D&D 5E On rulings, rules, and Twitter, or: How Sage Advice Changed

[mrpopstar]

As far as I can tell those things are valued by people differently depending on how their group plays the game.

In our last campaign - the space on the PC sheet could have been used for other stuff; they could be completely gutted from the character sheet.

For my group a PC's "ideals, bonds, and flaws" are just something that is emergent in play. We don't need to write it down ahead of time.

They are entirely vestigial to the 5e system mechanics as a whole.

They're not if you use the system's mechanics for resolving social interactions, where they feature heavily.

 

[MichaelSomething]

They're not if you use the system's mechanics for resolving social interactions, where they feature heavily.

Use the system mechanics?? You clearly don't understand 5E.

 

[Argyle King]

As far as I can tell those things are valued by people differently depending on how their group plays the game.

In our last campaign - the space on the PC sheet could have been used for other stuff; they could be completely gutted from the character sheet.

For my group a PC's "ideals, bonds, and flaws" are just something that is emergent in play. We don't need to write it down ahead of time.

They are entirely vestigial to the 5e system mechanics as a whole.

I view those things as being in the same general ballpark as D&D alignment.

It's the Cliff's Notes version of what the character might care about.

Other times, if I'm sitting down at a new table, it can be fun to just roll randomly and see what sort of personality gets attached to the mechanical parts of the character.

 

[Oofta]

I view those things as being in the same general ballpark as D&D alignment.

It's the Cliff's Notes version of what the character might care about.

Other times, if I'm sitting down at a new table, it can be fun to just roll randomly and see what sort of personality gets attached to the mechanical parts of the character.

Same for me. They can be an inspiration for how to run my PC, but that's about it.

At one time I paid attention what my player's had written, but decided it kind of like I was trying to enforce how they should run their PC, or at least with a carrot for "good" RP if not a stick.

So now I treat it like alignment: it's a tool for the player of they want it, but I don't care.

 

[mrpopstar]

Use the system mechanics?? You clearly don't understand 5E.

 

[Ovinomancer]

They're not if you use the system's mechanics for resolving social interactions, where they feature heavily.

Well, not really, right? The player's BIFTs don't matter at all in that system, only NPC BIFTs. You can leave that space on your sheet blank and get all the use out of that system as someone more diligent.

As a player side mechanic, BIFTs don't do much at all. Let's lay out how they work, according to the book. You have a BIFT, and you do something during play that characterizes one of them. Cool. The GM then has to notice, meaning they have to remember what your character's BIFTs are and recognize your play as invoking one of them. They then have to think that this characterization rises to whatever arbitrary level the GM has for rewarding. The reward is to mark Inspiration, but if you already have it, then you get nothing, even if your play was amazing -- no reward unless you've spent the last one. And then you have Inspiration, which gets spent arbitrarily by the player whenever they want, and doesn't reinforce playing to BIFTs when used, so only the lack of Inspiration actually encourages playing to BIFTs.

Most people that really like this system have changed it in some way, usually allowing fellow players to reward, or stocking Inspiration, or letting the players claim it on their own. And/or they change Inspiration to be a reroll-after-the-fact, or stackable, or have to be immediately used in the same action that earned it. These do more work to letting the system do something, but still isn't terribly strong.

BIFTs RAW are kludgey, don't really do much, and really just add to GM overhead. Most houserules address the don't do much bit, kinda, or take it out of the GM overhead, or both.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

What are the main obstacles to this happening in 5e, do you think? I don't follow sage advice, but I'm thinking to moments where we had to look up a rule or were otherwise confused at the table. Off the top my head, areas that are not rules-lite enough involve

• parsing the action economy (including all the rules related to movement)
• what conditions and status effects do and how they interact, and also the cognitive load of keeping track of them during an encounter. (I mean, look at this s***)
• over reliance of exception-based design, especially in spells and special abilities, which complicate the 'd20+mod' simplicity of the core mechanics

Apart from this, of course, a large portion of the fans would love a rationalized, rules-heavy system that they could analyze for optimization purposes.

Those three points are a pretty big part of it. I'd need some more time to gather my thoughts for anything outside the points you mentioned.

 

[mrpopstar]

Well, not really, right? The player's BIFTs don't matter at all in that system, only NPC BIFTs. You can leave that space on your sheet blank and get all the use out of that system as someone more diligent.

As a player side mechanic, BIFTs don't do much at all. Let's lay out how they work, according to the book. You have a BIFT, and you do something during play that characterizes one of them. Cool. The GM then has to notice, meaning they have to remember what your character's BIFTs are and recognize your play as invoking one of them. They then have to think that this characterization rises to whatever arbitrary level the GM has for rewarding. The reward is to mark Inspiration, but if you already have it, then you get nothing, even if your play was amazing -- no reward unless you've spent the last one. And then you have Inspiration, which gets spent arbitrarily by the player whenever they want, and doesn't reinforce playing to BIFTs when used, so only the lack of Inspiration actually encourages playing to BIFTs.

Most people that really like this system have changed it in some way, usually allowing fellow players to reward, or stocking Inspiration, or letting the players claim it on their own. And/or they change Inspiration to be a reroll-after-the-fact, or stackable, or have to be immediately used in the same action that earned it. These do more work to letting the system do something, but still isn't terribly strong.

BIFTs RAW are kludgey, don't really do much, and really just add to GM overhead. Most houserules address the don't do much bit, kinda, or take it out of the GM overhead, or both.

They're for fleshing out your character's personality; what drives them, what connections they have, and how they can be exploited. Inspiration rewards you for staying true to those personal characteristics.

As a player, it's helpful to have a list of suggestions to spark my imagination. As a Dungeon Master, it's helpful to be aware of those player choices when designing adventures because I'm better able to anticipate how the characters might react in a given situation or social encounter.

What I like most about them is that they offer tools for talking when discouraging metagame thinking. Gentle reminder: "What do your characters think?"

 

[Helpful NPC Thom]

BIFTs RAW are kludgey, don't really do much, and really just add to GM overhead. Most houserules address the don't do much bit, kinda, or take it out of the GM overhead, or both.

Exactly. The system--along with Inspiration--are clearly tacked-on and underdeveloped in an attempt to create more narrative- or story-oriented gameplay. They should either be excised or expanded. As they stand, they crowd the character sheet.

 

[TwoSix]

They're for fleshing out your character's personality; what drives them, what connections they have, and how they can be exploited. Inspiration rewards you for staying true to those personal characteristics.

As a player, it's helpful to have a list of suggestions to spark my imagination. As a Dungeon Master, it's helpful to be aware of those player choices when designing adventures because I'm better able to anticipate how the characters might react in a given situation or social encounter.

What I like most about them is that they offer tools for talking when discouraging metagame thinking. Gentle reminder: "What do your characters think?"

I mean, they're fine for reminding new players that they should actually roleplay, sure. The argument against them is that lots of other non-D&D games have mechanics that do the same thing, but better.