this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
197 points (96.2% liked)

Games

16800 readers
876 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But in that example, it’s not that he can’t read today, it’s that in this case, he failed to decipher the riddle, and you or the DM role play exactly why that is.

That's thin meat for roleplaying, and probably discouraging for the wizard who wants to be smart.

I don’t see what benefit there is for a consistent bump in the middle of your dice results when you’re looking for success or failure,

I like being consistently good at stuff. Every time I flub it on like a 5 I'm annoyed. Like, this is my character's high concept why do I still have a huge chance of beefing it. With, again, little to no mechanics to succeed at a cost or fail forward.

I don't feel the same way when a dice pool betrays me. If I roll [6, 2, 5, 4, 7] in Mage I can look at it and go "wow, I guess I fucked up". Feels different when it's just 1d20 comes out with a 3.

But predictable mechanics mean that I can plan tactically,

You can have understandable mechanics with the stuff I described. And about as predictable as regular DND, where people can pass or fail checks.

Some of what I described would open whole new tactical fronts. Like, if you have spell sequences, you'd want to consider how far to let an enemy go before you really need to deal with them. Or if you want to try to plan around your wizard using them.

Anything where the spell doesn't fire instantly also opens new fronts.

I also forgot to complain how magic doesn't get interrupted in 5e. You used to be able to interrupt casters by getting up in their face. I see why they removed it- players don't like it, too hard, losing your spell sucks- but it removed an important depth.

All of this would kind of be dragged down by spells-per-rest, but that's a separate topic .

You can’t guarantee success, but you can influence your odds in a bunch of ways

5e has vanishingly few ways of influencing the odds. No flanking. Expensive aid-another/teamwork. No situational bonuses. Few resources to dip into. I'm assuming a party that's like levels 1-5 because that's where most people play, and without a lot of magic items because that's the default game assumption. Because the magic item rules are so thin, you can actually patch a lot of these problems with items. But that's a patch.

This may vary by DM, but I’m still actively engaged in deducing HP, AC, and any other relevant values about the things we’re fighting while it’s not my turn, and our DM accommodates us doing that.

This is extremely metagamey, and not very interesting to me. Some DMs just tell you the numbers. And even so, that's only so much you can do until you figure it out.

Compare Fate for example. You can defend someone else on their turn. Shit, I forgot, DND doesn't even have this concept. But yeah, in Fate you're engaged when other people are going because you might need to leap in to defend them, or spend a fate point to help them out. That's engaging with the game a lot more than "I wonder what their AC is?"

I think at this point we might have to chalk this up to we want different things from games, and have different preferences. Some people like mayonnaise. That's okay.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That’s thin meat for roleplaying, and probably discouraging for the wizard who wants to be smart.

You still get to be smart most of the time due to where you put your points and proficiencies, but you're not all-knowing.

I like being consistently good at stuff.

But that makes you consistently middle of the road. The 1d20 still has that modifier to make you consistently good.

You used to be able to interrupt casters by getting up in their face. I see why they removed it- players don’t like it, too hard, losing your spell sucks- but it removed an important depth.

I don't like it for similar reasons. It's that thing where you said sometimes you miss, but I think it feels worse.

5e has vanishingly few ways of influencing the odds. No flanking. Expensive aid-another/teamwork. No situational bonuses. Few resources to dip into.

We play with +2 flanking rules. There are situational advantage rolls and such. Classes start with their resources quite early on.

You can defend someone else on their turn. Shit, I forgot, DND doesn’t even have this concept.

You can ready an action to trigger under certain conditions.

Some people like mayonnaise.

A ton of people like mayonnaise. I'm really not trying to pick a fight with you, and I appreciate this discussion, but you've been trying to say how bad mayonnaise is this whole time when I like mayonnaise, haha. At other times, I'll be interested in other condiments too, but mayonnaise is good on a lot of food, and it's easy to come by.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Plot twist: I like mayonnaise. To extend this metaphor, I'm just sick of it after eating nothing but mayo for a few years.

I appreciate you being patient. I'm not the most persuasive writer (especially on my phone), but I hope at least some of what I wrote gave you stuff to think about.

Ultimately, if you're having fun with your group that's what matters most. It sounds like you are. Would you have more or less fun with a different system? Maybe. I think it's good to try different stuff, but the primary goal remains having fun with friends.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's just that when I've seen so many problems in other systems that this one solves, it's astounding that someone can say the Larian DNA is the only thing making BG3 playable, haha.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

I honestly forgot that's how this thread started.

I think I would have liked it better if it wasn't so dnd5e, but DND is definitely playable.

I mean, I enjoyed Solasta, too, and that doesn't have any of the larian magic in it.