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

44 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This is why I’m switching to GURPS. It has rules for everything, but it’s very clear that you only need a handful of them, and the rest are options you can decide to use or not. I’m probably not going to use the rocket equations in the Space book to make space travel more realistic, but it’s nice that they’re there in case I wanted to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Praise be to GURPs! It’s unfortunate that there seems to be a persistent sentiment that DMs should be making snap arbitration on a large variety of systems instead of having a rule-base that you can ignore when it gets in the way of your storytelling.

GURPS does this some much better because it does have rules for almost any genre and style you want, letting you have professionally crafted rules that have been playtested and matches to the genre they are designed for that you can use either way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I like the middle ground where 5e is

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

DND writes its rules to be as quick to read and apply to basic situations, but then becomes unwieldy in many if the non-standard cases because they didn’t take the word count to fine tune the rules work as you necessarily would expect, and thus they become confusing.

Something like PF2E (while not perfect in clarity, but much better) has much more verbose rules, but they do a better job of making them apply to non-standard situations closer to how you expect more often.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It also suffers from not using consistent language and keywords in the rulings.

The more recent rewrites are better but there would be way fewer discussions on “what exactly does this mean” if there were consistent keywords for things.

…also I am currently writing a pile of homebrew to try and run a spelljammer game because those books they released inspired me to run a Treasure Planet campaign but didn’t give me nearly enough material.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points
*

Calling 5e and pf2e bloated with unnecessary rules, meanwhile Pathfinder and 3.5e are quite literally full of a couple decade’s worth of volumes and modules, in comparison to OSR?

I don’t know if you’re a boomer, a troll, or both

permalink
report
reply
1 point

3.5 has a ton of splatbooks, sure, but they’re expansions. You go in one, if you want, at character creation to pull out a cool class you want to play. Not playing something out of that book? Then you never need to think about it. It’s not like you have to have encyclopedic knowledge of all the hundreds of splatbooks; all the rules are contained in the DMG and PHB, just like with 5e.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Does the existence of a whale make it wrong to call an elephant big?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They’re not just calling it big, they’re calling an elephant big in comparison to a crude 8 year old’s drawing of said elephant (and of course the colouring is not inside the lines because it doesn’t have to conform to the consistent rules of an elephant). What purpose does that serve unless you’re the 8 year old trying to make your drawing sound impressive? See how small and unique my elephant is?

Meanwhile the whale sitting right next to the elephant is like wow that was a very specific callout on their size when I’m sitting right here. That kid must really hate that elephant.

It’s quite ridiculous. Wrong or right don’t factor into it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

PF2S is bloated with unnecessary rules. If that’s your thing, and I totally get the appeal of having a “wait let’s just see what nethys says abou — Oh apparently there are mechanics for this drug” moment; personally I find it really gets in the way of the session. Rule and move on with the story. Keep the mechanics to what they need. We’re ultimately dealing with a pretty simple underlying system: d20 roll high. All the subterfuge and wordy mechanics don’t really change that at the end of the day you need to roll a d20 and generally do better than a 12 or so to do what you want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I feel like pf2e has just enough rules to empower the players to the level I like

The more DM fiat a game has, the more trust I need from my players for things to go smoothly.

That’s not a bad thing, necessarily, but for me structure is usually good as long as it doesn’t raise the skill floor too high.

Once I’ve got trust built and feel a bit more experimental, I like Dungeon World or even Universalis

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Same I find it easy to gm and the players have enough of a grip of the system to be able to do something out of left field and I can find a way to make it work with the system so that play is smooth but consistent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

We’re ultimately dealing with a pretty simple underlying system: d20 roll high

I highly disagree with this sentiment. You do you, but this is not the general feeling of TTRPG players.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

PF2e is a joke. It requires reading the whole rules and planning out a character for multiple levels before making your first character. It gatekeeps the hobby worse than FATAL.

Yeah, PF1 and 3.5e are bloated as hell. But you didn’t need to read all the feats for all the races before picking human fighter. Plus the people still playing those never used everything that was published.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Lmao, I think you confused pf1 and pf2. In pf1 you can build yourself into a corner and create useless characters with ease. In 2e the worst characters are still decent

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points

Nope, I know both. They both suck because of the required over optimization. But pf1 at least didn’t have characters constantly at full hp, which is one of the biggest balance issues.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah that’s fair. For the most part we’re sticking to 5e, and the consensus is always to check the rules first when we’re unsure about something and to try and implement it as intended, so we’re not losing any of what I’d consider to be core rules, like the way movement, actions and bonus actions work during combat, or spell slots and class-specific rules etc.

It’s more of our approach to more niche elements, such as the food and water needs relevant to each creature’s size as specified in the DM’s Handbook - no one has the inclination to track our food supply and consumption to the pound per character, so we instead stock up on provisions to last X number of days, and track our usage by the day. It’s just a bit quicker and easier to manage that way, and we can still implement the same effects in the event we run out of food.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

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”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

At that point, you lose a lot of verisimilitude, and that’s pretty important to me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

But that’s valid criticism. Rules have to justify their existence

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

PF2 is certainly easier to run. But tell me when it becomes a RPG, it’s basically a video game system ported to tabletop. Everything is about the builds, not the characters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

The builds are an expression of character development tho.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Character development as characterization or character development as shonen protagonist?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What would it take to make it a RPG? Some characters are flawed in certain things while excel at others. But what you want your character to be, its in your hands due to how you build your character. That´s part of your character, same goes to the backstory you may have developed and inform your build.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Well they could stop gamifying RP and exploration so players actually get into character instead of just rolling dice. But that’s a pretty fundamental shift, so they won’t do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

But tell me when it becomes a RPG, it’s basically a video game system ported to tabletop

Uh… tabletop came before videogames…

Anyway, no. An RPG is a Role Playing Game, it’s a game where you take the role of someone, either created by you or given by the game (be it a videogame or not), and you experience the things that happens to that character.

Saying that TTRPGs are video games ported to TT is like saying that Lord of the Rings is a story written within the DnD lore. It’s completely wrong.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Why is everyone here so bad at reading? I specifically am calling out PF2 for being designed as if it was a video game. I am saying Paizo doesn’t understand the medium of RPGs, because they don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply

RPGMemes

!rpgmemes@ttrpg.network

Create post

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

Community stats

  • 1.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.3K

    Posts

  • 22K

    Comments