Open endedvs well defined abilities

[MrStabby]

What type of spells/abilities to people perfer? What would people prefer to see more of? Open ended or well defined?


So by open ended I mean things like illusion spells, spells like command and suggestion, or abilities like the cleric's divine intervention.

By well defined I mean things like scorching ray - it does one thing with well defined consequences.

And there are some in the middle like conjure animals - there is a finite range of options but the list is pretty big.




Personally I find it depends on the table - at some tables there will always be that one guy who tries to push the more loosely defined abilities too far and to get results disproportionate to the spell level, at other tables that same spell will open up really fun ways of playing and really develop characters.

[Tanarii]

I either prefer well defined or I need players that accept I tend to rule conservatively.

And by conservatively I mean not allowing them to "push the more loosely defined abilities too far and to get results disproportionate to the spell level". IMX the majority of players consider that conservative.


And there are some in the middle like conjure animals - there is a finite range of options but the list is pretty big.
Four options to pick from is pretty big? :smallamused:

[MrStabby]

I either prefer well defined or I need players that accept I tend to rule conservatively.

And by conservatively I mean not allowing them to "push the more loosely defined abilities too far and to get results disproportionate to the spell level". IMX the majority of players consider that conservative.


Four options to pick from is pretty big? :smallamused:

OK... a lot of outcomes! Maybe not so many options. I had a mental list of spells including better examples, like polymorph... which I should have used.

[Tanarii]

OK... a lot of outcomes! Maybe not so many options. I had a mental list of spells including better examples, like polymorph... which I should have used.
Joke was its actually a good example because who gets to pick is contentious.

[stoutstien]

I like a 60/40 split of form/crunch. a lot of spells tend to be 10/90 and can fill very blah if not used in the one part of the game that is also 10/90 with combat.

The point of games like DnD is to have open ended action resolution so heavy hand rules can bog the game.

[da newt]

As a player I prefer to know what my actions can and can't accomplish, so I tend to prefer well defined abilities, effects, spells, etc

There is little more frustrating to me than when I read a black and white definition of what an ability does and then attempt to use it in a game and the DM decides to interpret / rule differently.

On the other hand, I do like to be creative and find new ways to use the tools available ...

[Lunali]

DnD is built towards well defined abilities, so I would prefer more of those in the future. In general, I prefer open ended abilities, but they fit better in a system that encourages open ended gameplay.

[Zombimode]

Open Ended and Well Defined do lot lie on the opposite sides of a spectrum: any combination of these qualities is possible.


The 3.5 spell Polymorph for instance is Well Defined: it is not open to interpretation of what the spell does.
It is also open ended: from just reading the spell description you can not infer the effect for any one instance of the spell being cast.

Magic Missile (of I think all D&D editions) is Well Defined and not Open Ended: it's effect is not open to interpretation and you know exactly what will happen for all casting instances.

Many of 2e's illusion spells are Open Ended and not Well Defined: there is both a lot of room of what can be created with a illusion spell and how subjects will react to them.

2e's Charm Person is not Open Ended and not Well Defined: what exactly a friendly behaviour entails lies at least somewhat in the purview of the GM but the effect is always the same.

[heavyfuel]

Depends on the DM.

If the DM is prone to railroading, then open ended abilities are just going to make either make them resent the ability, or make it useless.

For DMs that encourage thinking outside the box and creative problem solving, then open ended abilities are the way to go.

[Dr. Cliché]

I like spells to be well-defined, though I should point out that this is not an antonym of 'open-ended'.

I don't mind spells being open-ended. I do mind open-ended spells being very poorly defined so that I'm unclear on what the practical limits are within their open-endedness.