This is a great post... The art of DnD and roleplaying has evolved and the resource management side is all but non existent at most tables. Ammo, rations, spell components... Encumbrance in many cases.
But where is that in RAW? Isn't that a question of how those tables run things, rather than how the rules are written?
you can also roll stats 3d6 in order and embrace the low numbers. instead we usually pick a backstory and class first and slot in an array of numbers after, don't we? because what fun would an unbalanced character be? 5e insists from the start that characters come first and tedious things like encumbrance ("we can't take a mule into a dungeon!") and rations ("I forage for... oh, you have goodberry?") and what fits in a sack ("hurray! a bag of holding for each of us!") only delay us on our way to forwarding the plot.
...but to be clear, I think that at least some of 5e popularity is due to this focus. there are other games for the people who want to carry a l0ft pole and gather hirelings and have all your class abilities at level 1.
We do? In 5e, it is Race, Class, Ability Scores, then Background.
And Standard Array is one option. The stock option is 4d6, best 3, x 6, then place in any order. 4d6 has been around since 1e.
Encumbrance and hauling? "What you want to bring literally everything back? Well... good luck with that. Oh, just that portion? Trivial survival check to make a travois, if any check at all is needed (and skills barely even existed in the beginning in 1e). Many of us who played knew things about RL survival skills.
Every party has Goodberry to spare? That seems a bit of an assumption. Plus foraging means one more 1st level spell available. But it is also a spell that has been around since 1e, so pretty close to as long as the game has existed.
Not sure what DM is handing Bags of Holding out to the party like candy. Again, nothing in the rules says to do so. In my campaigns, those things tend to be a bit rare, at least until mid to high level. Then the party might have one.
This is a great post... The art of DnD and roleplaying has evolved and the resource management side is all but non existent at most tables. Ammo, rations, spell components... Encumbrance in many cases.
But where is that in RAW? Isn't that a question of how those tables run things, rather than how the rules are written?
Where are the RAW written for how to roleplay? I'm not talking about RAW, I'm talking realism and common sense... MOST tables don't worry about those details yet they are still in the game. How many people carry around useless pack items from character creation that they know they'll never use. Why worry about it if you never get hungry or never need to worry about how much weight your carrying?
If anyone is bothered by high fantasy yet give their players/table unlimited ammo and immunity from starvation then it would seem a little hypocritical ehh?
I played at tables where resource management mattered and it was actually fun... But I'd argue it takes a good DM.
To each their own, I'm just saying its hard to be bothered by high fantasy when the game pushes you that way and you still enjoy playing.
Was saying that the resource management part is actually RAW. Even to the extent Goodberry does avoid a need to forage, then one must still use a Goodberry spell every day. Tables that do not worry about resource management are the ones either using optional rules or homebrewing. (So basically, we seem to agree).
So the main feature of this website, the character management tool, has an inventory system allowing a character to manage (add and deduct) their gear in a way much easier than we ever could on prior editions pencil and paper sheets (I would have rubbed holes into mine if I kept track of arrows and spell slots directly on my sheet with a pencil and eraser the way I can and do on my DDB character sheet. Back when I'd use scrap paper for ammo and slots).
This thread started with the OP asking what frankly seemed more a "vibes" based misreading of a key section on running the game in the DMG. That post was corrected by what's actually in the DMG. The DMG explicitly states its definition of high fantasy is the default mode of D&D, and that seems to be very much the case. Since then, this discussion has devolved into some pseudo "academic" intervention into the definition of Sword and Sorcery (replete with an infomercial for a well regarded fan treatise of S&S) as some sort of refutation of present D&D, or a post, or something. Amid that Sword [conjunction] Sorcery debate we're now getting vibes posts and speculative vibes both on whether low magic or attention to gear are impossibilities in D&D, with little engagement with what the actual text, the DMG, says (which if anyone with academic pretensions should know, is a key crux between pretending to be "academic" and shallow pedantry), and whether those DMG statements are valid.
I dunno where what people think is coming from, but I'm playing in a 5e game right now (on this very board, and I think some of y'all might be playing with me) where while it's more or less default 5e definition of high fantasy, we're nevertheless tracking our gear etc. It just seems this thread has predictably devolved into dueling presumptions about how some "they" play D&D where really, what actually would matter, be literally substantive, to this discussion would be whether posters have actually tried departing from the 5e definition of "high fantasy" using either the guidelines in the DMG or the many third party products that try to do so, some of which you can even get on this site.
This is a great post... The art of DnD and roleplaying has evolved and the resource management side is all but non existent at most tables. Ammo, rations, spell components... Encumbrance in many cases.
But where is that in RAW? Isn't that a question of how those tables run things, rather than how the rules are written?
Where are the RAW written for how to roleplay? I'm not talking about RAW, I'm talking realism and common sense... MOST tables don't worry about those details yet they are still in the game. How many people carry around useless pack items from character creation that they know they'll never use. Why worry about it if you never get hungry or never need to worry about how much weight your carrying?
If anyone is bothered by high fantasy yet give their players/table unlimited ammo and immunity from starvation then it would seem a little hypocritical ehh?
I played at tables where resource management mattered and it was actually fun... But I'd argue it takes a good DM.
To each their own, I'm just saying its hard to be bothered by high fantasy when the game pushes you that way and you still enjoy playing.
Was saying that the resource management part is actually RAW. Even to the extent Goodberry does avoid a need to forage, then one must still use a Goodberry spell every day. Tables that do not worry about resource management are the ones either using optional rules or homebrewing. (So basically, we seem to agree).
Oh I gotcha, my bad. Yep we agree.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We do? In 5e, it is Race, Class, Ability Scores, then Background.
And Standard Array is one option. The stock option is 4d6, best 3, x 6, then place in any order. 4d6 has been around since 1e.
Encumbrance and hauling? "What you want to bring literally everything back? Well... good luck with that. Oh, just that portion? Trivial survival check to make a travois, if any check at all is needed (and skills barely even existed in the beginning in 1e). Many of us who played knew things about RL survival skills.
Every party has Goodberry to spare? That seems a bit of an assumption. Plus foraging means one more 1st level spell available. But it is also a spell that has been around since 1e, so pretty close to as long as the game has existed.
Not sure what DM is handing Bags of Holding out to the party like candy. Again, nothing in the rules says to do so. In my campaigns, those things tend to be a bit rare, at least until mid to high level. Then the party might have one.
Was saying that the resource management part is actually RAW. Even to the extent Goodberry does avoid a need to forage, then one must still use a Goodberry spell every day. Tables that do not worry about resource management are the ones either using optional rules or homebrewing. (So basically, we seem to agree).
No it isn't. They could easily have balanced on everyone being weak. The reason they didn't is because players like super powerful characters.
So the main feature of this website, the character management tool, has an inventory system allowing a character to manage (add and deduct) their gear in a way much easier than we ever could on prior editions pencil and paper sheets (I would have rubbed holes into mine if I kept track of arrows and spell slots directly on my sheet with a pencil and eraser the way I can and do on my DDB character sheet. Back when I'd use scrap paper for ammo and slots).
This thread started with the OP asking what frankly seemed more a "vibes" based misreading of a key section on running the game in the DMG. That post was corrected by what's actually in the DMG. The DMG explicitly states its definition of high fantasy is the default mode of D&D, and that seems to be very much the case. Since then, this discussion has devolved into some pseudo "academic" intervention into the definition of Sword and Sorcery (replete with an infomercial for a well regarded fan treatise of S&S) as some sort of refutation of present D&D, or a post, or something. Amid that Sword [conjunction] Sorcery debate we're now getting vibes posts and speculative vibes both on whether low magic or attention to gear are impossibilities in D&D, with little engagement with what the actual text, the DMG, says (which if anyone with academic pretensions should know, is a key crux between pretending to be "academic" and shallow pedantry), and whether those DMG statements are valid.
I dunno where what people think is coming from, but I'm playing in a 5e game right now (on this very board, and I think some of y'all might be playing with me) where while it's more or less default 5e definition of high fantasy, we're nevertheless tracking our gear etc. It just seems this thread has predictably devolved into dueling presumptions about how some "they" play D&D where really, what actually would matter, be literally substantive, to this discussion would be whether posters have actually tried departing from the 5e definition of "high fantasy" using either the guidelines in the DMG or the many third party products that try to do so, some of which you can even get on this site.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Oh I gotcha, my bad. Yep we agree.