• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

What is the essence of D&D

4e had a lot in the little experience I had. Just not in combat. Reading the DM was great for skill challenges though.
We've already established the your brief experience predated functional Skill Challenges, even the first round of updates they got.
So that's plausible. But not a representative fraction of even 4e's relatively short history.

I assume you had more significant experience of 3e? Gaming the DM was also less of an issue then - system mastery being the main thing - though if you could get the DM to allow in the right supplements for your build, that'd be worth it.
 
Last edited:

Nagol

Unimportant
We've already established the your brief experience predated functional Skill Challenges, even the first round of updates they got.
So that's plausible. But not a representative fraction of even 4e's relatively short history.

I assume you had more significant experience of 3e? Gaming the DM was also less of an issue then - system mastery being the main thing - though if you could get the DM to allow in the right supplements for your build, that'd be worth it.
Supplement creep was terrible in 3.X.

I was playing in a campaign where a player persuaded the DM to effectively allow anyting WotC published and it ran several years.

My favourite character was Glanvar the 15th level Dream Dwarf Cleric 1 (Luck and Travel)/Wizard (Domain:Trasmutation) 4/Runesmith 3/Geometer 3/Fatespinner 2/Earth Dreamer 2 who wore armour, carried a Morningstar, and had triple digit hit points.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
That was barely over a year from release. And you missed out on having to try to make something of the borked original SC rules - and the shocking lack of gnomes...
Someone on here described how one could build a Monk via reflavoring another character class and I went ... wow a bit like Fantasy Hero got its Peanut Butter in the D&D chocolate. And I love Reeses ;) -> that said the actual release monk is pretty damn interesting
 
Last edited:

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
There was substantial DM judgement involved in running a skill challenge and handling noncombat resolution outside of skill challenges. Outside of rituals it was basically just the same for all characters. Making calls for what a wizard could accomplish with Arcana or what a Rogue could accomplish with Athletics were regular parts of play. When people start making noise about Fifth Edition giving the DM their power back I'm all like "Back? Where'd it go?"
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
When people start making noise about Fifth Edition giving the DM their power back I'm all like "Back? Where'd it go?"
We argue over minutiae here it is what we do. There are no longer a bunch of non-spell caster things where the DM didnt get to arbitrate the difficulty or just say no (Arguing one might say no to the application of a given utility power under a strange circumstance is missing the point). Even how far a jump as discussed in this thread beyond a reasonable base had some well defined answers. A DM can now just say no to 25 foot jump for a strength 20 character. See DM ultimate power restored (doesn't matter if big picture the DM in 4e is doing what they always have done with some extra tools and guidelines)
 
Last edited:

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Supplement creep was terrible in 3.X.

I was playing in a campaign where a player persuaded the DM to effectively allow anyting WotC published and it ran several years.

My favourite character was Glanvar the 15th level Dream Dwarf Cleric 1 (Luck and Travel)/Wizard (Domain:Trasmutation) 4/Runesmith 3/Geometer 3/Fatespinner 2/Earth Dreamer 2 who wore armour, carried a Morningstar, and had triple digit hit points.
That's excessive. Supplement creep was only a problem if you were power gaming, though. My group wasn't into that, so the supplements just allowed more and more different character concepts to be imagined and played. They were a great boon until they just got so crappy that we stopped buying them. I only had to ban the Nine Swords book. That was just broken no matter which way you sliced it.
 

Monayuris

Explorer
So Legend of the 5 Rings is a game where...

1. You the player get to explore a fantastic world filled with dungeons, ruins, monsters and magic. Your character is an avatar/playing piece that allows you to insert yourself into this world.
2. Your character has abilities that help define its role and how you contribute in the game. Classes provide strong archetypes for what you do in the world. The character class becomes a lens through which you see and interact with the fantastic world. Playing different character classes changes the lens and allows you to experience the game in myriad different ways.
3. The game is a cooperative event where you get to share an experience with other people and contribute to the success of the group.
4. The player at the table holds the power in a game, not the character. Character capability and player capability are two completely unrelated concepts. The character is just a playing piece for the player to exert their agency on the game.

According to your post, Legend of the 5 Rings is D&D. Is Legend of the 5 Rings D&D?
Maybe? It borrows many of the same elements of D&D. So why wouldn't they share the same essence.
 

Monayuris

Explorer
We argue over minutiae here it is what we do. There are no longer a bunch of non-spell caster things where the DM didnt get to arbitrate the difficulty or just say no (Arguing one might say no to the application of a given utility power under a strange circumstance is missing the point). Even how far a jump as discussed in this thread beyond a reasonable base had some well defined answers. A DM can now just say no to 25 foot jump for a strength 20 character. See DM ultimate power restored (doesn't matter if big picture the DM in 4e is doing what they always have done with some extra tools and guidelines)
Yes. I'm super happy that 5e turned to encouraging more DM authority. It is a strength of the game.

To me, those extra tools and guidelines were helpful in the beginning but turned into straight jackets as I got more skilled in the game.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Maybe? It borrows many of the same elements of D&D. So why wouldn't they share the same essence.
Because they are completely different games. Legend of the 5 Rings is not even close to being D&D. And the reason for that is because they present the same game elements in very different ways.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Yes. I'm super happy that 5e turned to encouraging more DM authority. It is a strength of the game.

To me, those extra tools and guidelines were helpful in the beginning but turned into straight jackets as I got more skilled in the game.
Thing is we were discussing how at a big level the level of adventure and broad challenge resolution that didnt change.

To me it means I have to adjudicate many many more actions and honestly making sure an improvised thing doesn't step all over things defined elsewhere in the system and is reasonably balanced with them is not exactly easy AND that is something DMs have demonstrably failed at since forever.

I have seen it on here with DM posters declaring near impossible difficulty for things that were demonstrably inferior to a situational level 1 spell... and another declared a slight variation of it as easy. *because one allowed a reaction to effectively be earlier rather than later. (the level one spell affected the entire party where as an acrobatic technique breaking an allies fall - or interrupting it entirely in the faster reaction case was declared EPIC). The it costs a resource how valuable is that cost????? is very good at hiding value. Its not generally even super valuable to be able to break fall "constantly" but stopping a party wide plummet from wrecking everyones day?. 4e provided consistency of resources that made it easier across the board for system design and dms like myself to adjudicate in improvised ways

To me they took away tools made the DM job harder and force me to concentrate on "bit fiddling" instead of bigger picture things...no how far can the character jump (beyond and overly mundane basic amount) should not require I be hunting through monk specialty rules and spells to decide but for it to be balanced with the capabilities of the caster crowd it needs to take them into consideration that is why system answers seem better to me.

And unlike 3e the rules were concisely modular and clearly expressed so that again it was not DM spending his time looking up overly complex rules or interpreting many many paragraphs of natural language.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top