D&D General When Was it Decided Fighters Should Suck at Everything but Combat?

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, the OP wasn't asking about how interesting the combat was, for fighters or anybody else. The question ireslf was explicitly about out-of-combat, with the implication that Fighters were effective in combat (even if the players were bored.)

So I don't know why we keep coming back to OD&D combat as a benchmark for engaging sub-systems.

Well, in my case because I don't think the basic combat system in D&D improved much over time. Virtually all the things that made combat in 3e or 4e interesting were character ability bolt-ons, rather than core combat structures.

That's key in my view; its not how interesting a system is when specific character special abilities are applied; its how interesting it can be when someone does not have or isn't using any of those.

 

[Tesral]

But does that mean you need a skill system, with a list of discrete skills?

I do. It is a preference, some people don't like. But for those that so, I have options. I started with 0e played all the way up to 3e. So I know by D&D systems. My current game is the result of what we like.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Yeah, I sailed a bit when I was younger. I suspect someone who'd seen it done could self-teach with a small sailing boat and good conditions, but that's not the same thing as "hop in the sailing boat and try to head across this straight."

Again this is just my style/preference, but even in that latter example...only as stated...I wouldn't bother asking why anybody knows how to sail and make them roll. It's just sailing across a body of water. So what if they make some mistakes on the way?

I also wouldn't ask for a roll if there was time pressure, but sailing was their only option, because they aren't really choosing to sail in that case.

Nor would I require a check to see if they avoid a complication (e.g. a monster they didn't know about) because, I'm not really presenting them with a trade-off to make: they have to sail across the water.

What I might do (first two things I thought of)
a) Ok, you can either take the long way around to the bridge, but that will take you X amount of time. As you know, time is of the essence. You can try sailing across, and that will take X/2 time....if you pass a sailing test. If you fail the test it will take 2X time. (Although I'd probably use multiple tests.)
b) Or maybe: You can see ripples on the water that suggest something big. To avoid that thing while crossing you'll have to make some sailing checks. OR you can try heading straight for the island, to fight it there. (Little do they know the "thing" is actually friendly....)

 

[Bill Zebub]

I do. It is a preference, some people don't like. But for those that so, I have options. I started with 0e played all the way up to 3e. So I know by D&D systems. My current game is the result of what we like.

That's the great part about all the games out there: we each get to find the game/s (and maybe modify them) to suit our preferences.

I find these debates helpful because it both helps me refine my understanding of why I have preferences...in other words, it helps turn gut feel into design theory...and because sometimes I'm persuaded to see things a new way.

In fact, a lot of my current playstyle is the result of arguing with...and eventually coming around to agree with... @Ovinomancer and @iserith (both of whom seem to have left Enworld.)

 

[Thomas Shey]

Again this is just my style/preference, but even in that latter example...only as stated...I wouldn't bother asking why anybody knows how to sail and make them roll. It's just sailing across a body of water. So what if they make some mistakes on the way?

Bluntly, the can very well capsize and drown. Sailboats and rowboats are vastly different beasts. Trying to operate a sailing boat in normal waters of any distance without at least moderate practice is not significantly safer than trying to fly a plane when you haven't been taught to fly.

Now, if that sort of simulationist/realist business doesn't concern you at all, that's your choice, but barring a very pulpy game (where I'd probably expect something like Savage Worlds skill lumping) that's a bridge too far for me. And I'd feel the same on either side of the table.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Bluntly, the can very well capsize and drown. Sailboats and rowboats are vastly different beasts. Trying to operate a sailing boat in normal waters of any distance without at least moderate practice is not significantly safer than trying to fly a plane when you haven't been taught to fly.

Not disagreeing with any of that.

But....we are playing a game, and in a game, imposing RNG...with consequences...on players who haven't made an informed decision to take on that risk is...well, not a very interesting game, imo. Just because the RNG depends on some number on their character sheet doesn't make the dice roll any more engaging than rolling to see if a stray meteor hits them, or they suddenly choke on a fish bone.

And I don't buy "well they chose to sail across the water", unless they were given another alternative, with different risks, such as the one I described above. (And if they were presented that option, then that makes "Hey, I have Rank 5 in Piloting Watercraft! Let's take the boat!" a lot of fun for that player.)

The card game War is mindless and random (due to shuffling) and the fact that I choose to play the game...or at least that I'm unwilling to disappoint my 8 year old by saying no...doesn't make the RNG, and absence of strategy, any more interesting.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Not disagreeing with any of that.

But....we are playing a game, and in a game, imposing RNG...with consequences...on players who haven't made an informed decision to take on that risk is...well, not a very interesting game, imo. Just because the RNG depends on some number on their character sheet doesn't make the dice roll any more engaging than rolling to see if a stray meteor hits them, or they suddenly choke on a fish bone.

This assumes they aren't making an informed decision. People in a game without the aforementioned broad-skill-pulpy approach who do something like try to sail across a sound without any relevant skill are going to be told in my case "You realize this is really dangerous since you don't know what you're doing, right?" If they still elect to do it, I don't feel a need to give them a free pass on it.

And I don't buy "well they chose to sail across the water", unless they were given another alternative, with different risks, such as the one I described above. (And if they were presented that option, then that makes "Hey, I have Rank 5 in Piloting Watercraft! Let's take the boat!" a lot of fun for that player.)

Depends on what you mean by "given". Have they made any attempt to find an alternate or just taken the first thing that came to mind? Is getting across the waterway to the island even strictly necessary, or have they just decided that themselves?

The card game War is mindless and random (due to shuffling) and the fact that I choose to play the game...or at least that I'm unwilling to disappoint my 8 year old by saying no...doesn't make the RNG, and absence of strategy, any more interesting.

Sometimes I don't expect an individual element in an RPG to be interesting. Its there because it should be there, and represents a possible consequence of PC actions. If it seems a particularly bad one, I'll make sure they're clear that its not a great choice, but I'm not going to protect them from their decisions if they insist on doing it anyway.

I mean, if I force them to use a highly dangerous method of proceeding ahead outside their ability sets with no alternatives, that's on me; if they insist on doing so out of impatience or stubborness, that's on them.

 

[Bill Zebub]

This assumes they aren't making an informed decision. People in a game without the aforementioned broad-skill-pulpy approach who do something like try to sail across a sound without any relevant skill are going to be told in my case "You realize this is really dangerous since you don't know what you're doing, right?" If they still elect to do it, I don't feel a need to give them a free pass on it.

Yes, I was assuming that, because that's all you described: sailing across water.

The point I'm making is that if it was a deliberate choice to choose sailing over another option then, yes, the players should be weighing the risks/rewards of both (many?) options.

But if it's just something they need to do in order to continue the adventure, then they aren't really making a choice, even if they "elect" to do it. Any more than I'm choosing which card to play next in the card game War.

Forcing a dice roll with potential consequences in that case is not really "playing a game", it's just imposing simulationism.

One could argue that "playing the game" involves some amount of being subjected to simulationism, but why? Why not excise those parts? We all have a finite amount of game time; I'd rather spend those precious minutes having players make interesting decisions.

Depends on what you mean by "given". Have they made any attempt to find an alternate or just taken the first thing that came to mind? Is getting across the waterway to the island even strictly necessary, or have they just decided that themselves?

I thought I had explained that multiple times, but I'll try again: by "given" I mean are there other alternatives, whether or not the GM offers them. And the litmus test is whether the decision is hard. If there are other choices, but not really any that can compete with sailing (in terms of risk:reward), then I would either eliminate the risk, or adjust the options to make them more appealing (maybe by making the sailing even riskier) so that it's actually a tough decision.

Sometimes I don't expect an individual element in an RPG to be interesting. Its there because it should be there, and represents a possible consequence of PC actions. If it seems a particularly bad one, I'll make sure they're clear that its not a great choice, but I'm not going to protect them from their decisions if they insist on doing it anyway.

I mean, if I force them to use a highly dangerous method of proceeding ahead outside their ability sets with no alternatives, that's on me; if they insist on doing so out of impatience or stubborness, that's on them.

My inclination there is to narrate past the uninteresting part. "Yes, you can take the sailboat across the lake. None of you know how to sail so there's a bit of comedy on the way, but you get there, noticeably more damp than before you embarked."

Again, play time is precious. I want to save it for the good stuff.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not disagreeing with any of that.

But....we are playing a game, and in a game, imposing RNG...with consequences...on players who haven't made an informed decision to take on that risk is...well, not a very interesting game, imo. Just because the RNG depends on some number on their character sheet doesn't make the dice roll any more engaging than rolling to see if a stray meteor hits them, or they suddenly choke on a fish bone.

And I don't buy "well they chose to sail across the water", unless they were given another alternative, with different risks, such as the one I described above. (And if they were presented that option, then that makes "Hey, I have Rank 5 in Piloting Watercraft! Let's take the boat!" a lot of fun for that player.)

The card game War is mindless and random (due to shuffling) and the fact that I choose to play the game...or at least that I'm unwilling to disappoint my 8 year old by saying no...doesn't make the RNG, and absence of strategy, any more interesting.

Why should the procedure for handling a water voyage be different based on whether or not the acting character chose to do it?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Why should the procedure for handling a water voyage be different based on whether or not the acting character chose to do it?

I guess I'm not interested in playing a RPG that has procedures for water voyages. That sounds dreadfully mechanical.

I play games that have procedures for resolving challenges that arise in response to player actions. If the players say, "We will sail the boat across the bay" and I don't turn that into a challenge, then there's no procedure. If I do turn it into a challenge, where players get to make meaningful choices, the resolution may require some type of skill related to water craft. Then again, it may not. It might require marine biology, or carpentry, or celestial navigation, or something else.

YMMV.