D&D 5E Resting and the frikkin' Elephant in the Room

[shoak1]

Well, I would consider myself more in the "do not limit my available tools" as a DM camp. But you know what, even that's fine to a large degree. There are already limitations.

Most of the time, my input as far as rules are concerned during the game is minimal. I present the world, play the NPCs and monsters, etc. and we follow the rules.

I use passive skills extensively, so we don't have to roll skill checks frequently, but that's still skill vs DC. Although there are plenty of actions the players attempt that may not have a direct correlation in the rules. So I choose the most logical fit.

If the players go in a direction that's unexpected, I need to deal with that. It's based on a combination of rules, random tables, and improvisation.

But my goal is to influence the narrative as little as possible. My input into the narrative is through the NPCs and monsters. For everything else I'm just there to referee the world and setting.

So I don't know what you want to call it. The rules are good at mechanics. It also maintains consistency. I have goals and personalities for NPCs I expect them to meet, but if they go in a different direction I can work from tables, or do it on the fly. However it's most seamless for the players. If I roll it randomly then I have to see how, if at all, that ties into whatever else is going on.

So I'm not sure I would use the term Big DM. I'm here to provide the stage for the characters. The players write their characters' story.

Perhaps my approach is more about putting the focus on the characters, and letting the players have full control over their actions and decisions? I don't know, that sounds pretty DM Light to me. The DM interferes and controls as little as possible.

An adventure designed with a set plot and expected outcome as determined by the DM? That sounds more like Big DM to me. Many of the APs and certainly a lot of adventures from the past fit that approach. It seems like that approach is more about the characters playing the DM's story.

I don't want the focus on me, and it's not about my story. I do provide a framework, and you can say it's my world, but I'm most interested in seeing how the characters, as people, handle life in a dangerous and magical world. I'm more interested in what they can come up with than me.

That to me is far more interesting to me to see if they can successfully get from point A to point B efficiently in something I preplanned for them. I guess for me there is no point B.

And that's the thing, from my perspective, it's not about the DM at all. Really, I prefer for the DM and the rules to be as invisible as possible. I think both are essential, but neither are the focus of my game.

Big DM is not a derogatory term, I merely use it to refer to a DM who exercises a sizable influence on the progress of the game once it begins (in the form of content creation/modification and ad hoc rulings). DM Light refers to someone who tries to limit such in-game influence by front-loading his need for such influence in the key. That's the limit of what the terms represent - and btw I see them both as valid methods depending on what you like. The terms are based on the division of styles illuminated in the quote I began with.

 

[shoak1]

You'd be correct there. 5e is most definitely not designed for the playstyle I prefer. Trying to make it work is the same as trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

Not sure why I'm even bothering with this topic, TBH..... 5e is basically unfixable for my desired playstyle. My 4e group disbanded a while ago though, and I do have a 5e group, so I'm here, trying to squeeze out what fun I can from a system that runs counter to what I want from D&D.

oooookkkkkkkkaaaaaay. Read my signature. No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming. So you are sticking around and playing 5e but not enjoying it. This means two things to me. You is a D&D addict. And/or you get your fun griping about the system.

Jasper.....the answer to your question is in the portion of his quote you strangely felt compelled to edit out.....Here is his full quote for the record (I bolded and underlined the portion you edited out):

You'd be correct there. 5e is most definitely not designed for the playstyle I prefer. Trying to make it work is the same as trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

Not sure why I'm even bothering with this topic, TBH. Perhaps expressing my frustrations now will somehow lead to a 6e that caters more to my desires? 5e is basically unfixable for my desired playstyle. My 4e group disbanded a while ago though, and I do have a 5e group, so I'm here, trying to squeeze out what fun I can from a system that runs counter to what I want from D&D.

 

[outsider]

To me, that's kind of the definition of "Dungeon Master" - the person running the game.

Kindof. Traditionally, the Dungeon Master has been both the referee and the storyteller. My belief is despite the fact it's the way we've always done it, it may not be the only or best way to do it.

I was being snarky because I initially had the impression that Outside was advocating a kind of "player's coup" where they take control of the game and tell the DM how things work, including things like forcing house rules on the DM.

Such a coup doesn't work, in that the DM isn't going to be forced into DMing a way he doesn't want to. I -have- seen player's coups result from DMs forcing houserules on players though, which resulted in the players abandoning the DM for a new one.

 

[outsider]

oooookkkkkkkkaaaaaay. Read my signature. No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming. So you are sticking around and playing 5e but not enjoying it. This means two things to me. You is a D&D addict. And/or you get your fun griping about the system.

I agree with you there. If I wasn't having fun in 5e I wouldn't be playing it. I had alot more fun in 4e, but 5e is better than no D&D. I consider 5e to be way better than 2e, and I played tonnes of 2e back in the day.

My "Not sure why I'm here" and associated frustrations is more questioning why I'm talking about the design of 5e. There is 0 developer intent to make this edition a DM Light system, so there's not much purpose to me talking about it, aside from maybe being a voice in the crowd that leads to a 6e more to my tastes.

 

[shoak1]

But is "getting your way" a part of Big Challenge? I mean look at sports, a big part of the tactics of the game is to get a referee to rule in your favor on a foul, penalty, or really any call... even if you have to exaggerate or "pretend" to get said call. I mean some of the greatest basketball players in the game right now will "flop" to get a call their way.

Very good example - especially when you examine how often the referees are accused of bias and unfairness by players and coaches, right? So it goes both ways. Also to be fair, the referee in basketball is not simultaneously controlling the opposing side of the players he rules against right?

 

[shoak1]

My question is, why is it so important for you to have WoTC release an official change to fit your playstyle? Why can't you take one of the very good suggestions offered in this thread and go with it? Or publish your own rules supplement on the DM Guild and make money for your effort? Why does it have to be official WoTC published material to work for your group? I'm really asking and trying to understand this part.

Big DM is fine with taking an amorphous ruleset and tweaking it to suit his preferences. DM Light is not. So my counter to your question is that if you see it as so easy and natural for a DM to do so, why not let us have our official changes and you just ignore them?

WoTC has limited bandwidth and page-count to make official modifications, and the changes you propose mean that other changes that could benefit others won't be worked on or won't fit into the book. If there is bandwidth and space I have no problem with them adding it, but you act that there isn't an opportunity cost to do so, and there is.

Let's see - a Rest guideline sidebar? half a page maybe? A linear path sidebar that keeps players on track? one page maybe? Suggested encounter changes for those looking for consistently balanced encounters? half a page? Can't you live with 6 pages of the history of Anywhereburg vs. 8 pages and throw us a few bones? I think Tony says it well here:

The other question is, why is it so important to deny those options that the game has provided in the past, to people who may want them, again, in the current edition?

They're options, they'd be forced on no one. They're non-core, they wouldn't change the face of the game. With WotC farming out most D&D projects, page count and development resources do not make it some sort of zero-sum game. Other business reasons are business reasons for WotC to consider, not reasons for fans on a forum to stridently oppose such additional options.

 

[shoak1]

One funny thing about this conversation is that I look at how you describe your desired style, and how I ran/played 4e, and don't feel like we had a lot in common.

I agree - that's why your even handedness is so welcome and appreciated. And its why I think those with different playstyles are not dismissive your articulation of my positions - which aids in the continuation of meaningful discussion.

 

[jasper]

I agree with you there. If I wasn't having fun in 5e I wouldn't be playing it. I had alot more fun in 4e, but 5e is better than no D&D. I consider 5e to be way better than 2e, and I played tonnes of 2e back in the day.

My "Not sure why I'm here" and associated frustrations is more questioning why I'm talking about the design of 5e. There is 0 developer intent to make this edition a DM Light system, so there's not much purpose to me talking about it, aside from maybe being a voice in the crowd that leads to a 6e more to my tastes.

Ok I going to skip the last paragraph because I don't think the owners of D&D care about this forum.
Now to "...I had alot more fun in 4e, but 5e is better than no D&D...."
Well I hear Pathfinder is really 3.75 D&D. So there is that.
But as a former addict to "D&D", I used to love playing until till real life made me quit. And after about a year of no gaming, I did come up with "No gaming is better etc.." If you not happy with the current system quit. Pack away your D&D stuff and find a new hobby. You may find out that the new hobby is better for your soul. If not, you can always unpack your game chest and start up again.
I quit table top roleplaying for 12 years. I did not get a xbox till 2009 and still stayed away from rpg games for a year or so once I had it.
I have had long talks with addicts of other stuff. And I see people saying/doing the same thing with gaming that people have done with the poison of their choice.
TLDR
To sum up. You can just game on, or buy the company and make the changes you want in the game.

 

[shoak1]

If you not happy with the current system quit. Pack away your D&D stuff and find a new hobby.....To sum up. You can just game on, or buy the company and make the changes you want in the game.

Seems like you left out an important choice in your haste to dismiss someone whose opinion differs from yours:

"Lobby here to gather support for changes, but also work toward greater understanding and compromise with opposing playstyles so as to bring the factions closer and help our preferred game grow and be appealing to more of us."

 

[jasper]

Seems like you left out an important choice in your haste to dismiss someone whose opinion differs from yours:

"Lobby here to gather support for changes, but also work toward greater understanding and compromise with opposing playstyles so as to bring the factions closer and help our preferred game grow and be appealing to more of us."

Not dismissing anyone.