D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[Hussar]

Between job schedules and attacking toddlers, my table rarely gets to play for more than 1.5 hours each week. So we savor the time we have. So yeah, we often spend entire sessions on pure roleplaying. We often go for sessions without combat. It's not unknown for us to not even roll a die more than once in a session.


Maybe you need to readjust your goals? You might be happier if you do

At my table, actually defeating the BBEG is a goal, sure, but not the primary one--that's to have fun, explore our characters, and to roleplay with one another and with NPCs. And as such, we're usually happy with our games. Most of the time, if we're not, it's because of system issues, not because the game petered out.

And that’s great for you.

Why are you telling me to adjust my goals though? Why shouldn’t we simply play where my goals are achieved in the time we have?

You keep insisting that this is a combat thing. That’s not it at all. An entire session with no die rolls? Fantastic. Great.

An entire session spent on pointless faffing about and not moving forward? No thanks.

You’re happy. Great. I’m not. So instead of telling me to play like you play, why not, perhaps, pretend that your one true way isn’t the one true way for everyone?

 

[Faolyn]

And that’s great for you.

Why are you telling me to adjust my goals though? Why shouldn’t we simply play where my goals are achieved in the time we have?

Because clearly that never happens, or you wouldn't be kvetching about it so much, to the point where you needed to start a new thread to see how common your plight is.

You keep insisting that this is a combat thing. That’s not it at all. An entire session with no die rolls? Fantastic. Great.

How on earth did I "keep insisting"? I mention combat once.

An entire session spent on pointless faffing about and not moving forward? No thanks.

See what I mean?

You have this very specific idea about what a game should be, and it sounds like you're miserable whenever that doesn't happen. You called six months of gaming "wasted" because your game ended. Not, "Welp, the game's over and we didn't defeat the dragon lords or find out what the deal was with that disembodied floating ear, but man it was fun while it lasted." Wasted.

So you have two choices: you can continue to hold on to that idea, that a game must conclude and anything that doesn't work directly to that conclusion is bad, and be miserable, or you can alter your mindset and expectations and actually be happy playing.

Because, see, my table does move forward. Our characters and our understanding of the world continues to change and grow and we tell stories about them. We've done stuff. Sure, maybe didn't get any closer to killing the BBEG this session, or solving the puzzle that will save the day, but the session was anything but a waste.

 

[Shardstone]

So far, 5.2 seems to have the best class design out of all the new 5E spinoffs coming out.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

So far, 5.2 seems to have the best class design out of all the new 5E spinoffs coming out.

It looks that way to me. shrug But I would still let my players play a LU class if they wanted.

 

[Hussar]

Because clearly that never happens, or you wouldn't be kvetching about it so much, to the point where you needed to start a new thread to see how common your plight is.

/snip

Because, see, my table does move forward. Our characters and our understanding of the world continues to change and grow and we tell stories about them. We've done stuff. Sure, maybe didn't get any closer to killing the BBEG this session, or solving the puzzle that will save the day, but the session was anything but a waste.

Sorry, I may be confusing you with the fifteen other people who keep telling me to change how I want the game to go. See, from my perspective, this is what I see:

Me: The game would be improved if it was run at a faster pace since many games end before a satisfactory conclusion.
Response 1 - No, you're wrong. The journey is the reward and you should just be happy with what you got.
Response 2 - No, you're wrong. You just want to go from combat to combat, and not do any role play.
Response 3 - No, you're wrong. Nothing that ever happens in an RPG is ever a waste of time.
Response 4 - No, you're wrong. Gaming is about "emergent" stories. Totally different from authored stories.

Personally, I really love #4 because, well, it ignores the fact that emergent or not, without a climax, you don't actually have a story. You have a setting. You have characters, but, you don't have a story.

At no point does anyone say, "Hey, Y'know what? Maybe if we tightened the campaign up a bit, stripped out those sessions where we "didn't get any closer to ... saving the day", we might, just maybe, actually have a complete campaign. But, no. Instead, I have everyone tripping over themselves to tell me how wrong I am for wanting DM's to maybe skip a few things, just so we DO get closer to saving the day. Because, for me, a session where we didn't get closer? That's a total waste of time because it means we're one more step closer to the campaign failing.

I mean, FFS, our Ravenloft campaign ended in the middle of a freaking combat. The DM just vanished into the ether and never came back. Real life stepped on him hard. I get that. But, poof. Campaign gone. No warning. No word. Just showed up for the game next week and... no DM. Our recent Avernus campaign ended while crossing a bridge. We'd resolved nothing. I'm not talking about campaigns trailing off because the DM wants to move on to something else, so, we've kinda sorta come to a conclusion (although that's common enough too). I'm talking about how the campagn ends three sentences after the Ring Wraiths stab Frodo.

Every time.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

At no point does anyone say, "Hey, Y'know what? Maybe if we tightened the campaign up a bit, stripped out those sessions where we "didn't get any closer to ... saving the day", we might, just maybe, actually have a complete campaign.

Huh. I thought that I said something along those lines. I mean, not those exact words, but I though that I was encouraging you to do whatever you have to do.

 

[Hussar]

Huh. I thought that I said something along those lines. I mean, not those exact words, but I though that I was encouraging you to do whatever you have to do.

Sorry, painting with too broad a brush and splashed you. My bad.

Doesn't stop the, by my count, at least four other posters, and I believe more, who've been tripping over themselves to tell me how wrong I am for not wanting to play the right way.

Funny thing is, when WotC did address this in the 4e DMG, they got absolutely pilloried for it. The whole "skip the gate guards" thing that became so farcical it became its own meme. But, here we are, ten years later, and even suggesting that it might make D&D games run better to tighten things up - a little - not everything, not all things, just cut out maybe, 15-25% of the fat on a campaign, might make for better games means that I hate role playing (a criticism that has been voiced more than once), been questioned why I even play RPG's and don't go off and play something else (also direct quotes), and been told that I'm totally off base here.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Sorry, I may be confusing you with the fifteen other people who keep telling me to change how I want the game to go. See, from my perspective, this is what I see:

Me: The game would be improved if it was run at a faster pace since many games end before a satisfactory conclusion.
Response 1 - No, you're wrong. The journey is the reward and you should just be happy with what you got.
Response 2 - No, you're wrong. You just want to go from combat to combat, and not do any role play.
Response 3 - No, you're wrong. Nothing that ever happens in an RPG is ever a waste of time.
Response 4 - No, you're wrong. Gaming is about "emergent" stories. Totally different from authored stories.

Personally, I really love #4 because, well, it ignores the fact that emergent or not, without a climax, you don't actually have a story. You have a setting. You have characters, but, you don't have a story.

At no point does anyone say, "Hey, Y'know what? Maybe if we tightened the campaign up a bit, stripped out those sessions where we "didn't get any closer to ... saving the day", we might, just maybe, actually have a complete campaign. But, no. Instead, I have everyone tripping over themselves to tell me how wrong I am for wanting DM's to maybe skip a few things, just so we DO get closer to saving the day. Because, for me, a session where we didn't get closer? That's a total waste of time because it means we're one more step closer to the campaign failing.

I mean, FFS, our Ravenloft campaign ended in the middle of a freaking combat. The DM just vanished into the ether and never came back. Real life stepped on him hard. I get that. But, poof. Campaign gone. No warning. No word. Just showed up for the game next week and... no DM. Our recent Avernus campaign ended while crossing a bridge. We'd resolved nothing. I'm not talking about campaigns trailing off because the DM wants to move on to something else, so, we've kinda sorta come to a conclusion (although that's common enough too). I'm talking about how the campagn ends three sentences after the Ring Wraiths stab Frodo.

Every time.

Maybe, just maybe don't say sentences like: "the DM only asks for roleplaying to screw the players over". Maybe then people won't understand you wrong.

 

[Hussar]

Maybe, just maybe don't say sentences like: "the DM only asks for roleplaying to screw the players over". Maybe then people won't understand you wrong.

You mean they won't understand me right? ((Joking, I'm kidding. The phrase just tickled me))

True. Perhaps. But, then, when I've spent a rather extensive amount of time explaining exactly what I did mean, with some pretty clear examples and clearly understood examples, I might get the benefit of the doubt? But, hey, here we are and folks are still accusing me of hating role play because I don't want to screw around with a bunch of trivial, pointless stuff that does not contribute towards moving the game forward.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You mean they won't understand me right? ((Joking, I'm kidding. The phrase just tickled me))

True. Perhaps. But, then, when I've spent a rather extensive amount of time explaining exactly what I did mean, with some pretty clear examples and clearly understood examples, I might get the benefit of the doubt? But, hey, here we are and folks are still accusing me of hating role play because I don't want to screw around with a bunch of trivial, pointless stuff that does not contribute towards moving the game forward.

Yeah. Now it is clear. At that point it was not. Now that this is settled, maybe all should just stop with that pointless sidetrack and go back to the actual topic.