Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Carpe DM" data-source="post: 1844003" data-attributes="member: 677">JD:Some great points -- especially point 3, which is that the designers are a smaller group than "all gamers in general," and if that's the case, why defer to one small group over another (i.e., the specific gaming group)?Overall, I think my theory still works to help us identify when we personally may be incorrect.  [edit: I understand that some changes are purely aesthetic, and there is no "right" or "wrong."  But other changes really do impact the playability and enjoyment players get out of the game.  So the above dichotomy is simply part of the decision: is it purely aesthetic or not would be the first question to ask in deciding whether to make a change.  And, I'll bet few changes are actually purely aesthetic.]My response to your point 3 would be that I suspect there's a difference between the core rules and the enhancements / supplements / add-ons in that respect.  I think the Core Rules both do reflect the ideas of a large number of gamers (shamelessly appropriated by the designers), and reflect greater experience and testing; whereas add-ons represent more personal decisionmaking on their parts.  Thus, no reason to trust CJT.  Anecdotally (for whatever, if anything, it's worth), I've found this approach very rewarding.  Many times I've raged against a rule, only to stick to the RAW, as above.  And I've often been rewarded by seeing that rule work out in very elegant ways.  For example, as I've mentioned before, the fact that you can't overrun on a charge still offends me deeply.  But, understanding that people can be of two minds on an issue, I choose to follow the RAW despite my inclination.best,Carpe</blockquote>

Verification