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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6260603" data-attributes="member: 2067">The question is: what is the goal of their design? I don't think this is quite it. Coherent? Seamless? Predictable? Quantifiable? The moment you accept the fact that all lemonade is local, you've acknowledged the futility of many of those goals. People will not play the same game at two different tables ever, and if you're embracing that idea, pursuing a monolithic play experience is quixotic. I'm not sure that's the plan, here.What I see as more likely is that they take a sort of "game within a game" style. The rules that will be published this summer will be a "D&D-branded" selection of rules that hang on a flexible math-chassis (probably one not too dissimilar from 4e). That'll be one "flavor" of D&D.But much like Gamma World could hang out on 4e's mechanical chassis, I think those books will be some rules that hang out on 5e's mechanical chassis. And if the 5e undercarriage is as robust as 4e's, I don't think they'll have any problem accepting diversity akin to (or even greater than) the heyday of d20, with a much clearer picture of how the changes change the math and how the math drives the experience.The idea isn't to make an idiot-proof, consistent, equitable, perfect gaming system. The idea is to empower individual DMs to make the game their own by giving them the tools to perfect the system for themselves (and some easy options to choose in the default game if they don't particularly want to). Which is likely going to include a solid rule base, but is also likely to not be tethered to it. If they deliver on their promise, the fact that they have mandated, for instance, passive perception/active trap stealth won't ever need to show up in my games. And maybe Wish never shows up in others'. And that's all fine because the game is ours to change.</blockquote>

Verification