Oofta
Legend
The same things that were being argued about for the first dozen or so pages.So, I’m jumping back in after 40 some odd pages of comments, what did I miss?
The same things that were being argued about for the first dozen or so pages.So, I’m jumping back in after 40 some odd pages of comments, what did I miss?
There probably is a sweet spot somewhere, if you want a lot more, maybe this is for you
I don't think I want 250 or so pages on ship combat, that might be worse than 20![]()
That's the fundamentally issue.fundamentally if you take a guy whose idea of the fantasy genre is game of thrones and berserk, a guy whose idea of the fantasy genre is discworld and earthsea, and a guy whose idea of the fantasy genre is skyrim and dragon age, and you sit them down to play the game made by people whose idea of the fantasy genre was conan and lord of the rings and dying earth, and you aren't constantly talking to each other about what your genre, setting, and tone expectations are, you're going to have a bad time playing your fantasy roleplaying game.
I already did, but to cover it again:... that is not a proof of it being an issue with others ignoring story
Care to give some examples?
The point I keep raising is.I can go on with more examples ... but a lot of them boil down to what I said: A lot of these perceived problems just don't exist when the world is given the 'story' elements to make sure it feels lived in and real.
Why? You have simply said that you posit they are so, but not why they are so. What makes them worthwhile? Why is it good to have annoying tedium and bookkeeping?I think part of the point is that it's supposed to be frustrating, in that it limits what the player can do in the game. This would put it in the same category as just about every other game rule. What encombrance does above and beyond this, however, is force not-always-welcome choices on the player as to what gear/loot/etc. should be kept vs what has to be left behind; and I posit choices like this are both realistic and worthwhile.
I mean, the issue here is that stats are stupidly designed, not that we should invent annoying systems to punish people for ignoring stats that were designed without a function.And a minor point in favour of encumbrance is that it gives Strength - an otherwise secondary stat in 5e - something to do.
But these exist in order to simply disengage players from, as you say, "foul" behaviors. They are not punished so long as they simply don't do certain things. That is quite a bit different from being punished for failing to do certain things, particularly when those things are mostly bookkeeping.In many sports and games the point of rules is to prevent bad (or foul) play, and the enforcement system is punishment-based: break a rule, you'll get a penalty of some sort; don't break any rules and you won't get any penalties.
Yes...I don't question any of that.Encumbrance is kind of the same. Stay within the limits and the reward is that there's no penalties. Go beyond the limits and penalties will start to accrue, as enforced by the DM-as-referee.
Verisimilitude. These are problems that should exist in the imaginary world, so having to deal with makes that world more real.Why? You have simply said that you posit they are so, but not why they are so. What makes them worthwhile? Why is it good to have annoying tedium and bookkeeping?
I mean, the issue here is that stats are stupidly designed, not that we should invent annoying systems to punish people for ignoring stats that were designed without a function.
But these exist in order to simply disengage players from, as you say, "foul" behaviors. They are not punished so long as they simply don't do certain things. That is quite a bit different from being punished for failing to do certain things, particularly when those things are mostly bookkeeping.
People deride this sort of stuff as "filling out your taxes" for a reason.
Yes...I don't question any of that.
I'm asking what value that gives. Why this enhances the experience of play. Boiling down your post to its core points, you have simply said, "Yes, it is annoying, but it it still valuable." But I was asking why and how it is valuable, questions you never answered. Well, apart from the "it gives Strength value," which as I said is really a condemnation of how bad D&D stats are, not how encumbrance adds value to the experience. We tolerate rules that pose negative impositions because they do something worthwhile beyond the frustration. What is that, for encumbrance? Because the value gained from the price paid looks ever more dubious to me.
not sure, WotC would never release a 250 page book on this, just not worth their time. They go for the common denominator and rely on someone else filling in the gaps / going for the crumbs - and unlike any other RPG someone almost always willHowever it proves my point. Someone else is filling the void. A void left because 5e didn't go far enough.
There is a medium 1.5 pages and 50 pages of combat rules that would have sold better than Spelljammer AAG.not sure, WotC would never release a 250 page book on this, just not worth their time. They go for the common denominator and rely on someone else filling in the gaps / going for the crumbs - and unlike any other RPG someone almost always will
Given that there are 400 backers, the demand is nowhere close to what it would need to be for WotC to care

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.