D&D General Playstyle vs Mechanics

[Micah Sweet]

It trivialized nothing, it makes difficulty adjustment more granular because they are more steps to death than just a difference of 6HP. Yes the default difficulty is much easier nowadays, but I can adjust it so far to run a highly deadly campaign in 5e without homebrew rules if I want to.

But why bother? There are plenty of D&D-style games, even 5e-based ones, that are better at handling survival-based playstyles and higher general difficulty.

 

[Maxperson]

So you don’t see how those are examples of controlling different elements?

Once again, very clearly this time. Yes you are controlling stuff.

NO......YOU.......ARE.......NOT......DOING......IT.......FOR.......THE......CONTROL. It's not ABOUT THE CONTROL.

Let me clarify again… I don’t think it’s inherently bad for DMs to want to have control over some elements of the game.

And I don't care whether it's good or bad, because it's not about wanting to have control. That desire doesn't exist for the vast majority of DMs.

As for your assessment about DMs who control things being abandoned very quickly, I think your assessment is way off. Plenty of folks here fit the category and all seem to be playing regularly.

No. That's a blatant misperception. There are not plenty of folks here who fit that category. There are plenty here who know that they HAVE control. And plenty who know that the game GIVES control. But not plenty who are in it for the phenomenal cosmic control over PCs!!!!

 

[tetrasodium]

It trivialized nothing, it makes difficulty adjustment more granular because they are more steps to death than just a difference of 6HP. Yes the default difficulty is much easier nowadays, but I can adjust it so far to run a highly deadly campaign in 5e without homebrew rules if I want to.

That's a different topic from what was being discussed and there is a huge difference between deciding how much above or below the curve of expectations for magical gear on a PC by PC basis vrs aligning the stars for a PC to feel risk or nerfing the heck out of the PCs alone with their abilities in order to add some fragment of fragility back to them.

The post you quoted was about how 5e very heavily stacks interconnected rules to strongly enforce or thwart styles of play other than the super hero to super hero+ playstyle it pushes.

 

[Maxperson]

Well that will depend on the situation and context of the adventure you are going through. If you are raiding humanoids, then no alerting them with a torch may not be for the best. If you are exploring a musty tomb unopened for centuries then yes torches all the way.

Why is it better to just walk into and set off all the humanoid traps, alerting them anyway?

 

[Emerikol]

Why is it better to just walk into and set off all the humanoid traps, alerting them anyway?

Every square inch of a dungeon is not a trap.

 

[TwoSix]

I realize there are many ways to play. There is very much a make it up as you go style of play where the DM's input into the setting is deemphasized though not eliminated by any means.

What many of you don't seem to ever understand is the opposite. The fact that many of us prefer a style where the DM's creation of the setting is perhaps the most important thing the DM does. That making the setting feel like a real place in the same way a good author crafts a setting is important to us. We want to adventure in an immersive believable setting. We want to interact with NPCs and establish relationships with them. We don't want to do things that pushes us out of that immersion and if we contribute to the setting while playing as a character that will shatter the suspension of disbelief. You may feel differently but we feel as we do.

I have no problem with people enjoying that style of play. I mean, I played it in plenty, it was the dominant paradigm for probably my first 15 years of roleplaying.

I just think it's important to reiterate that it's a 20th century atavism in a modern D&D context, and only has a tangential connection to how most modern groups play, and how most modern games (outside of some OSR circles) are designed.

 

[Maxperson]

Easy...

You start out reasserting that 5e doesn't try to force one particular style of gameplay with its mechanics.

Correct. It cannot possibly do so.

Move on to dismiss description of how it does that by declaring that someone cares too much about the thing in question while pushing for that one style of support it offers.

No. There was no dismissal of any description of any "one true way." I did say you care too much for predictability, but predictability is not forced in the mechanics, nor is darkvision any more or less predictable than light. So if you think darkvision and light somehow force predictability, then every RPG "forces" the same "one true way" of needing to see things.

Demonstrate that you have no understanding of common light sources in d&d like the previously noted torch and previously noted bullseye lantern differ from modern day flash lights

I demonstrated that continual light and light spells have been there and used from 1e on. I will also note the use of both torches and lanterns in 5e. So again, no real difference in 1e than 5e.

Go back and see comments about excessively generous hammer space carrying capacity. 5e differs from those in the fact that carrying them was a nontrivial problem and the fact that most PCs couldn't just ignore it in combat with dark vision if they didn't bunch up somewhat or have multiple torches out. Those earlier versions didn't have trivial unlimited light cantrip casting either either(4e maybe excluded) .

Same issues in 5e as 1e. Also, why didn't you just drop the torches or put the lanterns on the ground during combat in prior editions and just fight with light AND hands free?

Yes because you dismiss everything you are told thwarts a particular type of play or adventure and push the not so flexible 5e style as the only style there is.

Light isn't a playstyle. The problem here is that you are arguing something that doesn't exist instead of something that does. Instead of trying to redefine what adventures/campaigns are, and redefine what a playstyle is, just talk about the mechanics.

Does the light cantrip start at level 1 in 5e, giving trivially easy light? Sure. Did continual light start at level 5 in 1e, giving trivially easy light? Sure. Could you buy continual light coins trivially cheaply in 1e because of NPCs clerics? Sure.

So explain why you think it is somehow bad to get trivially easy light at level 1 in 5e, instead of level 2 or 3 when you get gold in 1e is bad. Argue the mechanics, instead of some mythical and non-existent "one true way" of 5e.

Wotc even admitted that monsters aren't up to snuff... Having death saves healing word self recharging magic items trivialized resting for excessively generous recovery and so on plus those inept monsters makes for extremely overly durable PCs that clash with certain styles of play & adventure.

Bad monster design wasn't one true way to play, either. DMs can and did make up their own monsters, buy 3rd party monsters, or add additional monsters to fights. You weren't forced to play one true way of encounter design and have bad fights.

 

[Maxperson]

Every square inch of a dungeon is not a trap.

Enough are to make it not smart to take the perception penalty. And you will be alerting the humanoids anyway. And missing out on tons of treasure. And missing pretty much every secret/hidden door or passage. And...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I have no problem with people enjoying that style of play. I mean, I played it in plenty, it was the dominant paradigm for probably my first 15 years of roleplaying.

I just think it's important to reiterate that it's a 20th century atavism in a modern D&D context, and only has a tangential connection to how most modern groups play, and how most modern games (outside of some OSR circles) are designed.

I continue to assert that the popularity of a playstyle is simply not an important indicator unless you're specifically talking about making money.

 

[TwoSix]

I continue to assert that the popularity of a playstyle is simply not an important indicator unless you're specifically talking about making money.

Or unless, you know, you’re making a group.