5E Lich Dmg Cover How To Play By#

I had no idea procedural dungeon exploration was even a gap in the 5E PHB! There's a loose discussion about time intervals and movement, but the book never puts it all together into a coherent example for the new players. If your wizard takes an apprentice he needs to spend the time and gold training the apprentice up to a maximum. I dont like the rule to be used on PCs but I think its a great option for cohorts or NPCs. On pg 131 there is a variant rule where players need to spend downtime days and gp to level up. DMG Variant rule: Training to gain levels.

Apparently none of my players read the PHB and caught that, either.5E Lich Dmg Cover. Upon my fresh reading, I did see that the PHB allows characters to explore in a single minute more than older editions would let the players cover in an entire turn (10 minutes). I just carried along working procedures from the old games into 5E and kept trucking. I had no idea any of that was missing in the Fifth. Who can forget Black Dougal's death scene? Those actual play examples demonstrate how the Q&A interaction between the referee and players advance the game state, how a mapper or caller fits into exploration, when do you roll for wander monsters, that kind of stuff. Those were prominent components in those older rule books! The Tower of Zenopus, Koriszegy Keep in Moldvay BX, Bartle's dungeon in the Mentzer Red Box, even the monastery dungeon in the 1E DMG were all prominently featured to transmit how play works.

5E Lich Dmg Cover How To Play By

Perhaps that's why the 5e DMG doesn't go into depth with an example of a keyed dungeon map. I think a lot of newer gamers are learning how to play by watching others on these venues, rather than by reading about it. From the DMG on page 133 (very bottom of the final paragraph): Over the course of a typical campaign a party finds treasure hoards amounting to seven rolls on the Challenge 0 - 4 table, eighteen rolls on the Challenge 5 - 10 table, twelve rolls on the Challenge 11 - 16 table, and eight rolls on the challenge 17+ table.The comments about YouTube and Twitch are interesting.

Reply DeleteI think the comparison with cargo cults is misleading, regardless of the precedent set by misuse of the term in the world of business.If anybody is a 'cargo cult member' among gamers, though, look no further than players who imagine they are playing 1970s D&D in the year 2020. It's great fun as a performance but not really representative of how D&D is traditionally played. A lot of rules get ignored for the 'rule of cool' and you can often tell where Perkins is pulling the strings (maybe in cahoots with the players) to add dramatic twists and turns. It's great, and Chris Perkins is a great DM, but it is very cinematic and theatrical. I am currently prepping to run the Curse of Strahd campaign and I've been watching Chris Perkins' 'Dice, Camera, Action' run on YouTube.

Are any DMs running tournament-style dungeons? There were players who wrote, back then, that they hated Gygax's style. This is so amply documented-and remembered!-that it should not need demonstration.Anyway, real dungeons varied enormously already in the '70s. They obsess about D&D among the hundreds of games that we played in the actual old days, dreaming of a fictitious 'old school,' pretending that gaming was always about 'quality dungeons.' Getting D&D *right*? I thought it was about having fun, not following a prescription of somebody's else's idea of a good time.There have always been other ways to play, from the beginning. Otherwise they couldn't complain the way they do.

If they draw in new players, maybe that's good for the old timers. Of course, it's a giant company that seeks to profit from hobbyists. We're talking about a subsidiary of Hasbro. Kids, if you are having fun, don't let old people tell you that your games are 'not correct.'As for WoTC, the only reason they will do anything is to make money off of you. But I don't think 5E gamers are playing wrong if they don't know how *I* do it.

Now there's a legion of Gygax footstools who think they are the real thing!Youngsters, if you are having fun, but an old guy tells you that you are 'attempting to follow older styles of play, but missing the mark,' you don't need a self-appointed authority to tell you that your fun is not authentic.I appreciate your view. Gygax crushed amateur creators and fledgling companies and tried to control the hobby for himself. But I'm guessing they don't explain how to make a dungeon to the satisfaction of the purists because they want people to buy their glossy, hard-backed campaigns and sign up for online resources so they can track your preferences and market to them, and, most importantly, because not all role-playing games are about dungeons, nor should they be.If aging so-called old-school gamers are still obsessed with D&D today, among all possible role-playing games, it's because they fell prey to TSR's marketing and control tactics in the old days, joining the 'cult' of those times and ignoring the *real* DIY stuff that they could have been a part of. If you have fun with D&D products, good, get your money's worth.

That was, for them, player skill: defeating the DM's environment.I do wonder if it's right to say that 'player skill' is neglected. The procedural part could also be taken to great lengths, with players writing articles about how to rig (imaginary) devices to douse mummies with flammable wine, etc. There were ardent pleas in Dragon magazine and other venues to create dungeons that were not senseless funhouses, that had back-stories, that made more architectural sense, etc. In the '70s, when the hobby was new, players had precisely the complaint you are raising: dungeons didn't make sense. Coming back to the hobby recently, though, I am endlessly perplexed at the divisions in the hobby over 'the right way to play.' What does it mean to say there is a right way to make a dungeon?Let me explain. I don't know if the response is aimed at a media image in WOTC products or actual players.

If nothing else, it provides timing for rolling random monsters, and I feel like THAT part is really important to leave in there.I feel like I've been circling around a specific mechanical procedure for this that still measures time and resources, but doesn't push the game quite into the same level of simulationist thinking that guided the original design. I don't really like tracking stuff like ammo, torches, or time, so going as exacting as it's written in, say, B/X is really not for me.There needs to be some kind of 'round' system for exploration, preferably where the party moves as a single unit unless they actively make the decision to split up for whatever reason. I've just kind of been winging it for a few years now. The 'Old-School' gamers have forgotten that.Anyway, a lot of the discussion about dungeons today seems to be echoing things said in the first years of the game.I very much appreciate that you post your views and allow this discussion! DeleteMy first D&D experience has been 5e, and while I've really enjoyed it overall, I noticed really early on that the PHB and DMG didn't actually tell me what to do when I was running a dungeon. He wanted players to compete with each other to be the 'best player' and they made ranking systems and actually ranked themselves.