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

[dave2008]

Yeah, I generally agree there. But I think there are different levels of focus we can give here and loverdrive is clearly angling for one a bit closer than the 10,000 foot view.

Sure, but I am not interested in engaging in this discussion in more detail. That would be no fun for me

 

[overgeeked]

The system is working when it gets out of the way, is handled so seamlessly it fades into the background, and focuses the players on the fiction and the world.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

When the toolset it provides can be used in part or in whole to create desirable and engaging experiences for the people using it. Emphasis on engaging because fun is both too subjective, and connotates lighthearted goofiness, whereas engagement encapsulates a greater variety of experiences that make the system worth using.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I sense a lot of vague, general ideas being thrown around but not a whole lot of specifics.

Is the question "When does the system work?" or "When does the system work for you?" Because an answer like "fun" doesn't mean diddly to someone who doesn't share the exact same ideas of fun as someone else. So what "works" for one person doesn't necessarily work for anybody else.

 

[payn]

I sense a lot of vague, general ideas being thrown around but not a whole lot of specifics.

Is the question "When does the system work?" or "When does the system work for you?" Because an answer like "fun" doesn't mean diddly to someone who doesn't share the exact same ideas of fun as someone else. So what "works" for one person doesn't necessarily work for anybody else.

I took it as literal mechanics making the game "work". Funny thing is, I think a too tightly wound CR works mechanically well, but isn't a whole lot of fun.

 

[overgeeked]

Is the question "When does the system work?" or "When does the system work for you?"

We’re individuals living a subjective existence with our own thoughts and ideas and are, generally speaking, incapable of a truly objective view of anything. So every question has an implicit or explicit “for you” or “in your opinion” just as every statement has an implicit or explicit “to me” or “in my opinion” attached.

 

[billd91]

I sense a lot of vague, general ideas being thrown around but not a whole lot of specifics.

Is the question "When does the system work?" or "When does the system work for you?" Because an answer like "fun" doesn't mean diddly to someone who doesn't share the exact same ideas of fun as someone else. So what "works" for one person doesn't necessarily work for anybody else.

The system works for me if it helps me to operationalize the things my players choose to do without being overly cumbersome and with enough flexibility that we can fit in our shared sense of the genre in which we choose to play. For example, the general rule of using an ability check with the addition of skills/proficiencies vs a difficulty class fits my definition of not being overly cumbersome and flexible.

 

[Quickleaf]

So, yeah, the question is exactly what it says on the tin: what exactly the rules should be doing to be considered working? Since I always have an opinion on everything, I'll start. The system works when it prevents bad stuff from happening and allows the table to focus on the good stuff.

That's pretty much it. Huh, I thought I had more to say about this topic. Welp.

I think 5e's chase rules (in the DMG) are a good example where the system doesn't work.

What's interesting is that the chase rules show three ways the system can fail, all in one part of the game, so it's a great example to study.

1. The chase rules devote a couple pages to all these obstacles and sprinting sub-systems, but fail to consider the greater ecology of the rules of D&D in which they operate. There is no guideline for how to transition into a chase scene (is it simply "the DM says so"?) and hold person (and similar effects) can stop a quarry dead in their tracks before the chase begins.

2. The chase rules are focused on providing a resolution rather than supporting an experience during play. The experience they should be supporting is one of a tense thrilling scene with lots of close calls. YMMV as this whole topic is subjective, but that has not been my experience with them at all.

3. The chase rules rely on self-defeating mechanics. You can sprint by risking exhaustion, thus improving your odds of winning the chase. However, the first level of exhaustion imposes disadvantage on checks (which you need to overcome obstacles during the chase) and the second level halves your speed (which is exactly the thing you need during a chase).

 

[Jacob Lewis]

I took it as literal mechanics making the game "work". Funny thing is, I think a too tightly wound CR works mechanically well, but isn't a whole lot of fun.

Yeah, that's how I take it. And yours is a solid, tangible answer. CR has never been very intuitive or easy to master in most editions. On the other hand, 4e came up with a different approach, which most agree was one of its greatest strengths. Not surprisingly, the 4e system works better than most editions, at least in that regard.

 

[billd91]

I think 5e's chase rules (in the DMG) are a good example where the system doesn't work.
<snip>

3. The chase rules rely on self-defeating mechanics. You can sprint by risking exhaustion, thus improving your odds of winning the chase. However, the first level of exhaustion imposes disadvantage on checks (which you need to overcome obstacles during the chase) and the second level halves your speed (which is exactly the thing you need during a chase).

That looks to me like an example of how the system actually works because its effect comes down to judicious use of finite resources. A participant who can safely deploy more dashes should be more likely to win the chase. Blowing through your dashes and hitting a level or two of exhaustion before the competing participant(s) should be considerably hampering.