'm also fine with using resources for a burst of speed.

I'm just not fine with one class getting an at-will burst of speed unless it fulfills a fantasy archetype. A basic rogue trained to wear plate mail can still potentially outrun a horse. This speed is nothing archetypically rogueish. It's purely a side effect of cunning action which can otherwise produce many other archetypically roguish effects.

 

[Uchawi]

I feel like a lot of the Sage Advice stuff has been overly gamey and complex rather than keeping the rulings simple and with verisimilitude in mind.

Since the DM rules in 5E, then sage advice is just the developers opinion as a DM. And then you have RAW and any inconsistencies, unless there is errata. At least that is how I roll.

 

[JohnLynch]

However 3rd and 4th edition house rule forums does show that some people should be NOWHERE near a game design chair. The amount of broken, under or over powed stuff, and ill advised variants and rules changes I have seen over the years could no way provided fun in all the tables they ever appeared in.

Whether a houserule is broken, underpowered or overpowered is irrelevant. Houserules shouldn't aim to some ideal of a balanced game, they should be aimed at making the game more enjoyable (although yes, for some groups, that will mean balanced in the context of how that group plays the game which could mean the rules are overpowered in someone else's game).

constant fairue loses your groups trust. We have a lot of jaded players and DMs with low group confidence out there....Teaching via failure is bad. It only ensures that DMs will fail a lot.

Failure in this context can, and often will, result from applying the rules exactly as written (or outlined in Sage Advice).

Teaching via failure is bad. It only ensures that DMs will fail a lot.This goes to one of D&D social flaws. It is afraid to teach. [/QUOTE]I've found 5th edition to explain the rules the best out of 4th ed and Pathfinder. There's always room for improvement though.

 

[Orlax]

But many trust their designers' judgement over their own. Which is sad.

However 3rd and 4th edition house rule forums does show that some people should be NOWHERE near a game design chair. The amount of broken, under or over powed stuff, and ill advised variants and rules changes I have seen over the years could no way provided fun in all the tables they ever appeared in.


Sadly the fear of failure is high in our community. And constant fairue loses your groups trust. We have a lot of jaded players and DMs with low group confidence out there.

This goes to one of D&D social flaws. It is afraid to teach. So almost every DM has learned from throw stuff at the wall and hope it neither blows up or stinks.

Teaching via failure is bad. It only ensures that DMs will fail a lot.

We need to teach the DM process. Explain all the logic behind the game. Help DMs understand "why" so they can do it themselves.

So this is some corporate speak buzzword BS. There is no process to being a DM. You want to know the big keys here you go:

1. Keep the game moving.
2. Keep the players engaged
3. Make sure everyone at your table is having fun.

Done! Thats the process. Other than that keep throwing crap at the wall till ya find something that sticks.

Yeah everyone is going to fail. There is no way to make it that they won't fail, or won't fail a whole bunch. Failure is how we learn anything and anything worth becoming good at is something you will be terrible at for a while. Jordan wasn't dunking when he first grabbed a basketball, he sucked for a while and practiced till he was the best, and then he kept practicing. Being a good DM is the same kind of thing. You have to keep practicing to get good at it. It is basically a form of performance art, to expect people to be good without a ton of failure is unreasonable.

 

[Minigiant]

So this is some corporate speak buzzword BS. There is no process to being a DM. You want to know the big keys here you go:

1. Keep the game moving.
2. Keep the players engaged
3. Make sure everyone at your table is having fun.

Done! Thats the process. Other than that keep throwing crap at the wall till ya find something that sticks.

Yeah everyone is going to fail. There is no way to make it that they won't fail, or won't fail a whole bunch. Failure is how we learn anything and anything worth becoming good at is something you will be terrible at for a while. Jordan wasn't dunking when he first grabbed a basketball, he sucked for a while and practiced till he was the best, and then he kept practicing. Being a good DM is the same kind of thing. You have to keep practicing to get good at it. It is basically a form of performance art, to expect people to be good without a ton of failure is unreasonable.

Learning by failure is a dumb way to teach. We didnt learn in school without teacher instruction or a tect explaining the process. The DMs shoud be taught the insides and guts of the system. The benchmarks, the justifications, the reasons for X.

5e is one of the best editions for teaching by it still failed to explain why "ClassX has Y and why DMs should beware touching it". The " modifying classes" article should have been in the DMG. There are DMs out there should don't realize all the hidden elements of the game.