D&D 5E Who would want to see rule books annotated with developer quotes on the system's mechanics?

[nomotog]

You sound like you're arguing that vague rules are best because they allow the DM to pretend they are playing RAW for the benefit of the players all the while secretly making up their own way of doing things.

That seems to be a very antagonistic way of playing to me.

The DM is always making up the rules as they go along. Though it is better to just be honest about that fact.

I would really like to read some a book with extra annotations, but more for fun. I kind of doubt that it would make the rules clearer.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I feel like this would defeat the purpose of D&D5's interpretive design. God forbid a player ever got a hold of it.

I think it complements interpretive design. It says straight up that this is the rule we went with... but... in the sidebar here's two other options that co-designers x and y thought were good fits too, and here are our reasons/what each method will tend to do to your game. Now you can choose one of our rules, or tweak them, or just make your own rule, and hopefully our reasons will assist you.

Leaving a rule vague, open to interpretation, if kind of a halfway house. It's not 4e strict. But it's not 13th Age flexible. It's something in between (albeit leaning more towards 13th Age flexible).

 

[was]

...I am not really interested in what a particular member of the development team was thinking about a rule at a particular moment during its development. The final rule from the entire team is more than enough for me.
...I think the annotations would be extra clutter for the most part. They increase the size of a book, decrease space normally reserved for artwork and generally give the company an extra reason to increase the price per book.

 

[JackOfAllTirades]

Stuff like this should probably be required reading for noob DM's who like to write up 20 page lists of house rules for games they haven't played, let alone run yet.

 

[Raith5]

I don't understand this trend of having commentaries with with DVDs or games. It is too "meta" for me. However, if there is demand they should consider it. But given the early state of the game and the rather bare release schedule, arent there other things they could be doing?

 

[billd91]

Count me in as a fan of designer notes. I'd love it if the rule books had more annotations.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Instead of making an extra book to explain the rules, why not make the rules clear in the first place?

Because people complain about 5 minute work days when the daily resources were meant to create "Press Your Luck" style tension?
Because lots of people ignored the gold for exp rule because they don't know that rule is suppose to encourage them to act like greedy treasure hunters?

 

[DMZ2112]

Leaving a rule vague, open to interpretation, if kind of a halfway house. It's not 4e strict. But it's not 13th Age flexible. It's something in between (albeit leaning more towards 13th Age flexible).

I don't have a bone to pick with 13th Age -- I own it, it looks like fun, and I expect to use it someday -- but I openly do not care for all aspects of its design. Large tracts of it consist of the designers telling the dungeon master, "Do whatever feels right," or worse, "Do whatever feels right to your players." Fortunately this blatant thoughtcrime is easily rectified by a litle dungeon master backbone.

Long story short, what you describe as a "halfway house" is my RPG sweet spot. I don't want a D&D5 that looks like 13th Age. I want a 13th Age that looks like 13th Age, and I want a D&D5 that looks like D&D5.

 

[the Jester]

It would be a minor incentive, but it wouldn't be enough for me to buy a book in and of itself.