Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Grognardism...
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="teitan" data-source="post: 8253950" data-attributes="member: 3457"><p>One of the design principles of 5e was that it would be evergreen and designed to fit any style of D&D play and that a simple 1e style character could sit at a table with a 4e style character. This came across in the optional rules of the DMG which go to great lengths to demonstrate how to change the game to fit theater of the mind up to tactical play popular in 3 & 4e games and spell point variants etc. I always scratch my head when people act like these “rule modules” (as originally described) have never been published because the optional rules are just that, modules to drop in that adjust 5e’s base rules to fit a different style of play similar to older editions. Early on I think this was more understood by the D&D community because we had yet to receive the influx of players the game now enjoys.</p><p></p><p>The game already supports “grognard” play out of the box, but there has been an uptick because of the new players where these players think THEY tell the DM what can be used and dictate the nature of the game, abandoning all pretense of a cooperative experience or that a DM has the final say on the experience he is trying to impart to players. Rules clearly laid out in the core books as optional rules, like Feats, are expectations rather than an option and most of these rules are PHB based and not the DMG based optional systems.</p><p></p><p>This has created a default style of play for 5e that defines 5e in a very specific way that it’s easy to forget those original design implementations.</p><p></p><p>I had mentioned that MUlticlassing was an optional rule in my group before we started our campaign and two of the players, long time 5e players, didn’t believe me. They had to look it up. Whenever I point out some element that is an optional rule that is a part of the “standard 5e experience” they get surprised to see... it really is optional!</p><p></p><p>Default 5e, rules options filed off, plays closer to 1e or 2e than any edition since. It’s part of why it appealed to so many grognards after 3e and 4e failed to hook em and it was even this default ability to be houseruled and not break that helped to get word out and make the game what it is now.</p><p></p><p>I found this link to be awesome for listing what is an optional rule in the core books.</p><p></p><p>[MEDIA=gist]krmaxwell/23a97192c8ce5073a49b[/MEDIA]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="teitan, post: 8253950, member: 3457"] One of the design principles of 5e was that it would be evergreen and designed to fit any style of D&D play and that a simple 1e style character could sit at a table with a 4e style character. This came across in the optional rules of the DMG which go to great lengths to demonstrate how to change the game to fit theater of the mind up to tactical play popular in 3 & 4e games and spell point variants etc. I always scratch my head when people act like these “rule modules” (as originally described) have never been published because the optional rules are just that, modules to drop in that adjust 5e’s base rules to fit a different style of play similar to older editions. Early on I think this was more understood by the D&D community because we had yet to receive the influx of players the game now enjoys. The game already supports “grognard” play out of the box, but there has been an uptick because of the new players where these players think THEY tell the DM what can be used and dictate the nature of the game, abandoning all pretense of a cooperative experience or that a DM has the final say on the experience he is trying to impart to players. Rules clearly laid out in the core books as optional rules, like Feats, are expectations rather than an option and most of these rules are PHB based and not the DMG based optional systems. This has created a default style of play for 5e that defines 5e in a very specific way that it’s easy to forget those original design implementations. I had mentioned that MUlticlassing was an optional rule in my group before we started our campaign and two of the players, long time 5e players, didn’t believe me. They had to look it up. Whenever I point out some element that is an optional rule that is a part of the “standard 5e experience” they get surprised to see... it really is optional! Default 5e, rules options filed off, plays closer to 1e or 2e than any edition since. It’s part of why it appealed to so many grognards after 3e and 4e failed to hook em and it was even this default ability to be houseruled and not break that helped to get word out and make the game what it is now. I found this link to be awesome for listing what is an optional rule in the core books. [MEDIA=gist]krmaxwell/23a97192c8ce5073a49b[/MEDIA] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Grognardism...
Top