Holy crap I come back and there is a full on dissertation on 5e....
5e's half baked rules are not this magic blend of simplicity and elegance people make it out to be. It's mostly the designers being lazy and making most things to "let the DM decide" which is code for "we couldn't be bothered"
Basically any outside of combat activity is not addressed with any kind of detail. If you say the "crafting" guides in Xanathars is good then you just haven't seen good guides.
It's as deep as a puddle but it's also the only thing you can get anyone to play.
Having played both rules heavy and rules light RPGs, I personally think 5e actually strikes a pretty good balance.
I think the point that 5e tries to make relatively clear is that the game ultimately belongs to the DM and the responsibility for what happens out in the world, outside of combat, is up to the DM to run as they wish. If characters want to make things, craft things, start a business, own a pub, buy a ship, fund expeditions, design buildings, help the poor, run a halfway house, become a moneylender - the DM has to decide what happens. There are limited rules for out of combat situations since the things a character can try to do are infinite and as soon as rules are written to try to cover some fraction of these possible interactions, the "rules" become unusable.
"Was it page 704 that explained how to handle a character wanting to cut facets onto a raw gem to increase its value? What does the table list as the DC for that task?"
The same goes for the complaints surrounding D&D combat. What about hundreds of different kinds of swords, polearms, staves with blades on the end - is that a spear or a glaive - how long does it need to be to be in a category? Can I attack with a dagger when wearing a buckler shield on the same arm? How big does that shield have to be before it is too big? Can I have a middling size shield that gets the +2 AC for shield and still lets me attack? Why not (cite some historical precedent)? D&Ds armor and weapon rules are intentionally simple and divided into broad categories with very small differences - the rest is left to style and how the character chooses to describe their weapons/armor without having a mechanical impact.
I'd argue that more detailed rules simply makes the game less fun to play. So what 5e provides is a framework of rules that a DM hangs their game on and they absolutely have to fill in a lot of blanks but that is part of the fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Having played both rules heavy and rules light RPGs, I personally think 5e actually strikes a pretty good balance.
I think the point that 5e tries to make relatively clear is that the game ultimately belongs to the DM and the responsibility for what happens out in the world, outside of combat, is up to the DM to run as they wish. If characters want to make things, craft things, start a business, own a pub, buy a ship, fund expeditions, design buildings, help the poor, run a halfway house, become a moneylender - the DM has to decide what happens. There are limited rules for out of combat situations since the things a character can try to do are infinite and as soon as rules are written to try to cover some fraction of these possible interactions, the "rules" become unusable.
"Was it page 704 that explained how to handle a character wanting to cut facets onto a raw gem to increase its value? What does the table list as the DC for that task?"
The same goes for the complaints surrounding D&D combat. What about hundreds of different kinds of swords, polearms, staves with blades on the end - is that a spear or a glaive - how long does it need to be to be in a category? Can I attack with a dagger when wearing a buckler shield on the same arm? How big does that shield have to be before it is too big? Can I have a middling size shield that gets the +2 AC for shield and still lets me attack? Why not (cite some historical precedent)? D&Ds armor and weapon rules are intentionally simple and divided into broad categories with very small differences - the rest is left to style and how the character chooses to describe their weapons/armor without having a mechanical impact.
I'd argue that more detailed rules simply makes the game less fun to play. So what 5e provides is a framework of rules that a DM hangs their game on and they absolutely have to fill in a lot of blanks but that is part of the fun.