Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supplemental books: Why the compulsion to buy and use, but complain about it?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6399248" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't think the language of "right" is very helpful in this context. Against whom is the right held? Are we saying that players have obligations to do as the GM says?</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure talking about "blame" gets us very far either.</p><p></p><p>I agree with [MENTION=82746]HardcoreDandDGirl[/MENTION] and [MENTION=58401]doctorhook[/MENTION]: the relevant concepts are <em>compromise</em> and <em>fun</em>.</p><p></p><p>Classic D&D and AD&D had virtually no PC build rules, but they had some. A fighter has to use weapons and armour; a magic-user has to choose spell load out on a daily basis; a 2nd ed AD&D thief player has to allocate skill percentiles.</p><p></p><p>I never saw GMs try and dictate weapon and armour choices, tell the MU player what spells to pick, tell the thief player how to allocate skills.</p><p></p><p>With the increase in build options - more classes, more races, more feats, etc - I think it's natural enough that players regard those options, and choices among them, as likewise being mostly up to them.</p><p></p><p>Classic D&D also has almost no action resolution mechanics, especially outside combat. (Gygax's DMG had fairly intricate social resolution mechanics, but I don't think they were widely used because somewhat opaque and scattered across multiple sections.) But where the mechanics existed, I think they were mostly used: GMs didn't regularly substitute their own judgements for players' d20 rolls, nor change the damage dice for fireball spells.</p><p></p><p>So I think it's also natural enough that, as the game developed more extensive rules for action resolution, that players assumed that the GM would apply those rules.</p><p></p><p>There are nuances, too. In classic D&D, a GM might make a secret door harder to find than 1 in 6 (and Gygax canvasses this in his DMG); or make a door harder to open than the standard STR chance. But the expectation, I think, was that the players would easily link this to the fiction (eg the GM might describe the door as very heavy or stuck; the secret door, when discovered, might be described as well-hidden).</p><p></p><p>But consider the setting of DCs for Diplomacy attempts in 3E (putting to one side the bigger issue that the Diplomacy rules are fundamentally hopeless). The GM will be influenced by all sorts of considerations of NPC backstory that the players probably don't know, and more significantly will often never know, or have any way of knowing.</p><p></p><p>This is a recipe for conflict. And it's interesting to see how the 5e designers try to diffuse this in the 5e social mechanics, via Insight checks to learn NPC motivations, thus reducing the inherently secret nature of this sort of backstory.</p><p></p><p>What I don't get is when the trope emerged that the PCs are just another group of schmos. When the game started, every PC was the first/only of his/her kind - the first thief, the first ranger, the first dual-wielder, the first baby balrog, etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6399248, member: 42582"] I don't think the language of "right" is very helpful in this context. Against whom is the right held? Are we saying that players have obligations to do as the GM says? I'm not sure talking about "blame" gets us very far either. I agree with [MENTION=82746]HardcoreDandDGirl[/MENTION] and [MENTION=58401]doctorhook[/MENTION]: the relevant concepts are [I]compromise[/I] and [I]fun[/I]. Classic D&D and AD&D had virtually no PC build rules, but they had some. A fighter has to use weapons and armour; a magic-user has to choose spell load out on a daily basis; a 2nd ed AD&D thief player has to allocate skill percentiles. I never saw GMs try and dictate weapon and armour choices, tell the MU player what spells to pick, tell the thief player how to allocate skills. With the increase in build options - more classes, more races, more feats, etc - I think it's natural enough that players regard those options, and choices among them, as likewise being mostly up to them. Classic D&D also has almost no action resolution mechanics, especially outside combat. (Gygax's DMG had fairly intricate social resolution mechanics, but I don't think they were widely used because somewhat opaque and scattered across multiple sections.) But where the mechanics existed, I think they were mostly used: GMs didn't regularly substitute their own judgements for players' d20 rolls, nor change the damage dice for fireball spells. So I think it's also natural enough that, as the game developed more extensive rules for action resolution, that players assumed that the GM would apply those rules. There are nuances, too. In classic D&D, a GM might make a secret door harder to find than 1 in 6 (and Gygax canvasses this in his DMG); or make a door harder to open than the standard STR chance. But the expectation, I think, was that the players would easily link this to the fiction (eg the GM might describe the door as very heavy or stuck; the secret door, when discovered, might be described as well-hidden). But consider the setting of DCs for Diplomacy attempts in 3E (putting to one side the bigger issue that the Diplomacy rules are fundamentally hopeless). The GM will be influenced by all sorts of considerations of NPC backstory that the players probably don't know, and more significantly will often never know, or have any way of knowing. This is a recipe for conflict. And it's interesting to see how the 5e designers try to diffuse this in the 5e social mechanics, via Insight checks to learn NPC motivations, thus reducing the inherently secret nature of this sort of backstory. What I don't get is when the trope emerged that the PCs are just another group of schmos. When the game started, every PC was the first/only of his/her kind - the first thief, the first ranger, the first dual-wielder, the first baby balrog, etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supplemental books: Why the compulsion to buy and use, but complain about it?
Top