D&D General Styles of D&D Play

[Minigiant]

Okay. I’m not doing that, so why the accusations?

Others aren't.

Saying "social mechanics are bad" is not an unpopular D&D take. It has been said in this thread.

Not need to take it personal. I never named names on purpose.

 

[FrogReaver]

Others aren't.

Saying "social mechanics are bad" is not an unpopular D&D take. It has been said in this thread.

Not need to take it personal. I never named names on purpose.

I’ve been in the thread the whole time. They are doing the same as me.

 

[FrogReaver]

I disagree. Options are good. Pick the ones you want, and discard the rest. Besides, you're assuming that all these options can't work together. Do you have any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, to suggest that they can't?

That’s fine. I’m not trying to get you to agree. I’m trying to get you to understand my perspective.

 

[FrogReaver]

So one thing I suggested in one thread a while ago, was to give D&D something like the journey mechanic from Adventures in Middle-Earth. And if such a system existed, then I feel some classes, ranger in particular, should have features that interact with this system.

Similarly, if a complicated social combat mechanics existed, then I feel some classes, bard in particular, should have features that interact with it.

And once such integration to the classes is done, you no longer can easily just decide to not use the system, as you deprive classes of their features. Like if you decided not to use the combat subsystem a lot of features would become useless. Highly modular game would best work as a classless game, as then you could freely build the characters only with the building blocks that interact with the mechanics you intend to use. But that would cease to be recognisable D&D, and would greatly affect the ease of use.

Game design is a bit harder than a lot people here seem to think.

Great example!

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. An argument doesn't need to be logical to be persuasive. It could rely on pathos or shared values (ethos). It could also just be a timely argument.


See above.

No. But it certainly helps!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But it's hour 3 into the session and my PC is INT 14. Can't I lean on my PC's big fat brain?

If it is several hours into the sessions and you're tired and not sure what spell to cast in combat, can you just forgo deciding and let your high int character decide instead?

 

[Minigiant]

I’ve been in the thread the whole time. They are doing the same as me.

I wouldn't take for other people.

"Mechanics are not needed" has been said.

And it's a popular saying in the community.

 

[Minigiant]

If it is several hours into the sessions and you're tired and not sure what spell to cast in combat, can you just forgo deciding and let your high int character decide instead?

Sure. Roll for it.

 

[FrogReaver]

I wouldn't take for other people.

"Mechanics are not needed" has been said.

And it's a popular saying in the community.

It is objectively true that social mechanics are not needed. They just aren’t necessary. The proof is in the pudding so to speak. There are certain pros and cons to including them though. Which is what most of the discussion has revolved around.

 

[GrimCo]

Similarly, if a complicated social combat mechanics existed, then I feel some classes, bard in particular, should have features that interact with it.

Well, technically, there already are features that influence social interactions trough mechanics. Spells. Enchantment school to be precise. Friends is cantrip on bard's list. And every new spell level Bard and Wizard (even Cleric to lesser extent) have new way to mechanically influence NPCs in social interactions. I guess that people don't really use them that much, but it's there.