Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6652072" data-attributes="member: 996">Well, except 'attack.'&nbsp; So, maybe the odd archery contest or something, but mostly combat.&nbsp;They'd obviously play a Barbarian.&nbsp;5e classes aren't all that elaborate, really.&nbsp; But it's an option for a DM who finds a class sufficiently lacking as presented.&nbsp;That's a matter of taste, of course.&nbsp; It was a very useful strategy, from the early days of D&amp;D on through 3.5, so a 'fix' available to more experienced DMs.&nbsp;The point is exactly what EGG said it was in the 1e DMG, and what Mearls has been saying since the playtest if not before:&nbsp; A 'starting' point.The DM runs by the rules (which do tell him to make rulings from the get-go), until such times as they would give a poor result, at which point he overrides the system and presents a better result.&nbsp;They're the curtain.&nbsp; They give the players the impression that it's not just all unfettered GM fiat, and the illusion that they have some idea of their characters' abilities and some control over their characters' success or failure.&nbsp; (If that were true, PCs would fail a lot more often!)&nbsp;I understand.&nbsp; I have very little interest in 5e as a player, myself.&nbsp; But, I'm delighted to run it, and there's no shortage of players, so far.&nbsp;A good overview of the shifting philosophies behind resolution systems in the evolution of D&amp;D.&nbsp; (Omitting of course, the 'not D&amp;D' anathema that was 4e.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6652072, member: 996"] Well, except 'attack.' So, maybe the odd archery contest or something, but mostly combat. They'd obviously play a Barbarian. 5e classes aren't all that elaborate, really. But it's an option for a DM who finds a class sufficiently lacking as presented. That's a matter of taste, of course. It was a very useful strategy, from the early days of D&D on through 3.5, so a 'fix' available to more experienced DMs. The point is exactly what EGG said it was in the 1e DMG, and what Mearls has been saying since the playtest if not before: A 'starting' [i]point[/i]. The DM runs by the rules (which [i]do[/i] tell him to make rulings from the get-go), until such times as they would give a poor result, at which point he overrides the system and presents a better result. They're the curtain. They give the players the impression that it's not just all unfettered GM fiat, and the illusion that they have some idea of their characters' abilities and some control over their characters' success or failure. (If that were true, PCs would fail a lot more often!) I understand. I have very little interest in 5e as a player, myself. But, I'm delighted to run it, and there's no shortage of players, so far. A good overview of the shifting philosophies behind resolution systems in the evolution of D&D. (Omitting of course, the 'not D&D' anathema that was 4e.) [/QUOTE]

Verification