this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
105 points (100.0% liked)

RPGMemes

251 readers
1 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I recommend this video to look more into OSR philosophy regarding the rules: https://www.youtube.com/live/bCxZ3TivVUM?si=aZ-y2U_AVjn9a6Ua

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 29 points 2 years ago (2 children)

5e has both too many rules and not enough rules.

It has very specific rules in some places. Item interactions, many spell specifics, grapple, holding your breath, etc.

It has very lackluster rules in other places. Social conflict, item and spell crafting, metagame stuff like making your own class or species.

I think a lot of people playing DND would be happier playing a different system. Just not the same system for everyone.

[–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exactly. It's sort of an uncomfortable middle ground, but also just kind of messy.

And I'm tired, as someone who DMed it a bunch, hearing people act like broken or missing rules aren't a problem, or somehow even a good thing, because the DM can just make something up. Yeah, not shit. I can do that in literally any game I run. It's just unpleasant to do in 5e, yet I have to do it all the damn time to keep the game running smoothly. I'd rather have a game that either supports me as a GM, or is easier to improvise.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it was a different thread where I posted about how a guy in my dnd group straight face told us something like "the beauty of DND is we can just try out different rules. If we want to do a chase scene we can try it one way, and if it doesn't work or we don't like it we can try something else".

I'm just like that's not a unique property of DND. That's just how playing make believe works. And I'd rather have a game that runs okay out of the box rather than keep playtesting as a DM, or deal with unchecked dm whims as a player.

[–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 3 points 2 years ago

That sounds familiar! Partly because I recall reading that, but also because it's a frustratingly common scenario.

D&D is, for a ton of people, synonymous with tabletop RPGs. Often that means people think the things they like about playing tabletop RPGs are unique to D&D, even they aren't.

What gets me are people who complain about Pathfinder 2e having more rules. You're just as free to ignore them, and no one has to read much less memorize all the rules. Besides, is anyone under the illusion that players are learning all the rules to 5e?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 24 points 2 years ago

5e isn't just needlessly complex, it is an unreferencable mess that has very poor general rules with lots of exceptions and poor standardization. The rules for traveling are so misplaced that most players don't know they exist, not that it's possible to find them when needed. And when there are general rules, they tend to be unfun. Stuff like crafting has no depth in 5e, it's just time + gold = item. It might "work", but it's just bookkeeping there is no hidden fun.

For fantasy, I prefer Hackmaster 5e, because it keeps the complexity and detail without dumping special case rules onto players. It's not perfect, but it's way more engaging and characters feel way more interesting. WFRP 4e is also nice, but not as deep (it does suffer from rules being scattered everywhere). I'll likely end up playing OSE ot some point.

[–] sammytheman666@ttrpg.network 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If you got to look up rules and nobody cares or wants to, skip it. Its my advice. Use rules only if its necessary and soemwhat contributing to a fun experience.

This is universal.

[–] AcidOctopus@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This. Our entire campaign is home-brewed using the 5e ruleset, but the application of those rules is selective when it needs to be.

For the most part, we're following them, but if there's a rule that results in a level of attention to detail that we simply don't care to implement, or would have less fun trying to religiously adhere too, we just scrap it in favour of something a bit more light-touch and call it a house rule.

Rules provide a great framework to base your game on, but the ultimate aim is to create an enjoyable experience and have fun, so bend them and break them when and where you need to for the benefit of all involved.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

One risk with this is when you have a new player join your group. They might expect raw and be surprised by a whole kettle of home brew.

I for one would be annoyed if I joined a group and found they were ignoring the rest rules. They may be having fun but I would have made different decisions if I'd known what they were actually playing.

[–] sammytheman666@ttrpg.network 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Every change should be treated the same : you tell about them at character creation and you tell them during the game while allowing for their set of rules on the present session if you cannot think of them in advance. Homebrew, legal rules, anything should be the same. It's not during a game that you tell the multiclass druid cleric that the steroid goodberries dont work in your game, as he's trying to heal someone after a fight. This actually happened to me. Don't fucking nerf the core of a character's mechanics midgame.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DmMacniel@feddit.de 16 points 2 years ago (24 children)

5e is pretty light though, and in most cases too light so the DM has no idea what to do and has to resort to "Rulings".

PF2e on the otherhand is crunchy AF and its awesome like that. It doesn´t have extra rules for everything, its all based on the same framework, which is pretty awesome.

[–] TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.network 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You see, OSR fans would argue both 5e and Pathfinder have broken core rules engine because if it was well designed, you could apply it to all situations and wouldn't need separate rules for every minutia. By these standards 5e is crunch heavy with unnecessary things like "how to hold your breath"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

5e has too many rules? If anything it seems to be lacking rules. D&D in general has too many options, but 5e often has nothing if you want rules to handle specific non-combat situations,

When systems go even lighter, it stops even feeling like we are playing a Game, and it starts feeling like annotated improv, which is very much not what I want to play. It never feels right to me as a player to be making sweeping declarations without knowledge of what the GM and the other players are planning.

[–] TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.network 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Okay, explain to me why do you need rules for holding your breath in 5e. Because that's a good example of too many rules, in OSR you would use something already existing.

And you do you, but really the OSR tend to teach players to find ways to avoid rolling altogether by stacking deck in their favor before attempting something.

[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Frankly I could point it right back at you as the example of a good thing to have. If you need to dive underwater without equipment or cross smoke during a fire, it's useful to have a reference of how long you can keep at it, how many rounds does that take, how much distance you can cross, what happens once you can't keep at it anymore. We are talking about adventurers, it's surprising that this is somehow thought of as an irrelevant edge case.

Are we expecting that the player should always have spells or some magic scuba for this?

I really don't get what's with OSR and not wanting to roll. I'm playing an RPG, I'm up for rolling. Though in this case, the rule does not even require rolling until you are already drowning.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] sammytheman666@ttrpg.network 5 points 2 years ago

For the few times your players want to swim a lot underwater OR if you use monsters designed to drown them long term

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] AndrasKrigare 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I hereby grant everyone permission to make up whatever rules they want for their rule sets.

Having rules for more situations is a feature, not a bug. You can always choose not to look up the rule and make something up, but if you ever want something that a designer spent some time on instead of making it up on the fly, you have the option

[–] TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

On the other hand, if you had basic rules be flexible and understandable enough, you could by common sense apply them to most of situations and devs could focus on polishing the edges where you would need a specific rules, which should be few and far in-between.

[–] Dice@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 years ago

It really is crazy how hard new players defend 5e and pf2 when so many other games make GMing actually fun and easy.

[–] EssentialCoffee@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

Rule 1: The DM describes the environment.

Rule 2: The players describe what they want to do.

Rule 3: The DM narrates the results of the adventurers actions.

The rules on how to play are pretty basic and very flexible. You can easily play an entire game or campaign not going past those three rules or needing anything more in depth than that.

Some folks like crunch. Some folks like heavy crunch, some like light crunch. Some folks just want a mushy bowl of cereal. We're all just playing make believe. What rules you use is up to your table and what kind of crunch they want.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Pyro@pawb.social 11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Depends on the game the group likes. More narrative driven game it can conflict and have issues

However, there is something nice about knowing a balanced way to do x or y across the board and at different tables.

A good gm should be able to make a note of something or make a quick call especially in pf2e case were generic difficulty dc per level is given

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago (4 children)

However, there is something nice about knowing a balanced way to do x or y across the board and at different tables.

I don't agree with this argument. Balancing is the job of the GM. Unless the GM acts as a glorified screenreader who only reads a pre-made adventure to the players with no influence what happens. But if the GM decides what monsters you run into, the GM has more influence over the balancing than the game framework. So why not lean into it fully and make the GM responsible for the whole balancing?

I mean, pen&paper RPGs aren't a players vs GM game, but instead the GM plays together with the players to create an interesting experience where everyone has fun. No need for the framework to do balancing, because a good GM will do that.

[–] hukumka@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

While GM decides what monsters to throw into players, they still need to know what they could use without it being either underwhelming or overwhelming. You dismiss this simply by saying: "just be a good DM".

  • New DM's will want guidelines to start from.
  • If combat is important having written rules help to use consistent ruling on same situation in different instances.
  • Story focused DM might reduce amount of effort needed to plan combat, since there is no need to build it from scratch.

Disadvantage of having to look up rules then you don't remember them could be mitigated by just saying: Look guys, I don't remember ruling now, so not to break the flow, I will rule it this way, and look it up later.

So while for most players rule heavy systems are less accessible, they are actually more accessible for many DMs, and since mastering have much higher barrier of entry, such systems at least should not be dismissed outright.

[–] Horst_Voller@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Balancing is the job of the GM.

And some systems make that job easier for the GM than other systems. Winning all the time without challenge is boring. Getting TPKd every other session does not feel good. A good GM should hit somewhere in-between. So you either have a system that helps you do that or you really need to have a lot of experience.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jagermo@feddit.de 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Meh, don't play it, then. Why turn everything into a competiton?

[–] tissek@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 years ago

Because ~~edition~~ system wars are fun?

(in moderation)

[–] Rheios@ttrpg.network 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Simple rules that can describe almost every situation are also rules that over-generalize characters to the detriment of options (everyone's noticing the same things, instead of perception allowing more observant characters to do what they could do), over-include the player's capabilities in place of the character's. (Players conversational skills failing to match with those of the character they intend to play), overly abstract what they describe (a monster's "power" or a character's actual abilities meaning something in adjudication but nothing consistent/concrete enough in-world), or demand a DM adjudicate without reinforcement or restriction (In the absence of rules every corner case ruling risks the danger of turning the table into a debate between PCs and the DM, inviting rapid ends and either producing embittered DMs or embittered players* - especially under the "pack it up" approach the video suggests - and helping to increase combative tables in the future.)

The games that OSR takes inspiration from did a lot right in their mortal power-level, reasonable growth, real risk of danger, and humanistic tones but if you're trying to sell me that the growth of rules that followed aren't a direct result of weaknesses in those games? I don't think we'll agree.

*The "Dorkness Rising" problem, for a slightly more light-hearted allusion.

[–] insurgenRat 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I might be misunderstanding but what you're talking about is basically just failures of a DM.

DMing osr style games requires being more than a simple automaton applying the rules. The systems are simple to allow you to spend your energy elsewhere. I'll use OSE as an example as that's what I'm currently DMing.

Let's take perception. Firstly if something matters from a fun perspective it should be obvious. For example, if overcoming a trap is fun then the overcoming should involve play, not dice rolls which are there to abstract over tedious or uncertain play. For example a large magical fire blocking the corridor requires no perception but will involve a lot of experimentation to find a way past.

Or if we are wanting a perception roll like event: Lets say players are stuck and have no ideas for finding a secret door they think is likely there. Who are the characters? not their stats who are they? Ok someone was a farmer prior? huh ok. Give them a clue to follow like "hey Jake the farmer, you notice the air in this room smells familiar, there's a maddening scent of petrichor which has no place on a dry stone chamber like this one" see what happens. Alternative if Jake asks for a clue ask Jake to describe some way in which who he is applies to the context and set an ability check for a true or false clue. Suddenly a lack of rules is freedom for players to build up their character mythos on the fly.

Likewise for player skill stuff. No reason a player needs to narrate a conversation anymore than swing an actual sword. If a player asks me if they can make an impassioned arguement based on legal precedent, a sense of justice, and the illegitimacy of a ruler who cannot protect their vassels to the King's guard then they make such an argument as appropriate to their character's level of skill.

[–] avalokitesha@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago (8 children)

Neiter you nor the person you're replying to is wrong, but the way I see it you're coming from different angles.

You're coming from the view of an experienced GM, while the person before you worries about people getting in the game or struggle with their social skills.

Imho, both ruleset have their place and everything depends on the group, what they want, what their personalities are and how experienced they are.

I would never run a table because I don't think I could handle it if one of the players got combative, and that danger is higher when you go rules light I would guess.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] darq@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I don't find 5e bloated exactly. But I do think it has a few too many systems in place, sometimes with overlapping use-cases.

Like attacks, skill checks, saves... They're all basically the same thing, an opposed check, but they have slightly different rules. Sometimes the player is rolling against a target, but sometimes the target is rolling to save against? It's a little strange, and adds a bit of extra complexity where I don't really think it's necessary.

A lot of it is just legacy systems that are kept because it wouldn't be D&D without them.

[–] Nerorero@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago

That's why I enjoy Weird Wizard and Demon Lord. They streamline this overlap pretty well and removed the bloat

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Veraticus@lib.lgbt 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It's true; 5E and most versions of D&D are just too heavy and get in the way of actually having fun.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ssgtmccrae@ttrpg.network 6 points 2 years ago

I'm really looking forward to 'Project: Black Flag' aka 'Tales of the Valiant' aka 'CORE Ruleset', which a like-like to 5e (compatible in regard to power-scaling and adventures) that's in development right now. My community plans to switch to it as soon as it's out as they are cleaning up a lot of rules and pushing for a world-agnostic system that feels a lot better from both a player and a DM.

[–] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't know who needs to hear this, but you can try games Powered by the Apocalypse!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tissek@ttrpg.network 6 points 2 years ago

Me and OSR are a complete mismatch in execution. But we work in theory and design. Where we clash is where the meme is. Simple basic rules that are to be used in pretty much every situation. Where the GM is empowered to make those rulings. Where the GM is King.

I have tried running them and constantly kept asking myself "according to the rules what am I supposed to do?" as I want to run systems as they want to be ran. What is a failure? How does the outcome space look like? And when I get to play I feel I get to relinquish so much control to the GM that I feel almost powerless. The GMs rulings and fiat rules. Sure these are my experiences and I can love OSRs and their designs while not wanting to acctually play them.

[–] GlyphOfAdBlocking@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

Take a look at Knave. It is a parring down of 5e.

[–] Gutless2615@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 years ago

This is why I play Shadowdark. It’s amazing. All the best bits of 5e design, none of the cruft. Ruleslite is the way to go.

[–] Nepalman230@ttrpg.network 3 points 2 years ago

Hello! So I’m not trying to stir the pot or anything.

Have you looked at Shadowdark?

https://www.enworld.org/threads/plenty-of-time-to-die-a-shadowdark-review.697134/

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/m/product/413713

It was very highly anticipated, had a very successful Kickstarter, and he’s been very well reviewed.

The author has written several well reviewed fifth edition adventures.

Shorthand way to describe it I’ve seen is, modern rules, old school style.

I’m throwing this out there, because it has been described as an old-school variant of fifth edition.

It is so old school that you have to do three d6 down the line.

Also, there is a very interesting real Times Torch mechanic.

A lot of Osr games, put attention on things like scarcity and time this phone put a lot of attention on light.

I haven’t read it so I don’t know for sure but to me that sounds like possibly inspired by dark dungeons. Although I know that wasn’t the first game to have a very prominent darkness mechanic either.

Just wanted to throw this out here I never want anybody to change game systems. I just thought it might be interesting for people who hadn’t heard of it.

load more comments
view more: next ›