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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E
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="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9589361" data-attributes="member: 6877472"><p>It's the same sort of thing that happened with the shift from 3e to 4e. Where 3e often went out of it's way (to it's detriment) to have the same rules for everything (you turn into a fleshraker dinosaur, you get all the stats of the creature, 1 HD humanoids advance via class levels, most things have feats), this could lead to issues- like what exactly to spend all the feats of my CR 10 monster with 20 HD.</p><p></p><p>Making high level humanoid foes becomes tedious because you have to advance them, give them feats, make sure they get their stat bonuses, then equip them so they can even be a challenge to the players, only for that equipment to instantly turn into loot for the PC's- I would spend hours building encounters!</p><p></p><p>4e made the change that the end result was more important than the journey in a lot of things. Rather than worry about how a given creature is a CR 7 threat, you just say "here's the numbers, assume it has them", which is similar to what's going on now.</p><p></p><p>Rather than worry about edge cases, an ability does what it says it does, no more, no less. This approach saves on a lot of printed words, and the game can be much easier to run for the DM, but it leaves it's own sticking points. Here are two:</p><p></p><p>First, edge cases are what TTRPG's are about! "If I cast my Fountain of Flame in a bakery, does it ignite the flour? What happens?". It's a classic GM conundrum- do you go with what should happen, despite the fact that it's way off script and beyond the scope of the ability, and thus risk your game running off the rails, or do you stick to the strict letter of the law, making the game feel more like, well, a game?</p><p></p><p>(Somewhat amusingly, the answer generally depends on whether or not it favors the PC's, in my experience, lol).</p><p></p><p>Second, "How is this goblin a CR 12? I shouldn't be fighting goblins at level 12, should I? What makes it so strong that it can keep up with me?". It's the same thing you see in MMO's- enter a new zone, suddenly you're attacked by a level 20 wolf. How the heck is a wolf level 20?! (and why did it drop a magic sword when I killed it, but failed to have any wolf paws on it's person?).</p><p></p><p>These sorts of abstractions can be quite immersion breaking if you think about them too much!</p><p></p><p>I used to institute a "No Prize" house rule, based on the old Marvel comics tradition. Simply put, anyone can point out an inconsistency or error. A true player spots the inconsistency, then produces an explanation for why it's not an inconsistency at all!</p><p></p><p>I would encourage my players to do this, because to me, a TTRPG is a creative endeavor, and a good narrative can trump little quibbles like how game rules =/= real world physics.</p><p></p><p>(An example of this kind of thinking- I once had a DM say he couldn't imagine allowing a Warforged PC in his Forgotten Realms campaign. I spun him a story about a statue of the goddess Sune that stood in a temple garden, lovingly sculpted by a master who had once had a vision of the goddess. Then, during the Spellplague, when magic went awry, a blue lighting bolt struck the statue, bringing it to life, where it was instructed by the priests of Sune. Game rules of a Warforged, even though it wasn't actually one. The DM approved the concept on the spot.)</p><p></p><p>It is better when one is able to square the circle, rectifying the vagueness of necessarily arbitrary game rules with an immersive narrative. Ideally, the rules should do this on their own, but too much attention to detail and attempting to model real world things can lead to just as many problems as not attempting to do so.</p><p></p><p>The pendulum has swung both ways in D&D's history. And it will again. Striking a happy balance is hard- either you upset the pedants who must have everything make logical sense, or you open the floodgates to rabid munchkins always looking for an exploit, lol.</p><p></p><p>I've found I'm of two minds about this. As a DM, I love the gamist approach. It makes my life easier. But as a player, it bothers me when something makes zero sense, like why a stock NPC who is stated to be a warrior just like my Fighter uses an ability there is no way for my character to ever learn or possess with no explanation. In universe, we're meant to be similar, but mechanically, we're worlds apart!</p><p></p><p>With no answer forthcoming from the game itself, I'm forced to earn my own No Prize.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 9589361, member: 6877472"] It's the same sort of thing that happened with the shift from 3e to 4e. Where 3e often went out of it's way (to it's detriment) to have the same rules for everything (you turn into a fleshraker dinosaur, you get all the stats of the creature, 1 HD humanoids advance via class levels, most things have feats), this could lead to issues- like what exactly to spend all the feats of my CR 10 monster with 20 HD. Making high level humanoid foes becomes tedious because you have to advance them, give them feats, make sure they get their stat bonuses, then equip them so they can even be a challenge to the players, only for that equipment to instantly turn into loot for the PC's- I would spend hours building encounters! 4e made the change that the end result was more important than the journey in a lot of things. Rather than worry about how a given creature is a CR 7 threat, you just say "here's the numbers, assume it has them", which is similar to what's going on now. Rather than worry about edge cases, an ability does what it says it does, no more, no less. This approach saves on a lot of printed words, and the game can be much easier to run for the DM, but it leaves it's own sticking points. Here are two: First, edge cases are what TTRPG's are about! "If I cast my Fountain of Flame in a bakery, does it ignite the flour? What happens?". It's a classic GM conundrum- do you go with what should happen, despite the fact that it's way off script and beyond the scope of the ability, and thus risk your game running off the rails, or do you stick to the strict letter of the law, making the game feel more like, well, a game? (Somewhat amusingly, the answer generally depends on whether or not it favors the PC's, in my experience, lol). Second, "How is this goblin a CR 12? I shouldn't be fighting goblins at level 12, should I? What makes it so strong that it can keep up with me?". It's the same thing you see in MMO's- enter a new zone, suddenly you're attacked by a level 20 wolf. How the heck is a wolf level 20?! (and why did it drop a magic sword when I killed it, but failed to have any wolf paws on it's person?). These sorts of abstractions can be quite immersion breaking if you think about them too much! I used to institute a "No Prize" house rule, based on the old Marvel comics tradition. Simply put, anyone can point out an inconsistency or error. A true player spots the inconsistency, then produces an explanation for why it's not an inconsistency at all! I would encourage my players to do this, because to me, a TTRPG is a creative endeavor, and a good narrative can trump little quibbles like how game rules =/= real world physics. (An example of this kind of thinking- I once had a DM say he couldn't imagine allowing a Warforged PC in his Forgotten Realms campaign. I spun him a story about a statue of the goddess Sune that stood in a temple garden, lovingly sculpted by a master who had once had a vision of the goddess. Then, during the Spellplague, when magic went awry, a blue lighting bolt struck the statue, bringing it to life, where it was instructed by the priests of Sune. Game rules of a Warforged, even though it wasn't actually one. The DM approved the concept on the spot.) It is better when one is able to square the circle, rectifying the vagueness of necessarily arbitrary game rules with an immersive narrative. Ideally, the rules should do this on their own, but too much attention to detail and attempting to model real world things can lead to just as many problems as not attempting to do so. The pendulum has swung both ways in D&D's history. And it will again. Striking a happy balance is hard- either you upset the pedants who must have everything make logical sense, or you open the floodgates to rabid munchkins always looking for an exploit, lol. I've found I'm of two minds about this. As a DM, I love the gamist approach. It makes my life easier. But as a player, it bothers me when something makes zero sense, like why a stock NPC who is stated to be a warrior just like my Fighter uses an ability there is no way for my character to ever learn or possess with no explanation. In universe, we're meant to be similar, but mechanically, we're worlds apart! With no answer forthcoming from the game itself, I'm forced to earn my own No Prize. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E
Top