Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9112701" data-attributes="member: 18">What you're still not taking seriously is that a lot of people kind of don't. Including a significant fraction of DMs.I don't know if you're from a more rural or citified background, but I'm from a citified one, but had a wealthy enough upbringing to get a lot of outdoors experience, and interested enough in the middle ages and renaissance to know a lot of the details of how things worked. But my long experience playing with players and DMs also from a citified background is that a lot of them genuinely don't have the level of functional knowledge that you're assuming.I guess you had a ton of this knowledge, because you out-of-hand dismissed the value of Aurora's for example (which even for me was educational), but that doesn't mean that's the norm, and I think there's a genuine point to be made about either having detailed or very abstract equipment lists as workable, but ones that are kind of in a wibbly-wobbly in-between aren't worth much.Re: soap, sure we can all come up with examples of stuff that needs less explanation than other things, but most survival, including tents? That could do with a bit more - at the very least an illustration if no description. I think you'd be genuinely shocked by some of the discussion I've had with players over the years about equipment items and what they actually were - not a single one of them was the player acting in bad faith - they just had, to my mind, somewhat wacky ideas about a thing, but based on the limited information they had, those ideas were not dismissed until we discussed it.(As an aside, I should point out I absolutely love equipment. I'm one of the two people in my main group who actually wants to play Torchbearer, for example. But a number of RPGs have equipment lists that are pretty worthless, for the most part, and current 5E is absolutely one of them. I rather hope 2024 does better.)</blockquote>

Verification