D&D 5E What are the "True Issues" with 5e?

[EzekielRaiden]

If it's all or nothing, can I assume your not wanting versimilitude as a standard for what isn't specified by the rules means my by the book 5e human fighter can eat through chains, claw through an oaken door with his finger nails, slide through cracks like an amoeba, sense magnetic north when underground, hang in mid air by flapping his arms (assuming I wasn't already falling), not fill his prison cell with waste and come out smelling like a rose if he decides not to escape, and hear and make hypersonic sounds like a bat?

No. It's not about it being "all or nothing" here. It's about how this is weaponized only against specific things, and then completely ignored everywhere else. That conveniences for a smoother, easier, more reasonable gaming experience are great only until they run afoul of some nebulous personal line, and as soon as they do, nope, absolutely not, doesn't matter how serious a design problem it may introduce, absolutely never ever, and how DARE you say otherwise, you fun-ruiner you.

"Verisimilitude only for the things I care a lot about" is one thing. "Verisimilitude only for the things I care about and especially against the things you care about" is a pretty serious problem. One I have personally seen, repeatedly, both on this forum and in general stuff, sincerely and explicitly expressed. Especially when, as stated, it is used as a justification for current design or for why serious ongoing problems other people have should never, ever be changed no matter what.

Some verismilitude is fine. Verisimilitude that doesn't hurt anyone else's fun is great. Verisimilitude that DOES hurt others' fun should be, at the very least, treated as a serious imposition only to be levied in truly dire circumstances.

I've had someone say, directly and explicitly on this forum, that being overtly racist toward dragonborn PCs unless and until the player chooses to start playing something else, is a proper and appropriate approach to play. Specifically because of alleged verisimilitude.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

"Ability to have sex with" does not equate to "similarity in capabilities". I'm not even sure how you're arriving at this conclusion.

it was literally what @mamba was arguing to him earlier (from what i could tell, anyway). why he thought you were arguing in favour of that point too, i...have no idea.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It can. It certainly applies to mealtimes. The other stuff can easily take place while setting up and/or breaking down camp, or on various rest periods. I never said those things didn't happen.

Nice try though.

And you actually play through every single moment of that stuff? Have people make checks? Force negative consequences if players improperly break down their camps?

Because that's what was said earlier. That it's not just enough to recognize that these things exist. Handwaves are unacceptable. We must, in fact, levy penalties for failing to do things correctly.

 

[Lanefan]

There probably is a sweet spot somewhere, if you want a lot more, maybe this is for you

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/homieandthedude/sky-zephyrs-5e

I don't think I want 250 or so pages on ship combat, that might be worse than 20

That's excellent - and our party already owns an airship!

 

[Micah Sweet]

And you actually play through every single moment of that stuff? Have people make checks? Force negative consequences if players improperly break down their camps?

Because that's what was said earlier. That it's not just enough to recognize that these things exist. Handwaves are unacceptable. We must, in fact, levy penalties for failing to do things correctly.

Hey, if you don't want to track encumbrance or ammunition, that's fine. I don't do it all the time. Sometimes my players aren't feeling it, and I'm not going to go against them. But it's what I want in a game I run, and it's what I want in a game I play.

Oh, and exactly how much verisimilitude to I need to have for my preference to be acceptable to you, and not some kind of hostility against my players? Let me know.

 

[mamba]

it was literally what @mamba was arguing to him earlier

interbreed <> can have sex with

 

[Lanefan]

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?

@Micah Sweet beat me to it: realism.

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.

Strength has a very obvious function - or had in the 1e days. Somehow much of that function (i.e. combat bonuses) got punted over to Dexterity, which already had more than enough to do anyway.

How much you can carry is an obvious key part of Strength's function, meaning that if one ignores encumbrance it's hardly surprising Strength doesn't look as useful.

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.

I see a certain amount of bookkeeping as simply being an integral part of the game: xp tracking, party and character finances tracking, party and character possessions/treasury tracking, and accounting for consumables. Don't want to do these things? Then this might not be the game for you.

I'm not hard-line on encumbrance unless I see something way out of line, but I do make them work out a solution if they're trying to carry something really heavy e.g. the party of six who found over 100,000 assorted coins in a dungeon and wanted to keep them all.

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.

It's valuable in that it helps gives a sense of playing/being a real person in a real setting.

 

[Lanefan]

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

I don't do crowdfunding but if I saw this on a store shelf somewhere I'd be mighty damn tempted.

 

[Lanefan]

And this doesn't apply to mealtimes and bathroom breaks and clothes-washing and all the other bazillion tedious chores of everyday existence because...?

Because most of the time those things don't directly affect one's ability to do one's job in the adventuring field. Running out of rations or ammo or water, on the other hand, very much can affect one's ability to succeed in the field; ditto for not having a key piece of equipment on board when you suddenly need it.

An example of the latter came up recently: the party I run had become dependent on magical light sources, and ran into a null-magic zone. All their lights go out. Total darkness. Frantic digging through possessions lists on character sheets turned up three (3) torches and zero (0) lanterns in a party of six. Oh, and somebody had a candle.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm not hard-line on encumbrance unless I see something way out of line, but I do make them work out a solution if they're trying to carry something really heavy e.g. the party of six who found over 100,000 assorted coins in a dungeon and wanted to keep them all.

I remember plenty of times back in 1e when we were in similar situations. We would start dropping the 10 foot poles, what torches we could spare, the metal spikes, etc. in order to free up weight for those coins.