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="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5870928" data-attributes="member: 58416">Somewhat off-topic and a double post, but I was reading a different thread, and I feel as though my thoughts on it might help to give a little context to what I've said here, and shed some light on what I want out of D&D 5E.I've seen several threads here and elsewhere talk about adventure based designed versus encounter based design.  Which do I prefer?  Which do I think is better?  My answer is neither.What I want is a game that says, "here is the world; the story is what you make of it."  I want that to be as independent as possible from concepts such as 'encounters', 'adventures', 'levels', and etc.  I want an experience which feels as though it grows more from the in-game action than from ooc concepts.  I have no illusions about D&D not being a game.  I know it is one, and I accept that sacrifices often need to be made in the name of fun and/or playability.  I'm ok with that, but -as much as possible- I want to feel as though the entity of 'DM' and/or the entity of game mechanics aren't really there.  I want to be able to escape into my mind; into a different reality for a little while.I do feel that the encounter guidelines from 4th Edition were great; I hands down feel the encounter design ideals from 4E were better than 3E.  I still feel there should be some guidelines which detail how many monsters should be a challenge for a certain number of players.  However, I want those guidelines to be just that -guidelines.  I don't want the assumptions of the game to be that every encounter of level X should contain quantity Y of monster points, and every PC should have equipment Z to be relevant in that encounter.  I want to be able to place things into the game world which I feel make sense in the game world.  While I can openly defy the guidelines set in place in the prior two editions, doing so often violates both the expectations of the game, the play styles encouraged by the system, and the expectations of most D&D players I have gamed with.I've seen a lot of quotes from Tolkien and various other authors tossed about during recent discussions, and I'll return to Tolkien myself.  One of my favorite fantasy scenes is the battle with Smaug.  He was incredibly powerful, but he was still not impossible to defeat, and he was still not entirely invincible to what D&D might call lower level heroes.  It simply took a lot of people to challenge him, and some secret knowledge about a weakness to easily kill him.  I want my D&D experience to be a little more like that.  Yes, an ancient dragon more than likely will mop the floor with a bunch of peasants, and he might even be able to challenge a platoon of well armed men, but he's still not entirely impossible to defeat.  The 'level 1' mooks are still capable of hitting and dealing damage; it might not be enough to really do much of anything to the ancient dragon, but it should still be possible for their efforts to matter.  The other thing that scene shows is how to incorporate non-combat skills into combat.  A battle which was extremely difficult (the odds might even say virtually impossible) was made manageable by gaining some information.  I think being able to make an arcana check or a religion check or knowledge: dragons check or whatever you want to call it and gain useful tangible information which can be used is a good thing.  It helps me to feel as though the various parts of the game are sewn together more tightly.  Also, as someone who likes to have a broader experience during play, I don't feel as though picking up feats which boost my skills are crap in comparison to Weapon Expertise because I'm give the impression that the game supports more than one way to succeed.  So, how does this tie into my previous comments?  Well, as said, I want everything to feel more connected.  If the party is facing a tough foe, I'd like to be able to call upon an ally or a sidekick (if need be) to help engage the world.  On the other hand, if I am struggling, yes, that should make things harder for me, but it should not make things impossible for me.  If my 20th level fighter breaks his sword -or if I'm too broke to afford one because my kingdom was recently hit with plague and I used personal resources to help my people, I don't want that to make me useless.  I want to feel like I am engaging the world more so than engaging the game system.  That is my hope for 5th Edition.</blockquote>

Verification