D&D (2024) What would you like in the 2024 DMG Instead of the Bastion System?

[Saracenus]

Having not play tested the rules for Bastions, here are my initial thoughts...

I think it works if you use them as a conversation between the DM and the players. It gives just enough guidance to turn our imaginations loose for a giant "Yes, but..." session-zero-like, give and take between both parties. It is super rules light. This is a result of the influence of PbtA, Kids on Bikes, Blades In The Dark, etc.

I think that DMs that have cross-pollinated in TTRPGs outside of D&D will be much more comfortable with the rules light aspect of it where as, say me as a DM in the early 2000s would balked at it, essentially I would not know how to play it. It would have been the same experience I had when I first found D&D in 1979 and I had to make sense of the 1e rules that assumed I had a wargaming background.

I think there needs to be some tweaks, but the most important thing is going to be the basic example/explanation of how to use this new system in play. Something I think they said they were going to do in the 2024 edition of the DMG.

My two coppers, for what that is worth...

 

[mamba]

A functional and clear set of Exploration rules with or without resource management.
Something akin to the downtime rules, but for the wilds.

also, survival rules for different environments

 

[Scribe]

A better set of Bastion Rules.

I mean, I guess these are a start? But I feel like a lot of work still needs doing.

(Though I like the idea of better Wilderness Exploration rules too. Can we have both?)

I almost dont want the Bastion in the DMG. Feels pretty player focused/facing.

Exploration needs a massive glow up, to then bring up the Ranger/Barbarian/Druid side along with it.

 

[Krachek]

I think bastion should not add mechanical features to PCs.
We have enough with classes, MC, feats and magic item.

 

[Retros_x]

Why do we need to give up bastion rules? I actually like the idea to bring back some of the oldschool domain spirit. But I also would like a good exploration framework. And the DMG really needs a section of how to actually run a dungeon.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So I put the question to the community, what sort of system would you prefer instead of the Bastion system, or have I misjudged and most actually really like the Bastion system?

The entire text of Shadowdark.

Then I might actually buy it.

 

[Clint_L]

I think bastions should be its own thing, for those who want such a system. For me, it devalues the DMG because it's a waste of pages and clutters up the book with a castle mini-game that I want nothing to do with. Give it its own book, integrated with a bastions-centered adventure, so that they can really go to town on the rules.

 

[Davinshe]

Give it its own book, integrated with a bastions-centered adventure, so that they can really go to town on the rules.

Well, I'd be remiss if I didn't say that Matt Colville's strongholds and followers is exactly this, if you want to see what this concept given it's own book looks like.

 

[R_J_K75]

This goes for the PHB and DMG, get rid of the useless walls of text and paragraphs of examples and put them in the MM where they actually matter. I'll take good monster descriptions over the 4 pages that will take up the jump skill and grappling explanations. Not everything needs an in-depth description or a subsystem. Break the rules down to the lowest common denominator, keep things brief, simple and to the point. I don't want to have to go through 300+ pages to find what I'm looking for. My biggest complaint with the way most RPGs are written is the length they go through to explain something. I'd prefer a 150 page PHB and DMG over 350 page ones.

 

[Clint_L]

Well, I'd be remiss if I didn't say that Matt Colville's strongholds and followers is exactly this, if you want to see what this concept given it's own book looks like.

I don't! At all! But I'm glad it's available for those who are into it!