yer doin it wrong!

[geekintheground]

is there a way to play D&D "wrong"? in my opinion, the only way for this to happen is if one person is making it so no one else has any fun. but there may be things i havent thought about. what do you guys think?

[johnbragg]

is there a way to play D&D "wrong"? in my opinion, the only way for this to happen is if one person is making it so no one else has any fun. but there may be things i havent thought about. what do you guys think?

There Is No Badwrongfun. If your group are all having fun, then you're doing it right. Maybe you're doing it differently, maybe you could be having Even More Fun, but there is no such thing as "doing it wrong."

Maybe you could say your group has houseruled and reinterpreted things to the point where you're not playing D&D anymore, but I'd say that's fine.

[Bigbeefie]

There Is No Badwrongfun. If your group are all having fun, then you're doing it right. Maybe you're doing it differently, maybe you could be having Even More Fun, but there is no such thing as "doing it wrong."

Maybe you could say your group has houseruled and reinterpreted things to the point where you're not playing D&D anymore, but I'd say that's fine.

That is the Fluff answer. And I am not one for Fluff like everyone is a winner, there are no losers, life is full of limitless possibilities you just have to smell the rose of your opportunity. I am the other side of that coin so I will give you the Yin to Johnbragg's Yang!

Here it goes without fluff and unfiltered.


Not living through encounters and progressing the game is "doing it wrong".
Causing problems in the group is "doing it wrong". (Have your fun but not at the expense of others)

What the point of playing a game if you aren't trying to play through it?

Getting through it means you did things "right"
Failing at the game means "something was done wrong"

[Tvtyrant]

That is the Fluff answer. And I am not one for Fluff like everyone is a winner, there are no losers, life is full of limitless possibilities you just have to smell the rose of your opportunity. I am the other side of that coin so I will give you the Yin to Johnbragg's Yang!

Here it goes without fluff and unfiltered.


Not living through encounters and progressing the game is "doing it wrong".
Causing problems in the group is "doing it wrong". (Have your fun but not at the expense of others)

What the point of playing a game if you aren't trying to play through it?

Getting through it means you did things "right"
Failing at the game means "something was done wrong"

I don't think so. The extremely elaborate plot by Dagon and Demogorgon to flood the world might be too much for the party, and their minds are shredded in their climactic battle with the Prince of all Demons and his Obyrith companion. Is that any less satisfying than winning?

[TuggyNE]

is there a way to play D&D "wrong"? in my opinion, the only way for this to happen is if one person is making it so no one else has any fun. but there may be things i havent thought about. what do you guys think?

I'd extend that to say that if anyone, or the group as a whole, makes it so even one player is not having any fun, they're doing it wrong. (In many cases, of course, it's attributable to the actions or choices of that player themselves, but that just means that they're sabotaging their own fun.)

[Slipperychicken]

If everyone at the table is having fun, then you are doing it right.

Assuming you aren't doing things like murdering people IRL to have fun. Just had to throw in that caveat.

[Gale]

Misinterpreting rules or deliberately cheating in a way that goes against the general consensus of the group in my opinion can be considered a wrong way of playing D&D. As others said before me the point of the game is to have fun. Making the game unfair for others in most cases will ruin their ability to enjoy it.

[Invader]

Idk, I think losing is sometimes doing it right. Some of the funniest most memorable and enjoyable times I've had playing D&D was from colossal failures we've had while other times when we finished our goal it was simply a "meh" moment.

[Sir Chuckles]

If you're ruining other people's experiences, you're doing it wrong.

Further pointing out the fact that that statement requires human input, meaning a massive amount of variables.

I personally hate when people turn the game into a mechanical slogfest of optimization (especially when they don't have a back story or personality to back it up), but some people hate my take of reinforcing what happens with roleplay, and in turn some hate roleplay.

But ultimately, it is about fun. As long as everyone is having mild fun, it's all good.

[johnbragg]

Not living through encounters and progressing the game is "doing it wrong".

Not always--a heroic death (or TPK) that ends a well-fought campaign doesn't invalidate the fights won and monsters conquered. (Well, unless there's an overarching save-the-world plotline running in the background that Only the PCs can stop)

People rarely enjoy seeing their players killed off, but PC death doesn't automatically mean Badwrongfun.


Causing problems in the group is "doing it wrong". (Have your fun but not at the expense of others)

Yes. "There Is No Badwrongfun" means "TINBWF if everyone is having fun."


What the point of playing a game if you aren't trying to play through it?

Getting through it means you did things "right"
Failing at the game means "something was done wrong"

What's the point of playing if you're guaranteed to win?

[EugeneVoid]

The only time when you're playing D&D wrong is when someone in the group isn't having fun. That's it.

[johnbragg]

Misinterpreting rules or deliberately cheating in a way that goes against the general consensus of the group in my opinion can be considered a wrong way of playing D&D. As others said before me the point of the game is to have fun. Making the game unfair for others in most cases will ruin their ability to enjoy it.

Ok, this is true. Fudging die rolls, prepared casters always having just the right spells even though they "forgot to write it down", etc. is "doing it wrong" if you're playing D&D.

You can do that, but only if everyone at the table is playing Munchkin the RPG, and that can be fun for a session.

[Togo]

is there a way to play D&D "wrong"?

No. I've played no-combat D&D, no-PC class D&D, D&D as a fantasy kingdom simulator, D&D as a psycho-drama, diceless D&D, anime style D&D, Adventuring Party Plc D&D, and D&D as a tournament minatures game. They're all fun in their own way, and that's all that matters. The game is far wider and far more diverse than people tend to give it credit for.

[EugeneVoid]

No. I've played no-combat D&D, no-PC class D&D, D&D as a fantasy kingdom simulator, D&D as a psycho-drama, diceless D&D, anime style D&D, Adventuring Party Plc D&D, and D&D as a tournament minatures game. They're all fun in their own way, and that's all that matters. The game is far wider and far more diverse than people tend to give it credit for.

+1
There's no way to play D&D wrong as long as everyone's having fun.
Even if everyone is cheating, as long as no one is upset/not having fun, then you're doing it right.

[Grayson01]

It's very easy to play DnD wrong you Don't Play a T1 caster that is completely Oped to the point where there is no chance of EVER LOSING EVER!!

Or not having fun.......

[danzibr]

If ya don't play by RAW yer doin it wrong.

[TuggyNE]

If ya don't play by RAW yer doin it wrong.

Or "If you don't play by my idea of RAI yer doin it rong."

[Zweisteine]

There is, in fact, a way to play D&D wrong. It involves playing it in a swimpool on a submarine in the Marianas Trench, shortly after being in a jeep in Death Valley while the goat tied to the top of the jeep is struck by lightning, and just before eating a three-layered cake, in which the DMG, PH, and MM are the layers.

You are probably also playing it wrong if you got a TPK by Spontaneous Falling Rocks of DM Ire. It's a spell that very rarely sees play, as it is only castable by an over-over-over-etc-deity.

[Slipperychicken]

There is, in fact, a way to play D&D wrong. It involves playing it in a swimpool on a submarine in the Marianas Trench, shortly after being in a jeep in Death Valley while the goat tied to the top of the jeep is struck by lightning, and just before eating a three-layered cake, in which the DMG, PH, and MM are the layers.


This actually sounds pretty awesome. Is it a reference to something?

[Brookshw]

If everyone at the table is having fun, then you are doing it right..

Yup, this exactly.

[Thurbane]

There are a few ways to play D&D wrong:

Play without ToB.

Enforce multiclassing XP penalty rules.

Play any edition other than 3.5.

Play a tier one class that breaks the game, but then take a PrC or multiclass that costs casting levels. Because, yanno, if you're gonna break the game, you simply have to do it with 20/20 casting levels.

[Psyren]

The only time when you're playing D&D wrong is when someone in the group isn't having fun. That's it.

And even then, they might be the problem and so the group itself is still doing things right. (Though not determining that for sure would be wrong.)

[Grizzled Gryphon]

Technically, a game has rules, and in order to play that game right, you have to follow the rules. As D&D is a game, and has rules, then if you aren't following the rules, your doing it wrong.


BUT


There are a few things that apply, here. One, it is stated that the rules are open to change if the DM so chooses. So, technically, if you change the rules, then you are still following the rules.

More importantly, and thus worthy of being stated again, if you and the players are having fun, well, that is the whole point of a game, so congrats, you are succeeding at the game, and thus are doing it right!

[pwykersotz]

D&D isn't about fun! It's about numbers! On stylized spreadsheets! And making those spreadsheets fight! So, if you forget to fill out a field on your spreadsheet or if your numbers are lower than someone elses, you're playing it wrong.

[The Trickster]

There Is No Badwrongfun. If your group are all having fun, then you're doing it right. Maybe you're doing it differently, maybe you could be having Even More Fun, but there is no such thing as "doing it wrong."

Maybe you could say your group has houseruled and reinterpreted things to the point where you're not playing D&D anymore, but I'd say that's fine.


I'd extend that to say that if anyone, or the group as a whole, makes it so even one player is not having any fun, they're doing it wrong. (In many cases, of course, it's attributable to the actions or choices of that player themselves, but that just means that they're sabotaging their own fun.)


If everyone at the table is having fun, then you are doing it right.

Assuming you aren't doing things like murdering people IRL to have fun. Just had to throw in that caveat.


If you're ruining other people's experiences, you're doing it wrong.

Further pointing out the fact that that statement requires human input, meaning a massive amount of variables.

I personally hate when people turn the game into a mechanical slogfest of optimization (especially when they don't have a back story or personality to back it up), but some people hate my take of reinforcing what happens with roleplay, and in turn some hate roleplay.

But ultimately, it is about fun. As long as everyone is having mild fun, it's all good.


The only time when you're playing D&D wrong is when someone in the group isn't having fun. That's it.

I think we have a winner.

Edit: SlipperyChicken.

The fact that you added that line makes me a bit nervous. :smalltongue:

[Phelix-Mu]

Rule Zero really lets the game take any form that the group desires, when combined with a cooperative DM that is aiming to create fun. Don't want dice rolls? Then let's ignore rolls; you get a pool of "roll results" up to ten 5s, five 10s, two 15s, and one 20 that refills every minute. Assign as you see fit.

As DM, I can make the game in whatever image the group wants to play, ignoring as much or as little of the books as I see fit.

If there is good agreement among the group as to what kind of fun is to be had, therefor, it's very hard to go wrong.

In general, I dislike anyone that accuses someone else of "playing wrong" or whatever. D&D is a terribly subjective experience, and between diverse personalities, unique table dynamics, and group histories, there really is a small amount of advice that can be generalized to every table.

That said, "have fun" is a perfectly decent place to start in the realm of "what constitutes doing it right."

[geekintheground]

Rule Zero really lets the game take any form that the group desires, when combined with a cooperative DM that is aiming to create fun. Don't want dice rolls? Then let's ignore rolls; you get a pool of "roll results" up to ten 5s, five 10s, two 15s, and one 20 that refills every minute. Assign as you see fit.

that's actually a really cool, interesting idea.

and thanks everyone. you've helped uncloud my head :biggrin:

[Psyren]

The results pool is weird to me. It implies that a 5 is ten times as likely to occur as a 20, when with a fair die they are exactly equal.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

If everyone at the table is having fun, then you are doing it right.

I think this is the answer to the question of "Is there a way to do 'social event' wrong?"

Because nothing about this answer applies to D&D. You could say it about Chess, Candyland, Charades, or Diplomacy.

Wait, no. You couldn't say it about Diplomacy. :smalltongue:

So, actually--that's my counter-question. Why does that answer specifically apply to D&D, and not to the other games I listed?

[Phelix-Mu]

The results pool is weird to me. It implies that a 5 is ten times as likely to occur as a 20, when with a fair die they are exactly equal.

If the results pool emulated a die roll, it wouldn't be an interesting alternative. At least in my mind. You could certainly create a pool that did emulate the die roll, specifically useful for when no one has any dice.

My idea when I took one minute to create the idea, was to create a spread that would be more useful in a game less about combat mechanics and more about free-form role play (which is what comes to my mind when people want to play but don't want to roll). Taking 20 takes more time, taking 10 is easy, and being crappy is nothing special.

The array is probably imperfect and could use some tweaking, but it was the rough sketch of an idea that I literally came up with while posting.

[Psyren]

If the results pool emulated a die roll, it wouldn't be an interesting alternative. At least in my mind. You could certainly create a pool that did emulate the die roll, specifically useful for when no one has any dice.

You misunderstand - I'm not saying more low rolls than high rolls is bad (indeed, since the players are going to naturally assign the low rolls to either inconsequential stuff or stuff they are really good at, you have to do this.) It was more the specific quantities that I found odd. By all means, don't mind me :smallsmile:

[Phelix-Mu]

You misunderstand - I'm not saying more low rolls than high rolls is bad (indeed, since the players are going to naturally assign the low rolls to either inconsequential stuff or stuff they are really good at, you have to do this.) It was more the specific quantities that I found odd. By all means, don't mind me :smallsmile:

Ah, well, sorry then. I really picked the quantities out of a hat, along the general lines of

Ten 5s = Anybody can putz around full-time.

Five 10s = Be average by taking a moment to think about it.

Two 15s = Yay! Lucky!

One 20 = Be very special once a minute.

You could definitely tweak up the 15s and 20s by one or two and probably not destroy the game (especially in it's now totally alien form of not relying on luck).

[Slipperychicken]

So, actually--that's my counter-question. Why does that answer specifically apply to D&D, and not to the other games I listed?

My answer applies to all the games you listed because the goal in each one is to have fun.

[johnbragg]

So, actually--that's my counter-question. Why does that answer specifically apply to D&D, and not to the other games I listed?

Because D&D is a very flexible, very open-ended, and very hackable system, or at this point even set of systems (from retroclones to Pathfinder and 4E). The others listed, much less so.

If you're playing Diplomacy with dice, you're doing it wrong. That's not a moral judgment, just a statement of fact--you are playing a non-Diplomacy game. If you're playing chess with three players, you're not playing chess. Etc.

D&D is a flexible enough thing that you can push it in a wide variety of directions and still be "playing D&D." You can run a no-magic setting with the PCs as Experts and Warriors if you want to. Or you can run a full science-fiction setting with the old Spelljammer books, either updated to 3E or using the old 2E rules. If you want, you can do it dicelessly using the scheme that Phelix-Mu just came up with.

[AMFV]

So, actually--that's my counter-question. Why does that answer specifically apply to D&D, and not to the other games I listed?

Clearly you've never played Monopoly or Poker with houserules. Frequently groups that have been playing things for an extended period will alter the rules to suite their playstyle better. This is as true in board games as it is in roleplaying games. Of course there's less of this if you play irregularly or play with strangers, but the same is true of houseruling D&D.