Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 6634442" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya! Wow...if this isn't flame-bait, I don't know what is! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Sure, I'll through the first match...I hate trying to answer questions posed by players who just can NOT grasp that "It's vague on purpose, the DM fills in the blanks" is a perfectly viable 'rule'. And then having to answer the same thing in a slightly different manner. Over and over, and over...and OVER...and OVER again. They come into 5e expecting the mechanically tight numbers and rules-system that their previous incarnation had. When they don't find it, they loose their kittens! They scream about "unfinished rules", or "broken mechanics", or supposedly needed "errata" or they can't even play the game. All the while, no matter how many times, or how many different ways we (general we) try and help them by explaining that 5e doesn't roll that way...that the DM in 5e is required to run a smooth game by adjudicating and just making <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> up on the fly...it just doesn't sink in. It's like there's a mental block keeping them from accepting that what the DM says is more important and "correct" than what the rule book says.That's what I hate about 5e. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Oh, that and that it now constantly fights my brain for being in the top 3 of my all-time favorite RPG's (which was already crowded by me having 4 of them!).On the flip side, one of the things I LOVE about 5e: that they made both Feats and MulticlassingOPTIONAL. That right there has already saved me (probably) hours of arguing, rule-fiddling, and beating myself up about wanting to nix some, and change others. Not that my players were ever really keen on Feats (we never liked them, really), but anytime we played PF it was one of those things they felt they HAD to put serious effort into multi-level character planning to get some feat chain or something. Multiclassing was much the same. At least now I can say "Don't worry about it...we aren't using them" and nobody feels pressure to choose them or even think about them.^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

Verification