D&D 5E What is Quality?

[Hussar]

Am I the only one that has no problems with Inspiration as written? I didn't actually know that this was an issue. I missed that.

As a counter to quality, I present people's Exhibit A - The Player's Handbook Index. Does anyone think that THAT is an example of quality?

But, frankly, the whole quality argument is made in poor faith. It's very much like the canon arguments.. "I don't like something, but, I need to make it sound like it's more than just my personal preference, so, I'll appeal to popularity or lore or history or something in the hopes that enough people won't notice that the only reason I'm saying this is because I want to force my preferences on everyone else."

It's such a blatantly obvious tactic.

 

[Oofta]

Here's the thing - 5e can be a good game while other games are also good. By framing quality as a popularity contest, you create an environment where you pit fans of 5e against fans of other games which pits those of us who are fans of multiple games in a pretty tough spot. Like this constant need some 5e fans have to sideswipe previous editions or other closely related games in completely unrelated threads makes no damn sense to me. It only serves to raise the overall temperature and rancor on these boards.

There's no limit to how many games can be considered high quality. I never meant to imply or state otherwise. In addition, there's room for different preferences. My brother-in-law loves his pickup truck for reasons I can't comprehend, I'd rather spend the same amount of money and get something small and sporty because I'm not a farmer or construction worker that needs to haul heavy loads on a regular basis.

That doesn't make him wrong, any more than someone else liking something I don't makes them wrong.

 

[Oofta]

The very fact that the Rolex can be counted on to outlast the Casio (and by a big factor!) is a direct result of its superior quality.

Quality does not equate to here-and-now functionaltiy. Both watches have that, and both are good at what they do. Quality equates in this case to how long I can expect that same degree of functionality to sustain without any further input from me other than occasional battery replacement.

I had my casio for ... I don't know ... 20 years? I had to replace the battery a few times but despite being abused it kept running. I only got rid of it once I got a cell phone. I have no idea how long either one lasts on average. Do you have any actual evidence to back up the claim?

Beyond that, longevity is only one measure of quality, of many. For you a Rolex may be higher quality based on what you value and what you decide to give weight to. I used the timer and stopwatch functionality of my Casio on a regular basis so for me those were big factors in product quality.

But I guess that's kind of my point. After a certain point of basic functionality, all claims of quality of subjective.

 

[Mort]

Am I the only one that has no problems with Inspiration as written? I didn't actually know that this was an issue. I missed that.

I find that the inspiration mechanic is good but tracking it is rough. The DM has A LOT to do and tracking if the players are playing their characters gets a bit much and (can also lead to spotlight hogging). I find that @iserith's method works quite well to address this issue (certainly for my group).

As a counter to quality, I present people's Exhibit A - The Player's Handbook Index. Does anyone think that THAT is an example of quality?

Yes, the organization and indexing of the PHB is, frankly terrible. The organization of the DMG is also bad and makes it quite hard to find something unless you know exactly what you are looking for AND know where to find it. I've seen that lead to instances where people (even on this board) think there isn't a good rule (or explanation) for something when there is. I sincerely hope that one of the big things addressed in 2024 is this very issue!

 

[payn]

Am I the only one that has no problems with Inspiration as written? I didn't actually know that this was an issue. I missed that.

As a counter to quality, I present people's Exhibit A - The Player's Handbook Index. Does anyone think that THAT is an example of quality?

But, frankly, the whole quality argument is made in poor faith. It's very much like the canon arguments.. "I don't like something, but, I need to make it sound like it's more than just my personal preference, so, I'll appeal to popularity or lore or history or something in the hopes that enough people won't notice that the only reason I'm saying this is because I want to force my preferences on everyone else."

It's such a blatantly obvious tactic.

Also, happening right now over in "build online" thread.

 

[delericho]

As a counter to quality, I present people's Exhibit A - The Player's Handbook Index. Does anyone think that THAT is an example of quality?

Oh, it's terrible. What's even more damning is that someone clearly intervened to make it extra terrible - the auto-generated index would have been better.

And yet... the PHB is still better indexed than most RPG books out there.

 

[payn]

I find that the inspiration mechanic is good but tracking it is rough. The DM has A LOT to do and tracking if the players are playing their characters gets a bit much and (can also lead to spotlight hogging). I find that @iserith's method works quite well to address this issue (certainly for my group).

Its a doozy. Over in PF2, the GM is supposed to give out a hero point every hour of game play. They should also award one luck player (arbitrarily) per session a hero point based on play. What is a GM supposed to do? Set a clock?

 

[ART!]

People are absolutely terrible at differentiating between "I don't like it" and "it is bad."

The internet is absolutely bursting with opinion wankery pretending to be thoughtful and/or good faith criticism.

 

[Oofta]

You keep saying these really odd things. Of course brand names are valuable; that's why companies spent millions of dollars promoting them, and protecting them.

I feel like you have a very unusual view on what marketing is, and how it affects popularity.

(Again, you've been repeating the same thing for 10 pages now, so I don't expect this to sway your opinion one iota; it's mainly for the others reading here).



I feel like this is a somewhat disingenuous misrepresentation of those who disagree with you. With a couple of exceptions, people aren't saying that D&D isn't a quality game. Most people here agree with you that it is. We're here on a busy D&D discussion forum for a reason. What we keep saying that its popularity is not proof of its quality.

But I feel like you must know that's what we're saying by now, yet you keep repeating it, so... yeah. Dunno where to go from there.

Either we can say that a TTRPG is quality product or we cannot. Obviously I believe the former but after a certain level of basic functionality it comes down to personal preferences and valuations. I assume we agree that D&D, like most mainstream publications, meet the basic level of functionality and editing quality. So then it's a question of can we look at any objective measure to determine subjective opinion?

But if feels like you're saying that I believe popularity alone is a measurement of quality. It's not. While D&D certainly had a strong starting position, it's the decade of double digit growth that tells me that many people (subjectively) judge it to be a quality product. Is it the best? Who knows, that's an entirely different question. What's best for me may not be the best for anyone else.

Obviously branding matters, I just don't believe branding alone can account for the success we currently see. There's nothing magic about branding or IP, if there were the DC universe would have spawned many more movies, instead most of the movies hit with a splash and quickly sank. People were incredibly excited about Batman vs Superman, but the branding couldn't make a mediocre movie into a quality one and the box office returns after opening weekend proved it.

 

[Morrus]

Obviously branding matters, I just don't believe branding alone can account for the success we currently see. There's nothing magic about branding or IP, if there were the DC universe would have spawned many more movies, instead most of the movies hit with a splash and quickly sank. People were incredibly excited about Batman vs Superman, but the branding couldn't make a mediocre movie into a quality one and the box office returns after opening weekend proved it.

That rather contradicts your own point though. BvS made nearly $900M. Whatever you or your social circle thought of it, it made a ton of money. By your own reasoning, it is therefore a quality movie. Yet you say it is not.