Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Abstruse" data-source="post: 5952056" data-attributes="member: 6669048">I selected &quot;no&quot; solely because of the use of the word &quot;early&quot; in the poll.I seriously doubt that most groups use even the sort of social rules we've had in previous editions. Rules for complex social interactions have never really been a part of D&amp;D, as most groups either roleplay it all the way through, or they just make a single check or opposed check to gloss over it and get back to monster fightin'.However, there's a demand for these sort of rules. Many people like running social-based games and a rules module like this would be required to run something similar to Game of Thrones due to the amount of political infighting in the show. They can and should make detailed rules for social interaction to allow groups who want that sort of play to use it. It might also bring back a resurgence in some of the older campaign settings where politics were important, such as the city of Waterdeep or Birthright (at least from what I understand, only briefly skimmed those books).It's the word &quot;early&quot; that I disagree with. There is a lot more that's more important to a new D&amp;D system to me than social interaction. Tactical combat, detailed exploration rules, skills, various character classes/races/themes, iconic monsters, character creation, weapons, armor, magic items, spells...there's a lot that's more important to core of what the game is than social interactions and I honestly think it should be one of the last rules modules playtested. Hell, they probably wouldn't even need to both with them until after the core books are published, introducing those rules modules in a splatbook or campaign setting book that's focused on more social interaction oriented play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Abstruse, post: 5952056, member: 6669048"] I selected "no" solely because of the use of the word "early" in the poll. I seriously doubt that most groups use even the sort of social rules we've had in previous editions. Rules for complex social interactions have never really been a part of D&D, as most groups either roleplay it all the way through, or they just make a single check or opposed check to gloss over it and get back to monster fightin'. However, there's a demand for these sort of rules. Many people like running social-based games and a rules module like this would be required to run something similar to Game of Thrones due to the amount of political infighting in the show. They can and should make detailed rules for social interaction to allow groups who want that sort of play to use it. It might also bring back a resurgence in some of the older campaign settings where politics were important, such as the city of Waterdeep or Birthright (at least from what I understand, only briefly skimmed those books). It's the word "early" that I disagree with. There is a lot more that's more important to a new D&D system to me than social interaction. Tactical combat, detailed exploration rules, skills, various character classes/races/themes, iconic monsters, character creation, weapons, armor, magic items, spells...there's a lot that's more important to core of what the game is than social interactions and I honestly think it should be one of the [I]last[/I] rules modules playtested. Hell, they probably wouldn't even need to both with them until after the core books are published, introducing those rules modules in a splatbook or campaign setting book that's focused on more social interaction oriented play. [/QUOTE]

Verification