Rules volume and play focus.

[MichaelSomething]

I don't think the design of 5e really supports all pillars equally/equitably. If the intent is for them to be equal, the intent is also for the GM to be most of two pillars, without a lot of rules to direct them.

DM EMPOWERMENT!

Wotc finally understood the fulitity of non combat rules. People want non combat situations to be free-form improv cause the judgement of the DM has the best grasp on the fiction the group is trying to build.

 

[Umbran]

DM EMPOWERMENT!

With respect, I feel that the rules should have far more guidance for it to be "empowerment". To empower you, the game should not just leave you to your own devices, but set you up to succeed at applying your own power. It doesn't do that, imho.

People want ...

Eh. You are allowed to speak for yourself, and probably your table. But beyond that, please don't make assertions on what others want. Appeals to unidentified masses are not solid positions, and don't really add anything of value to the discussion.

 

[overgeeked]

I think maybe I made an error using D&D as an example, because all we are doing now is arguing about D&D.

It's the most popular RPG in the world by leaps and bounds so the most people can comment on the topic using it as an example. But sure...

Let's take Savage Worlds. It is a trad game, like D&D, with a heavy focus in the rules on combat and combat related things (weapons, powers, etc). But just because the non combat rules elements take up fewer pages, a Savage Worlds game is intended to cover a lot of ground in play.

Like D&D, Savage Worlds started as a wargame. You can tell because of the page count focus on combat, the character creation focus on combat abilities, etc. Trying to break the SWADE book down by page count is misleading. Technically the combat chapter is only 6 pages long(!) out of a 212 page PDF, but most character options are combat related, most (if not all) of the powers are combat related, most of the rest of the rules chapter are combat related, etc.

But, importantly, Savage Worlds doesn't focus on combat to the extent that some other games do. How can we tell? Because the game also includes well-designed mechanics for non-combat stuff. Things like dramatic tasks, hazards, interludes, quick encounters, social conflicts, and travel, among others. We know that the SaWo game is meant to cover a lot of ground because the mechanics cover a lot of ground. If you strip out the majority of the non-combat mechanics, then asked what SaWo is about, the clear answer would be combat, because what remained of the rules would be focused on combat.

 

[Reynard]

It's the most popular RPG in the world by leaps and bounds so the most people can comment on the topic using it as an example. But sure...

Like D&D, Savage Worlds started as a wargame. You can tell because of the page count focus on combat, the character creation focus on combat abilities, etc. Trying to break the SWADE book down by page count is misleading. Technically the combat chapter is only 6 pages long(!) out of a 212 page PDF, but most character options are combat related, most (if not all) of the powers are combat related, most of the rest of the rules chapter are combat related, etc.

But, importantly, Savage Worlds doesn't focus on combat to the extent that some other games do. How can we tell? Because the game also includes well-designed mechanics for non-combat stuff. Things like dramatic tasks, hazards, interludes, quick encounters, social conflicts, and travel, among others. We know that the SaWo game is meant to cover a lot of ground because the mechanics cover a lot of ground. If you strip out the majority of the non-combat mechanics, then asked what SaWo is about, the clear answer would be combat, because what remained of the rules would be focused on combat.

You seem to be suggesting that D&D is different in this regard, that D&D has few or no well designed non combat rules. Well designed is a matter of opinion of course, but they exist, even if -- just like Savage Worlds -- combat rules make up the bulk of the rules.

 

[bloodtide]

D&D has and will likely be a pure combat game. Right from the start it was some vague "oh you can do whatever wahtever" and oh, here are 300 pages of combat adventure rules.

Seems clear "playing D&D" is all and only about combat.

Of course, this was also the big strength of D&D. Even back in the Time Before Time, people would pick up the rule books and then say "well, lets also ROLE PLAY." Up until 3E it was a lot more common for most games to say "you the player must talk to NPCs....for real".....there was not much of the "the player just takes a nap and rolls a d20, and their character just does whatever".

And over 50 years...D&D could have added rules for anything except combat......but hardly did so at all. Even 5E just wastes time with "oh you can pick a background and get a pointless plus" and count that as "role playing".

As always, and even today, at least HALF of all players think of D&D as only pure combat. If you do anything else, like talk or role play, you are not "playing D&D" to this type of player. Should someone do anything non combat related and they will whine "can't we get back to the GAME".

And this is on top of, and crosses over with the more then half of players that refuse to take any "non mechanical action". As again, to them, unless you are actively using game mechanics....you are not "playing" the game. If you roll a d20 to talk to a goblin, that is playing the game....should you dare to role play and speak in character "well met goblin", that is just wasting time.

 

[Reynard]

D&D has and will likely be a pure combat game. Right from the start it was some vague "oh you can do whatever wahtever" and oh, here are 300 pages of combat adventure rules.

Seems clear "playing D&D" is all and only about combat.

Of course, this was also the big strength of D&D. Even back in the Time Before Time, people would pick up the rule books and then say "well, lets also ROLE PLAY." Up until 3E it was a lot more common for most games to say "you the player must talk to NPCs....for real".....there was not much of the "the player just takes a nap and rolls a d20, and their character just does whatever".

And over 50 years...D&D could have added rules for anything except combat......but hardly did so at all. Even 5E just wastes time with "oh you can pick a background and get a pointless plus" and count that as "role playing".

As always, and even today, at least HALF of all players think of D&D as only pure combat. If you do anything else, like talk or role play, you are not "playing D&D" to this type of player. Should someone do anything non combat related and they will whine "can't we get back to the GAME".

And this is on top of, and crosses over with the more then half of players that refuse to take any "non mechanical action". As again, to them, unless you are actively using game mechanics....you are not "playing" the game. If you roll a d20 to talk to a goblin, that is playing the game....should you dare to role play and speak in character "well met goblin", that is just wasting time.

I have never met anyone who refused to engage with the game outside of mechanics. I have met a few that did not know they could, but that is easily resolved with a little care and patience in explaining what an RPG is.

 

[overgeeked]

You seem to be suggesting that D&D is different in this regard, that D&D has few or no well designed non combat rules. Well designed is a matter of opinion of course, but they exist, even if -- just like Savage Worlds -- combat rules make up the bulk of the rules.

D&D is different by degrees. It’s ratio of combat to non-combat mechanics is drastically skewed towards combat, as you said in the OP, roughly 90% of the mechanics are combat-focused. Looking at the SWADE book that’s clearly not the case. The majority of the rules are combat-focused, granted, but nowhere near 90%. D&D 5E has a few odd paragraphs of non-combat stuff spread across the game line while SWADE has pages of non-combat stuff in the core book.

So a question. You said upthread that Savage Worlds is meant to be more than just a combat-focused game. “[A] Savage Worlds game is intended to cover a lot of ground in play…” From the context, I take that to mean be more than just a combat sim. Okay. How do you know? SWADE is a generic toolbox of a game system. There’s no setting or fiction baked into the core book. Besides a few intro pages and a “what’s an RPG” section, it’s pure mechanics. To claim to know what the game is about is to make a statement about what the mechanics are and what they represent.

 

[Reynard]

D&D is different by degrees. It’s ratio of combat to non-combat mechanics is drastically skewed towards combat, as you said in the OP, roughly 90% of the mechanics are combat-focused. Looking at the SWADE book that’s clearly not the case. The majority of the rules are combat-focused, granted, but nowhere near 90%. D&D 5E has a few odd paragraphs of non-combat stuff spread across the game line while SWADE has pages of non-combat stuff in the core book.

So a question. You said upthread that Savage Worlds is meant to be more than just a combat-focused game. “[A] Savage Worlds game is intended to cover a lot of ground in play…” From the context, I take that to mean be more than just a combat sim. Okay. How do you know? SWADE is a generic toolbox of a game system. There’s no setting or fiction baked into the core book. Besides a few intro pages and a “what’s an RPG” section, it’s pure mechanics. To claim to know what the game is about is to make a statement about what the mechanics are and what they represent.

It tells you in its opening, just like D&D does.

Just to reiterate, my thesis is not that games are lying to you about their intent with their mechanics, but that mechanics don't necessarily describe the whole of the play intent. It is clear that D&D is meant to provide more play than just combat.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Eh. You are allowed to speak for yourself, and probably your table. But beyond that, please don't make assertions on what others want. Appeals to unidentified masses are not solid positions, and don't really add anything of value to the discussion.

True. I'm too lazy to go off identifying the people who want that type of thing. Unless you want me to start pulling quotes from random thousand post threads over the year, we could just say there's at least a small fraction who would want that sort of thing?

 

[overgeeked]

It tells you in its opening, just like D&D does.

You mean this: “This version of Savage Worlds is what we hope is our best attempt yet at accommodating not just every era, genre, and setting, but most every play style as well. Want to sit around on couches and carry out most of the tale through talk and a few die rolls? It's here. Want to break out miniatures and have a massive knock-down, drag-out fight? Everything you need is here. Need to tell an epic story that's mostly roleplaying and narrative? Nothing's stopping you—and sub-systems like Quick Encounters can help you sum up bloody conflicts along the way if pressed for time.”

This is the same generic “you can do anything you want in an RPG” followed by a few hundred pages of rules detailing what you can and can’t do as most other RPGs.

Just to reiterate, my thesis is not that games are lying to you about their intent with their mechanics, but that mechanics don't necessarily describe the whole of the play intent. It is clear that D&D is meant to provide more play than just combat.

No, but you seem to be saying a hundred-odd words in the intro should be given more weight than several hundred pages of rules.

And no, the mechanics don’t “describe the whole of the play intent” because they can’t. If they tried, they’d all be several thousands of pages long to cover that “you can do anything” bit. But it’s fairly obvious on its face that instead RPGs do use their limited page count and precious design budget on the rules that matter most to the game’s intended play style. You don’t design detailed life sim rules for a 4X game, for example. Likewise, you don’t design a deadly fighting subsystem for a game you’re not meant to fight in.