Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 8191679" data-attributes="member: 6677017">And so I have yet again unintentionally demonstrated that it is virtually impossible to make any statements on the internet that will be understood the same by everyone. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />Rather than attempting the impossible and trying to rephrase the options so that everybody has one that fits, I'll just clarify individually which meaning is intended to fit certain answers. (So far [USER=70468]@kenada[/USER] is the only one for whom "Other" is really necessary.)I didn't explicitly mention whether players should be making characters (or getting attached to concepts) before they meet up with the group because I didn't want to muddy the waters with that particular dimension. The questions are intended to be inclusive of that preference.In this case, the answer designed for your explanation is either #3 or #4, depending on whether you want the players to turn the results of those dice into an idea that seems like it was made for the fiction of the setting and campaign (#4), or whether you're fine with them coming up with something a bit outside the box as long as they can make it fit pretty well (#3). My guess for an OD&D/BECMI 3d6 stats in order would be that you're going for #3.Yes if you are sticking with the options allowed for Eberron (I acknowledge that the 3e version of that was "pretty much anything", though the game has changed enough that I'm unsure whether I would run it that way in 5e) and working with the party means working well with the party. No if you mean that any option from an official game source automatically is approved regardless of how much work it is to fit in, and working with the party just means not destroying the campaign.That fits in option #3, because it establishes a tone for the world and the limitations are in service to that. None of those excluded options would "break the game", but they might very well interfere with the intended play experience for the setting and campaign. It's a good subtlety you bring up that deserves further explanation.Basically, #3 can accommodate themes as simple as "do whatever you want, as long as it's fantasy and PHB only" as long as the reason for that is because of a desired setting and campaign experience, while #2 would never make such broad limitations unless the DM really believed that a dash of sci-fi would completely destroy what had been previously established, and everything outside of the PHB is mechanically broken.It's not a topic I'm making an argument for, it's a preference poll so I can determine how popular the various choices are. Text discussion of these sorts of things alone can't always provide as good of a perspective on the popularity of choices. Does relative prominence of preference matter for your table? No if you have an established group. Yes, if you want to have a better perspective about what new players are likely to expect. (Well, technically I did make one claim--that DM-Overseen campaigns are a valid style, and provided an option in the answers for those who disagree with that claim.)</blockquote>

Verification