D&D General When does the system "work"?

[Thomas Shey]

To me, a system/rules “getting out of the way” doesn’t mean you don’t use them, just that they don’t…get in the way…of playing. A game so complex you have to always look up the rules, even when you’ve been playing for a while, or rules that are poorly written or ambiguous leading to disagreements at the table. Or a game with math that is tedious or takes a long time to do (e.g. multiple modifiers from different sources, etc).

Its clear that for some people they really do want mechanics they have to only engage with minimally, though. Even if the rules are serving a purpose and produce interesting gameplay, they find them obtrusive.

 

[Hussar]

Point of order: The grappling rules might be shorter, but they still suck, and require you to go to a separate rules section to figure out what the grappled condition actually does to a target. The PHB doesn't even give you a page number to go to, just "Appendix A." Best of luck!

And like in essentially every trad game, grappling in 5e doesn't feel like grappling in real life or in other kinds of narratives. You're essentially gluing the target to yourself, so you can walk them around, whereas any actual grapple should end up with both people on the ground within seconds. It's unclear in RAW how you do damage to the target you've grappled, whether they can defend against attacks from you or others, whether at the very least the grappled person's AC is temporarily lower. And worst of all (imo) you only need one free arm to grapple someone, so people are just running around doing one-armed hugs on each other that somehow incapacitate them.

I don't think 5e is uniquely terrible about grappling--basically all trad games turn PCs into combat-optimized Terminators for whom wrassling with a single enemy is usually just taking yourself out of the combat for a while, and not doing enough damage per round (if any damage at all) to justify that. And if you were to try to really carefully model how grappling and close-fighting works, it'd make already cumbersome grappling subsystems even worse. Never mind that most grapples should also probably be part of that other poorly-modeled and basically-never-attempted maneuver of tackling someone (which no PC does in RPGs, but that defines and ends most real-life fights). I think you basically have to step out of trad games for grappling to work, and be as common and attractive as it is in every narrative medium that isn't an RPG.

The one-armed grappling though...yeah that's maybe uniquely silly and deserves to be ridiculed.

In a system that is so very abstract as DnD, more realistic wrestling rules aren’t really going to work.

 

[loverdrive]

I've been busy the last few days, sorry if I missed something directed at me.

@loverdrive Just curious: did you mean to file this one under D&D General instead of TTRPGs General?

To put it simple: I screwed up. It shoulda been in TTRPG general.

 

[loverdrive]

I was noodling about this this morning and I wonder if a slightly different definition might not work. For me, a "working" system means that the system is reliable. In other words, I, as player or GM, can be fairly confident that in any given, fairly normal situation in the game, the rules of the game will cover the resolution.

Hm, I like the reliability angle. Gonna steal it, it pretty much sums up my requirements.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

In a system that is so very abstract as DnD, more realistic wrestling rules aren’t really going to work.

Doesn’t address the total suckiness of the rules that are there, especially the goofy one-armed bit.

In other words, who cares if the grapple rules are relatively short, as you noted, if they’re bad, and actually in two different places in the book?

 

[Hussar]

Doesn’t address the total suckiness of the rules that are there, especially the goofy one-armed bit.

In other words, who cares if the grapple rules are relatively short, as you noted, if they’re bad, and actually in two different places in the book?

The problem being that you are calling these bad because they don’t fit your preferences. For me, they’re perfectly fine.

But I was not really concerned mmenting on whether The rules were good or bad. I was pointing out an example of how getting rules that are more intuitive are simpler to run at the table and that’s what people mean when they talk about the rules “getting out of the way”

 

[Grendel_Khan]

The problem being that you are calling these bad because they don’t fit your preferences. For me, they’re perfectly fine.

But I was not really concerned mmenting on whether The rules were good or bad. I was pointing out an example of how getting rules that are more intuitive are simpler to run at the table and that’s what people mean when they talk about the rules “getting out of the way”

I get your intent, but you picked an example where the rules getting out the way mean having to go check the grappled condition, in a different part of the book, with no page reference, just a chapter.

I propose that you not only picked a bad example based on the content (grappling is infamous in game design circles as always being terrible and ungainly) and information design (not all that short of a section, and also awkwardly split up).

So we have to "agree to disagree," as they say.

 

[Hussar]

I get your intent, but you picked an example where the rules getting out the way mean having to go check the grappled condition, in a different part of the book, with no page reference, just a chapter.

I propose that you not only picked a bad example based on the content (grappling is infamous in game design circles as always being terrible and ungainly) and information design (not all that short of a section, and also awkwardly split up).

So we have to "agree to disagree," as they say.

Meh, if you can't remember "grabbed=0 speed" and that's your bar for too complex to be intuitive, then, sure, I guess that's a point of view? Now, if your argument is that the PHB is poorly organized and has an index that is abysmal, you'll get no argument from me. But, that's not an issue with the mechanics. That's an editing problem.

I mean, I play on VTT. Grappled means I click one button and it's applied. It couldn't be any simpler. But, again, that's an organizational thing, not a feature of the rules themselves.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Meh, if you can't remember "grabbed=0 speed" and that's your bar for too complex to be intuitive, then, sure, I guess that's a point of view? Now, if your argument is that the PHB is poorly organized and has an index that is abysmal, you'll get no argument from me. But, that's not an issue with the mechanics. That's an editing problem.

I mean, I play on VTT. Grappled means I click one button and it's applied. It couldn't be any simpler. But, again, that's an organizational thing, not a feature of the rules themselves.

Though in the field that's a distinction that can sometimes be--subtle. Organizational problems are probably the chief way people get rules wrong on a consistent basis.

 

[Hussar]

Though in the field that's a distinction that can sometimes be--subtle. Organizational problems are probably the chief way people get rules wrong on a consistent basis.

Oh, will totally agree there. And, again, I'll certainly never argue that the rule books are well organized. They are terrible for finding stuff. Never minding the stuff that SHOULD be effects but aren't - like Hidden or some other stuff.

Like or hate 4e, at least it was really, really well organized.