D&D General Styles of D&D Play

[hgjertsen]

Bang you're dead.

Nuh uh. I got and invincibility shield

But my bully deals infinite damage

My shield is infinity plus one

No... more like

"Well, my character Aniska is a barbarian with an int score of 7 so maybe she wouldn't think about flanking the mage with the fighter but she'll definitely pop a rage and whack him with a battleaxe"'

There, picking a combat option my character would go for rather than a combat I option I might tactically know to give me the best advantage.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Masque of red death was awesome supplement with interesting concepts, sadly never run too many games using it.

The best sessions I ever played of any game was running Masque of the Red Death as a victorian supernatural sitcom because I had nothing prepped

 

[Aldarc]

You can roleplay and add other descriptive elements during combat but the resolution of the combat is basically unaffected by the roleplay. A PCs personality can affect it to a certain degree, but it's minimal. Same with 4E skill challenges.

I think that this is an incredibly limited perspective about what constitutes roleplaying and how roleplaying affects the game's resolution. I don't think that roleplaying is just about a player flexing their B.A. in Dramatic Arts in a silly voice when talking to the GM's NPC in the hopes that the GM doesn't call for a roll.

Roleplaying is also about the choices that a player makes for their character in the game's fiction and inhabiting their character in accordance with the game system. In my experience, those dramatic player character choices and the roleplay thereof are equally present in both combat and skill challenges. The outcome of combat, for example, can very much depend on my in-character choices. Do I valiantly but recklessly charge into the mob? Do I sacrifice myself to give my companions chance to escape? Do I save the imperiled hostages or do I let the villain escape? Do I ignore my imperiled fellow PCs to save my brother? The mechanical processes that we engage in during combat will very much depend on the choices that the players make for the character. Likewise the decision that the GM makes for the characters under their control in combat is likewise roleplaying those characters.

As such, the idea that it's only roleplaying if my "skill in roleplay" somehow affects the outcome of the GM's decision to call for a roll or not seems ridiculous to me.

 

[GrimCo]

I think the biggest issue with gun mechanics is always that people already realize how deadly getting shot is. That somehow being shot with a relatively low powered blackpowder gun (even a pistol) is somehow far more deadly than getting hit with a claymore. We can accept that the sword not killing the PC is just a glancing blow, luck, strain, whatever. But a bullet? Either totally misses or instantly deadly. An example of someone in armor getting shot? The picture of the breastplate with a big hole in it because the guy was hit by a cannonball. That and when people think guns they tend to think modern military style firearms, not matchlock rifles.

I any case, I'd have no issue with early firearms but I'm fine without them as well.

Early firearms are okish as they are in DMG. It brakes down when you go from them to Napoleonic era firearms and beyond. We tried using D&D for modern urban fantasy inspired by Dresden Files and Supernatural. It went well until someone had idea to mount good old Ma Deuce on their car and go hunt dragons using Javelins and Carl Gustavs (and i play with some gun nuts). At that point, firearms are effectively same as high level spells without slots. Also, AC becomes problem since armor doesn't really makes sense past those early firearms. Even Old West is hard to do combat wise.

As i said, D&D can be used for many types of games, but for some it just isn't good or it requires so much work from the DM it's just not worth it and it's better to use specialized game system.

 

[Oofta]

Early firearms are okish as they are in DMG. It brakes down when you go from them to Napoleonic era firearms and beyond. We tried using D&D for modern urban fantasy inspired by Dresden Files and Supernatural. It went well until someone had idea to mount good old Ma Deuce on their car and go hunt dragons using Javelins and Carl Gustavs (and i play with some gun nuts). At that point, firearms are effectively same as high level spells without slots. Also, AC becomes problem since armor doesn't really makes sense past those early firearms. Even Old West is hard to do combat wise.

As i said, D&D can be used for many types of games, but for some it just isn't good or it requires so much work from the DM it's just not worth it and it's better to use specialized game system.

If I did an old/weird west campaign I'd just say that armor has come a long way and that the materials used to make it are enhanced to the point where they do stop bullets. Some armor becomes giant spider silk Kevlar, and so on. I'd have to think about how to handle machine guns (even Gatling guns) in a more futuristic game, the real limitation there would be weight, ammo capacity and limiting the arc you can target.

So I've considered it but I think a system designed with them in mind would be better. Which is kind of odd considering D&D's roots.

 

[Minigiant]

Early firearms are okish as they are in DMG. It brakes down when you go from them to Napoleonic era firearms and beyond. We tried using D&D for modern urban fantasy inspired by Dresden Files and Supernatural. It went well until someone had idea to mount good old Ma Deuce on their car and go hunt dragons using Javelins and Carl Gustavs (and i play with some gun nuts). At that point, firearms are effectively same as high level spells without slots. Also, AC becomes problem since armor doesn't really makes sense past those early firearms. Even Old West is hard to do combat wise.

As i said, D&D can be used for many types of games, but for some it just isn't good or it requires so much work from the DM it's just not worth it and it's better to use specialized game system.

That sounds exactly how Dresden Files works.

The strongest things under minor gods and supernatural patrons are magically buffed humans with guns or tanks.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That sounds exactly how Dresden Files works.

The strongest things under minor gods and supernatural patrons are magically buffed humans with guns or tanks.

Also with guns it really depends on the genre you are going for. There are a lot of 'guns are magic' 'karate is magic' genres where these things are just treated as more powerful than they are in real life. I think in gaming a lot of people expect firearms to occupy 'guns are magic' space

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think the biggest issue with gun mechanics is always that people already realize how deadly getting shot is. That somehow being shot with a relatively low powered blackpowder gun (even a pistol) is somehow far more deadly than getting hit with a claymore. We can accept that the sword not killing the PC is just a glancing blow, luck, strain, whatever. But a bullet? Either totally misses or instantly deadly. An example of someone in armor getting shot? The picture of the breastplate with a big hole in it because the guy was hit by a cannonball. That and when people think guns they tend to think modern military style firearms, not matchlock rifles.

I any case, I'd have no issue with early firearms but I'm fine without them as well.

I think a lot of people tend to draw off movies too rather than life. I know nothing about guns and I am not someone who is particularly interested in learning about them (when people talk about guns, they might as well be reciting football statistics to me). But i do like guns in movies. After seeing dirty harry I want a gun mechanic that has the weight and satisfaction of Dirty Harry firing his 357 Magnum. Is it realistic? I have no idea. I just want something that can deliver a dramatic single shot that cuts through the rain of lesser gunfire

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Bang you're dead.

Nuh uh. I got and invincibility shield

But my bully deals infinite damage

My shield is infinity plus one

I think that when evaluating other systems (whether they are rules-lite, rules-heavy, or even rules-absent), it is usually best to make two assumptions-

1. The people are all playing in good faith.
2. The players are not, in fact, kindergarteners.


Or, put another way-

It is rarely a winning move to choose to pit the idealized version of your game against the worst possible version you can imagine of a game you don't personally enjoy. And this is true for all values of "your game" and "a game you don't personally enjoy."

 

[hgjertsen]

I think a lot of the quibbles people have with guns in a system like 5E DnD vanish if you change your expectations a little bit. You can have a hunting rifle that deals 1d10 piercing damage and that's completely fine if you keep in mind that a Commoner has 4 hp. I tend to imagine that dumping dozens of bullets into a high CR orc is equivalent to riddling an elephant with 9 mm because I just don't let players hit the head even if they're aiming for it, I tell them their shot went a little low or whatnot.