[5e] My table rules as they currently stand. Criticize mercilessly, show me yours

Willie the Duck · October 11, 2016, 02:27:37 PM

Quote from: Doom;923693Thank you in advance? Seriously, it's not a criticism, it's folly to even attempt to model all aspects of reality within a few hundred pages of text. "Go with what feels right" has the huge advantage of not having much in the way of loopholes.

Pundit had a small role in bringing 5e to fruition (I'll let him toot his own horn).

Doom · October 11, 2016, 06:08:13 PM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;924471Pundit had a small role in bringing 5e to fruition (I'll let him toot his own horn).

Correct!

Omega · October 11, 2016, 06:45:47 PM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;924471Pundit had a small role in bringing 5e to fruition (I'll let him toot his own horn).

Totally worth it too just to see the tears of impotent rage certain factions wailed over this.

Willie the Duck · October 12, 2016, 07:21:57 AM

Quote from: Omega;924504Totally worth it too just to see the tears of impotent rage certain factions wailed over this.

Tempest in a teapot. It could easily have been someone from the 'other side' of however you want to call this divide in gaming communities. I'm sure it would have gone the same way.

Omega · October 13, 2016, 01:27:45 AM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;924568Tempest in a teapot. It could easily have been someone from the 'other side' of however you want to call this divide in gaming communities. I'm sure it would have gone the same way.

That was 4th ed D&D...

estar · October 13, 2016, 09:01:16 AM

Quote from: Omega;924504Totally worth it too just to see the tears of impotent rage certain factions wailed over this.

What many forget that this (holding up a player handbook) is just detail for a fundemental rule which is the players describes what his character does and the referee adjudicates. If it not detailed in this (again holding up a player's handbook), it is still the referee job to figure out how to adjudicate what the player describes. If the referee declines to do this by saying it not in the book, then he has failed to do his job. And note ruling that a character is not capable of the action is a valid ruling if it make sense in terms of how the character is described. But saying that character can't do the action because it not described in a rulebook is not a valid or fair ruling.

RPGPundit · October 17, 2016, 03:32:05 AM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;924568Tempest in a teapot. It could easily have been someone from the 'other side' of however you want to call this divide in gaming communities. I'm sure it would have gone the same way.

Well, in this case it couldn't have been. It could have theoretically have been someone else from the 'same side', but WoTC explicitly wanted a consultant representing the OSR.

kosmos1214 · October 17, 2016, 06:28:54 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;925272Well, in this case it couldn't have been. It could have theoretically have been someone else from the 'same side', but WoTC explicitly wanted a consultant representing the OSR.

Well lets be honest there's nothing wrong with making the safe move.

RPGPundit · October 25, 2016, 07:57:44 AM

Quote from: kosmos1214;925388Well lets be honest there's nothing wrong with making the safe move.

Yes. WoTC finally did the right thing, after several years of having made every possible wrong choice.

Omega · October 25, 2016, 02:19:07 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;926826Yes. WoTC finally did the right thing, after several years of having made every possible wrong choice.

Thats pretty much the history of WOTC. For every success they have they torpedo their own product with the next. Theyve screwed up so much Hasbro has them on a tight budget leash.

Christopher Brady · October 25, 2016, 10:43:14 PM

Quote from: Omega;926874Thats pretty much the history of WOTC. For every success they have they torpedo their own product with the next. Theyve screwed up so much Hasbro has them on a tight budget leash.

Right... No. As long as the Magic money rolls, they have no oversight on WoTC. D&D could disappear from the portfolio and Hasby wouldn't care as long that sweet, sweet Magic money keeps a coming harder than every sexual fantasy the world has had at once.

Willie the Duck · October 26, 2016, 08:07:58 AM

Well, sorta. Just because Pepsi-Co now makes the bulk of its money by owning KFCs and other non-soda-related activities means that they don't care about their soda brands. WotC wants D&D (the game product line) in a nice, safe box where its minor revenue is a distant fourth to not rocking the MtG boat, bringing/keeping people in(to) the nerd fold and perhaps also buying Magic cards, and selling related products like the new D&D movies (if those end up being successful).

Christopher Brady · October 27, 2016, 06:16:25 AM

Quote from: Willie the Duck;927016Well, sorta. Just because Pepsi-Co now makes the bulk of its money by owning KFCs and other non-soda-related activities means that they don't care about their soda brands. WotC wants D&D (the game product line) in a nice, safe box where its minor revenue is a distant fourth to not rocking the MtG boat, bringing/keeping people in(to) the nerd fold and perhaps also buying Magic cards, and selling related products like the new D&D movies (if those end up being successful).

Well, OK, I'll grant that if D&D was costing Wizards more money than Magic was bringing in, then yes, Hasbro would cut it like a barnacle off a boat. Thing is, that will never happen, simply because the moment that Magic Money gets so small that it COULD be affected by D&D's success, Hasbro would have dropped the puppy into the lake to let it drown long before that happened.

Omega · October 27, 2016, 06:35:31 AM

Quote from: Christopher Brady;926956Right... No. As long as the Magic money rolls, they have no oversight on WoTC. D&D could disappear from the portfolio and Hasby wouldn't care as long that sweet, sweet Magic money keeps a coming harder than every sexual fantasy the world has had at once.

Wrong... yes. MTG and their sidlines have been waning with each successive year. The've started branching it out into board games now. And WOTC has flubbed a few times with Magic as well so Hasbro keeps an eye on them. Especially after they botched several projects. The CCG bubble burst a decade and a half ago.

Omega · October 27, 2016, 06:51:41 AM

Quote from: Christopher Brady;927229Well, OK, I'll grant that if D&D was costing Wizards more money than Magic was bringing in, then yes, Hasbro would cut it like a barnacle off a boat. Thing is, that will never happen, simply because the moment that Magic Money gets so small that it COULD be affected by D&D's success, Hasbro would have dropped the puppy into the lake to let it drown long before that happened.

Hasbro threatened to do exactly that with D&D. Either show a profit or the end. Especially after WOTC botched 4e D&D GW. And that was under a very tight leash indeed.
Theres also all the legal hassles behind D&D. The near total lockout of being able to make movies or TV series is a problem.