D&D 5E Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)

[Imaro]

Oh, I see - misunderstanding, here, I think. I wasn't suggesting that sequence as a mechanism for D&D (or any RPG, really), just presenting it as a story building technique separate from RPG rules, as such. As I said, it's a process from McKee's book, not from any RPG rules.

Yeah, my bad... I thought you were laying those points out as a guideline for how characters should be created.

 

[pemerton]

they are D&D players I'm assuming they choose to play D&D. With that choice made the rules of D&D can force or push a certain play style or agenda.

Well, they do, namely, an agenda of "always use your best numbers whenever possible". Which in turn creates pressures on the system that we can see in both 3E and 4e. [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] was pointing to a rules approach which can relieve some of those pressures.

 

[Hussar]

Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a for...

it was also just a funny story but some Pelops jumped on it telling me how wrong it was...

Not quite. Some people jumped in to say how wrong it would be for our tables.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Not quite. Some people jumped in to say how wrong it would be for our tables.

try again... I already said I wouldn't even run it the same way at two different tables... it is based on the players and the mood of the game... AND PEOPLE KEEP PRETENDING I HAVE TO APPPEAL TO PLAYERS NOT IN MY GAME...

 

[Hussar]

Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a for...

Then what was your point? If your story only applies to five other people, then it's not terribly useful is it? Other than, "know your players" I suppose. But that's not how it looked.

It looked like you were trying to offer general advice in running a game. When I said this would not be fun for me and mine, you tried to argue that it's better to just make up than follow the rules.

Which again for me would be the opposite of fun. It works for your group, great. But it certainly wouldn't for mine.

 

[Bedrockgames]

i think you guys may be miscommunicating. Sounds like some are talking about what type of style play the mechanics of the game should encourage, some are talking about what style game and group tailored techniques they prefer, and others are speaking about what style and advice is best unviersally. I think Hussar's point is he is just saying what works at his table, not what he thinks should be the default system or a gaming approach embraced by others.

 

[Imaro]

Well, they do, namely, an agenda of "always use your best numbers whenever possible". Which in turn creates pressures on the system that we can see in both 3E and 4e. @Manbearcat was pointing to a rules approach which can relieve some of those pressures.

I never said they didn't... I'm having a hard time understanding the point of this post, I know what Manbearcat was trying to do with his rules approach and was answering the question of how I thought the general D&D audience would feel about said changes...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Then what was your point? If your story only applies to five other people, then it's not terribly useful is it? Other than, "know your players" I suppose. But that's not how it looked.

It looked like you were trying to offer general advice in running a game. When I said this would not be fun for me and mine, you tried to argue that it's better to just make up than follow the rules.

Which again for me would be the opposite of fun. It works for your group, great. But it certainly wouldn't for mine.

This all started becuse i said encounter length got MUCH longer in 4e then 3e, i said back in 2e we had 10-15 min fights with an occasional 5 min or 25+ min one... in 3e fights eaither ended in the first round or last very little time with it being odd for one to last 25 mins in 4e almost every fight took a half hour or longer and it was not unheard of for a.gight to be over an.hour


When i.was told 3e fights could not be run that fast I made and another poster where compairing set up time an dplayer turn length during that part I made an off hand joke about my Home PCs once ending an impossible encounter with one spell... how ever since that poster didnt like that I had shown how to run faster encounters in 3e already he decided to nit pick a one off instead of continueing on the fact that I could run such "fast" encounters... then others jumped in to tell me why my call was wrong... now for 10 pages and three days i have tried to explain why i made the call i did, and have been cslled a dumb DM who doesnt know how to run and a.bad Dm



By the way the real arguments that got side lined were:
A) I liked 2e style of encounter becuse 3e was too swingy and 4e too long
B) You could use mini's or Theater of the mind in any edtion
C) Any edtion over time can be house rule dto work for anyone
D) I do not belive in sand box or railroad at 100% but am much more sandbox
E) No edtion is perfect and each has it's merits and flaws

 

[Derren]

In my experience the only thing what made 3E combats long were the players themselves by not remembering their abilities/spells or starting to plan only when it was their turn instead of doing that before while the others were still moving/rolling.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In my experience the only thing what made 3E combats long were the players themselves by not remembering their abilities/spells or starting to plan only when it was their turn instead of doing that before while the others were still moving/rolling.

every edtion had players who would not pay attention of plan... I also think 4e came at the wrong time, because in 2006 none of us had smart phones or tablets, and only half the table did this thing called 'text message'

by 2011 2 of the people I knew who play didn't have either a tablet or a smart phone (and some had BOTH). Everyone knew what texting was, but only about half of us were really into it.

today I know 3 people total who do not have smart phones or tablets, and none of them are RPG players (2 of those three are my grandparents)

I know 4e had a lot of things that made those fights long, but I often wonder if no one had fruit ninja/ Angry birds/ candy crush going and no one could be having a converstion without really talking on the phone, and no one could be internet surfing... would it play faster? Then again maybe I'm just a luddite