It foists basically all mechanic decisions that aren’t directly related to combat onto DM adjudication, and provides very little guidance.
The idea here is that the D&D ruleset is supposed to be permissive, not restrictive:
permissive - anything not explicitly prohibited is allowed
restrictive - anything not explicitly allowed is prohibited
The gameplay experience depends greatly on which of these directions you interpret rules from. So, when you say that it “provides very little guidance”, that’s intentional, because it allows the DM and the players to use the basic structure of the game to support and inspire having fun and being creative. It should be a foundation, not a cage.
D&D was always intended to be an open framework for actual roleplaying. The munchkin concept of gaming the rules for min-maxing stats came later.
Rules lawyers, be they DM or player, make playing less fun.
No, the idea is that 4e basically imploded the brand, so they pushed some unfinished stuff out the door before the axe came down and suddenly and unexpectedly they discovered that the brand was printing money.
Rules aren’t restrictive, because every rule is optional. A lack of guidance is WotC asking you to do their work for them.
I don’t need to buy a set of books to give me permission to use my imagination, and I don’t need it’s permission to disregard rules that don’t serve my campaign, or homebrew my own. Every ruleset of every tabletop game is optional. Sure, ignoring some rules can unravel the system, but every table is free to make that choice.
I buy a set of books because I want an exhaustive set of balanced and playtested rules. I am under no obligation to use every rule, but I want to have them so I know if I choose to use them, I’m not going to break the balance.
For instance, I’ve fully moved to GURPS. It has a reputation for being complicated because there are lots of mechanics available. I ignore the vast majority of them most of the time, but when a player wants to do something out of the ordinary, I can count on having a balanced mechanic available for guidance. I don’t have to worry about being too strict, or too lenient, or inconsistent the next time the same situation arises.
5e isn’t “permissive”, it’s lazy game design. I quit after buying the Spelljammer set, which provided basically zero guidance for any of the actual spell jamming stuff. When the answer to every question is "The DM can decide to do it however they want :)”, you’re not actually releasing a game system.
Again, I don’t need to buy a book to have permission to use my imagination however I want. I buy a book to give me balanced and playtested mechanics. WotC doesn’t seem particularly interested in that.
I think it’s better to think of all the add-ons and supplements as GM inspiration, rather than hard and fast rules. Most everything in GURPS is set up to arrive at a skill roll or attribute modifier; so even if you don’t remember a particular rule for a particular edge case, you can generally eyeball it and come up with a modifier pretty close to what’s in the books. The books give a lot of guidance on how to reach that modifier, though; and give you enough information to feel comfortable coming up with your own modifiers outside of what they outline. I feel like that’s a lot of what GURPS brings to the table - a simple system, with an internally consistent set of guides about how easy or hard a given action might be.
The idea here is that the D&D ruleset is supposed to be permissive, not restrictive:
The gameplay experience depends greatly on which of these directions you interpret rules from. So, when you say that it “provides very little guidance”, that’s intentional, because it allows the DM and the players to use the basic structure of the game to support and inspire having fun and being creative. It should be a foundation, not a cage.
D&D was always intended to be an open framework for actual roleplaying. The munchkin concept of gaming the rules for min-maxing stats came later.
Rules lawyers, be they DM or player, make playing less fun.
No, the idea is that 4e basically imploded the brand, so they pushed some unfinished stuff out the door before the axe came down and suddenly and unexpectedly they discovered that the brand was printing money.
Rules aren’t restrictive, because every rule is optional. A lack of guidance is WotC asking you to do their work for them.
I don’t need to buy a set of books to give me permission to use my imagination, and I don’t need it’s permission to disregard rules that don’t serve my campaign, or homebrew my own. Every ruleset of every tabletop game is optional. Sure, ignoring some rules can unravel the system, but every table is free to make that choice.
I buy a set of books because I want an exhaustive set of balanced and playtested rules. I am under no obligation to use every rule, but I want to have them so I know if I choose to use them, I’m not going to break the balance.
For instance, I’ve fully moved to GURPS. It has a reputation for being complicated because there are lots of mechanics available. I ignore the vast majority of them most of the time, but when a player wants to do something out of the ordinary, I can count on having a balanced mechanic available for guidance. I don’t have to worry about being too strict, or too lenient, or inconsistent the next time the same situation arises.
5e isn’t “permissive”, it’s lazy game design. I quit after buying the Spelljammer set, which provided basically zero guidance for any of the actual spell jamming stuff. When the answer to every question is "The DM can decide to do it however they want :)”, you’re not actually releasing a game system.
Again, I don’t need to buy a book to have permission to use my imagination however I want. I buy a book to give me balanced and playtested mechanics. WotC doesn’t seem particularly interested in that.
I think it’s better to think of all the add-ons and supplements as GM inspiration, rather than hard and fast rules. Most everything in GURPS is set up to arrive at a skill roll or attribute modifier; so even if you don’t remember a particular rule for a particular edge case, you can generally eyeball it and come up with a modifier pretty close to what’s in the books. The books give a lot of guidance on how to reach that modifier, though; and give you enough information to feel comfortable coming up with your own modifiers outside of what they outline. I feel like that’s a lot of what GURPS brings to the table - a simple system, with an internally consistent set of guides about how easy or hard a given action might be.
Exactly. I usually eyeball modifiers.