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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pamphylian" data-source="post: 9749822" data-attributes="member: 7053769">I mostly complain (though this was only partially my intent) because I play 5e and like many aspects of it, but think some could be better. Perhaps this is sort of a self defeating place to be but what can one do! If you are coming to D&D with no detailed historical context and see a 3rd level spell called Create Food and Water, I don't think it is crazy for you to think, ah! I might have to worry about Food and Water in some contexts at low levels! The fact that you don't but there nonetheless exist these subsystems is on its face a sort of strange approach to designing rules that I think is worth looking at and thinking about how to do it better, at least because it is pretty pervasive in the game and similar games.To your second point, I think "let the player choose how challenging they want the game" is maybe not the best game design. As they say, players will optimize the fun out of game if you let them. They would take Fly and a sword that did triple damage at first level if allowed. You lay challenges at their feet, and the fun for them is finding a response to them that requires some decision making. "Gimp your self for fun" might be fun for some but I don't think it is something to build a game around. In any case, my point is that I think it would be a worthwhile endeavor to fix the subsystems I'm talking about and make them ignorable by tables that don't want them, and that this would be better than designing them as nonfunctional on purpose.</blockquote>

Verification