D&D General Why Editions Don't Matter

[pemerton]

I very much doubt anyone wants to play that complete game over the relative incompleteness of 5e

Maybe you'd be surprised! (Or maybe not.)

 

[Umbran]

Maybe they're familiar with D&D vampires and aren't confident that classic werewolf tropes apply?

Okay, so let's look at this -

Why are they so concerned with getting the werewolf as the book says that this matters?

 

[Maxperson]

With an escape valve as huge as "rulings, not rules", 5e is definltely playable "RAW".

It's rulings OVER rules, meaning when the rules get in the way or don't cover something, make a ruling and move on. They never suggested not having rules.

 

[Mannahnin]

I'm reminded of that bit from Michael Scott in the Office:

It's all meant to be a "joke" to Michael Scott; however, the joke is on Michael Scott who fails to see how his comment still is offensive, doubly so in the context of the show, as this "retarded" comment came on the heels of calling one his employees "gay," which leads to his employee being outed to his coworkers. But hooray for the algorithim.

I'm going to highlight this comparison but I'm not sure I'm capable of adequately expressing comment on it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Okay, so let's look at this -

Why are they so concerned with getting the werewolf as the book says that this matters?

Because they paid for a book with werewolf rules?

What should the expectation of buying an RPG sourcebook be if not to provide rules for implementing concepts as part of the game or provide context for how the work in the game's universe?

Especially when it does do that for other subjects.

That, to me, is the difference between rules lite and incomplete.

Rules Lite gives you a resolution mechanic and some examples and tells you how to apply those examples elsewhere.

Incomplete has very specific rules for some things and then for others is vague or non-existent.

We know how hags operate very specifically. We know how and why a dragon grows. And let's not get started on how different krakens are from the popular concept. But we have to do it ourselves and depend on unconnected pop culture (with is not unified as people are acting on this thread) for werewolves.

 

[TwoSix]

Huh? Ability checks are that method.

"I perform an interpretive dance to soothe the wolf-spirit inhabiting the infected peasant and draw it out." What ability check would you use for that declaration in 5e?

The only point I'm trying to argue here is that "completeness" isn't really much of a virtue in TTRPG design; I don't feel like you actually disagree with that.

 

[Oofta]

Because 5e has different, specified resolution methods for different tasks and actions. And it doesn't have a default resolution method to fall back on for non-specified declarations. There are suggestions and methodologies for the DM to make a determination, but there is not a specified method in the core rules.

In "Coin-flip" game, the player can declare "I use my magic to remove the curse of lycanthropy from the afflicted peasant" and the player and DM know exactly how to determine that works. In 5e, the DM can determine any number of possible resolution methods to that attempt, but there is no specified method to make that resolution; thus, I argue it's "incomplete".

Now, you could certainly argue that "Use the resolution methods specified in the book, if none is found, make up your own ad-hoc resolution" is also a complete ruleset. I can't really argue specifically against it, but I personally feel "define an ad-hoc method" is less complete than "always use the resolution method."

This is all really abstract, of course, but the coin-flip model is always a nice hypothetical model to determine what gains are made by adding exceptions to a generic ruleset.

Has any version of the game had specifics for every situation? Because it's a never ending rabbit hole that never really fixed the issue in my experience. It is simply not true that you are not given a default resolution method. It's explained in chapter 8 in the DMG. If you choose to use dice to resolve uncertainty (as opposed to ignoring the dice) you pick an ability score mod, decide if a proficiency applies and the DM sets a DC. It works as well as anything we had in previous editions in my experience and it leads to significantly smoother play.

You may not like the direction they took, but these kind of things will always be on a spectrum. On the one end you have the dice flip, on the other end you have a board game like Murder in Baldur's Gate or one of the miniature skirmish games WOTC has come out with. The dice flip is close to what the video was talking about that still called it D&D while 3.x and 4E were closer to the board game end of the spectrum than 5E.

I can have fun with a coin flip game. I can have fun with a D&D Miniatures game. I happen to prefer 5E's approach and it seems to work well enough for a lot of people, you may prefer more specific examples. But saying there is no default way to resolve uncertainty given? Simply not true.

 

[Maxperson]

It's the dark moon you have to watch out for. Solinari and Lunitari, you can see and prepare for.

One you can't see, so it's constantly a New Moon. One is constantly red, so it's always a Blood Moon(eclipsed). One is normal and gives a Full Moon.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Now, you could certainly argue that "Use the resolution methods specified in the book, if none is found, make up your own ad-hoc resolution" is also a complete ruleset.

I only play rulesets that aren't quite np-complete .

Basically, I get the two largest versions of Cortex Prime I can find and then I mix 'em up and play with the result.

 

[Charlaquin]

"I perform an interpretive dance to soothe the wolf-spirit inhabiting the infected peasant and draw it out." What ability check would you use for that declaration in 5e?

If this is something that can succeed, can fail, and has a cost or consequence for failure (not enough context for me to tell from this description alone), I’d call for a Charisma check. Performance or Animal Handling would probably allow you to add your Proficiency Bonus.

The only point I'm trying to argue here is that "completeness" isn't really much of a virtue in TTRPG design; I don't feel like you actually disagree with that.

I’m not sure because it seems like we have very different ideas of what “completeness” means. I do think being incomplete, as I understand it, is a bad thing for an RPG because it would make the game unplayable in certain circumstances.