Pcgen pathfinder datasets2/21/2023 ![]() ![]() Even then, my playgroup is constantly looking for ways to introduce choice, depth, and diversity back into the 5e ruleset somehow, and unfortunately we're butting up against the strict limitations of the DDB tool doing it. I would've jumped ship and taken my money with me long since if not for what the DDB team built here. ![]() I can say that the only reason I'm still running 5e instead of switching to a system that does not assume everyone using it is as dumb as a sack of sand and cannot handle ANY cognitive load whatsoever is because of the DDB tool. Here, let me emphasize it more: needs needs needs needs needs needs NEEDS - a greater degree of depth for those players who're slowly starving to death on the core 5e rules. The game needs - and I heavily emphasize that word. My own concern is that eventually, Wizards is going to find out that 5e cannot retain players. The weapon is common enough that the PC did learn how to use one, so why couldn't there be at least a +1 such weapon somewhere?Įnchanting is actually a thing. The same went for your character build- unbound stats meant that you basically had to run perfect optimization in building up everything or you'd wind up being too weak to be effective at higher levels.Īnd that's the issue with adding complexity- too much of the extra stuff that was in those games was there just to pad page count without adding anything meaningful. Sure, there were enough weapon options for an entire splatbook, but most of them were sub-optimal in stats and also rare enough that specializing in one just meant that you were insuring that you'd never find one as treasure unless the GM felt sorry for you ad inexplicably tossed a +1 Gnome Hook-Hammer into a chest in a dungeon. Third Edition and Pathfinder had a lot more rules and a lot more character design options than 5E, that's true.Īnd most of it was really a straitjacket that punished you for not taking one of a few optimal character designs. And no, DDB doesn't particularly help with issues of fixing the game, which is just another indication of how much 5e's assumption of the complete and utter stupidity of all its players pervades the entire hobby. 5e despises that sort of rules patching, despite ostensibly being designed with exactly that flexibility in mind. All the while disregarding that sometimes, what a given game wants to homebrew is new rules, either because existing rules are bad and should feel bad (see notes on grappling above) or because there are no existing rules and a table wants to work up a system to use as a baseline reference rather than having the DM wing it whenever that situation arises. Every one goes out of its way to stress multiple times that the preferred method is to stay within the rules, pushing many methods onto both players and DMs of reflavoring something to better fit a desired aesthetic whilst remaining in strict compliance with The Rules. If an action, option, or possibility is not ennumerated in the PHB or the DMG, a player is not permitted to make that action regardless of what the scene/story/fluff say.įurthermore, homebrew creation of rules, items, critters, or whatever else is held up as an absolute last resort in all three core books. There's a list of "Actions in Combat' in the PHB - those are the sum totality of the actions your character can take, both on and off the battlefield. Not just on the part of the DM, but on the part of the players, as well. Any deviation from the rules, for any reason, is not allowed. That a game can conform to the rules and expectations of Adventurer's League, or it can be wrong.Īdventurer's League does not allow a DM to do any DMing - the position of 'Dungeon Master' is supposed to be filled by someone as close to a computer operating system as possible. Wizards mandates that Adventurer's League play is the highest, best, and most perfect form of D&D 5e play. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |