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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Those poor farmers!
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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6482139" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>One important point is that the writers of the DMG cannot know what sort of campaign the purchaser will be running. So the question becomes, if I'm going to make reference to strongholds of any sort, what sort of generic information can I provide that will be useful to every DM that uses the book? The information may be insufficient for the particular DM's campaign, who may desire detail that can't be provided in the space available, but it ought to be sufficient to get started with.</p><p></p><p>For example, the 1e DMG provides very simple rules for constructing strongholds piece meal from component castle pieces without really laying out why you'd want a stronghold. It doesn't need to lay out why a character would want a stronghold, since the Player's Handbook has already provided one solid reason for wanting a stronghold in the description of the 4 core classes - Fighter, Cleric, Thief, and M-U. Player's will want to build a stronghold at name level to lay claim to land (and with it tax income) and to acquire followers. So the DMG focuses on questions like, "How much will it cost to build a stronghold?" and "What will the stronghold look like (as on a map)?" Together with some simple siege rules, this provides a small but complete rules set which also usefully integrates with the Monster Manual (which among other things, describes humanoid tribes like Orcs as occupying simple castles with a number of siege engines). </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You may be right, but if that is the case, why are they here?</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>The character may want it, but note that unless the game provides in game reasons for wanting it - like 1e's tax income per peasant, followers, and presumable defensibility against attackers - why should the character want it? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps. For ropes one minimally needs to know its physical features (weight, length, strength), cost, and how it interacts with general rules related to objects (hit points, AC, break DC, etc.). Exactly how much detail for objects is enough is a matter of taste (do you need to say that ropes are immune to cold damage? do you need to say that cold damage temporarily makes ropes more brittle? etc.), but if you put 'rope' in the basic table of gear and don't say how much weight rope can bear, then in my opinion you've too few rules for rope. In this thread though, I've seen far more objections that amount to "bad rules are good", than defenses of these rules. I'm more annoyed by the suggestion that bad rules are good rules than I am by the particular rules themselves. The rules themselves are probably less objectionable than some of the nonsense that has been said defending them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6482139, member: 4937"] One important point is that the writers of the DMG cannot know what sort of campaign the purchaser will be running. So the question becomes, if I'm going to make reference to strongholds of any sort, what sort of generic information can I provide that will be useful to every DM that uses the book? The information may be insufficient for the particular DM's campaign, who may desire detail that can't be provided in the space available, but it ought to be sufficient to get started with. For example, the 1e DMG provides very simple rules for constructing strongholds piece meal from component castle pieces without really laying out why you'd want a stronghold. It doesn't need to lay out why a character would want a stronghold, since the Player's Handbook has already provided one solid reason for wanting a stronghold in the description of the 4 core classes - Fighter, Cleric, Thief, and M-U. Player's will want to build a stronghold at name level to lay claim to land (and with it tax income) and to acquire followers. So the DMG focuses on questions like, "How much will it cost to build a stronghold?" and "What will the stronghold look like (as on a map)?" Together with some simple siege rules, this provides a small but complete rules set which also usefully integrates with the Monster Manual (which among other things, describes humanoid tribes like Orcs as occupying simple castles with a number of siege engines). You may be right, but if that is the case, why are they here? The character may want it, but note that unless the game provides in game reasons for wanting it - like 1e's tax income per peasant, followers, and presumable defensibility against attackers - why should the character want it? Perhaps. For ropes one minimally needs to know its physical features (weight, length, strength), cost, and how it interacts with general rules related to objects (hit points, AC, break DC, etc.). Exactly how much detail for objects is enough is a matter of taste (do you need to say that ropes are immune to cold damage? do you need to say that cold damage temporarily makes ropes more brittle? etc.), but if you put 'rope' in the basic table of gear and don't say how much weight rope can bear, then in my opinion you've too few rules for rope. In this thread though, I've seen far more objections that amount to "bad rules are good", than defenses of these rules. I'm more annoyed by the suggestion that bad rules are good rules than I am by the particular rules themselves. The rules themselves are probably less objectionable than some of the nonsense that has been said defending them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Those poor farmers!
Top