Manbearcat
Legend
In my opinion, it does not reflect well on the 5e GMing community nor 5e as a ruleset that @hawkeyefan 's depicted play excerpt is even in the slightest bit controversial.
Would it be controversial if a 5e GM said to a Ranger (Natural Explorer) who is leading his allies on a perilous journey through the wild any of the following:
The game is littered with examples of "would it be controversial if" where the answer should emphatically be "YES!1111!"
When the final playtest came out, Background Traits were one of 3 things in the ruleset that I cited as the strongest features of the game.
If you're a Folk Hero PC, and assuming the place you're in meets the fictional parameters (if this was a PBtA move, the trigger would be "when you're among the common folk and on the run or exhausted from a journey, they'll take you in to evade pursuit or recover") and you deploy Rustic Hospitality in an evasion conflict, that is the player taking their small foothold in the GM's world and establishing an archetypal reality; "these folks will risk everything for their belief in me, that belief matters in this world, and they know I'll continue to give them reason to believe."
A GM shutting that down is completely subordinating both your thematic decision-making and your tactical decision-making as a player. They're basically saying "nah...none of that is true...not the folk hero mythology facts on the ground...not the willingness to risk themselves...not the evasion of pursuit...have this ice cold bath of go eff yourself and fight these dudes!"
Its an egregious use of Force.
This should not net pages of conversation.
Would it be controversial if a 5e GM said to a Ranger (Natural Explorer) who is leading his allies on a perilous journey through the wild any of the following:
- The difficult terrain slows your group's travel.
- You're lost because the topography is particularly dizzying.
- But you were tracking...how can you possibly be alert to dangers?!
- Yeah, I know you were tracking the 4 Ogres that came through here 3 days ago, but its actually 6 Hill Giants and it was all an elaborate trap! They're here now and upon you!
The game is littered with examples of "would it be controversial if" where the answer should emphatically be "YES!1111!"
When the final playtest came out, Background Traits were one of 3 things in the ruleset that I cited as the strongest features of the game.
If you're a Folk Hero PC, and assuming the place you're in meets the fictional parameters (if this was a PBtA move, the trigger would be "when you're among the common folk and on the run or exhausted from a journey, they'll take you in to evade pursuit or recover") and you deploy Rustic Hospitality in an evasion conflict, that is the player taking their small foothold in the GM's world and establishing an archetypal reality; "these folks will risk everything for their belief in me, that belief matters in this world, and they know I'll continue to give them reason to believe."
A GM shutting that down is completely subordinating both your thematic decision-making and your tactical decision-making as a player. They're basically saying "nah...none of that is true...not the folk hero mythology facts on the ground...not the willingness to risk themselves...not the evasion of pursuit...have this ice cold bath of go eff yourself and fight these dudes!"
Its an egregious use of Force.
This should not net pages of conversation.