[sirwhinesalot]

I think this is a neat product but not one I have any interest in. I play board games in part to avoid the digital world.

If a board game needs a computer to handle the rules, then it is a needlessly complicated board game.

[reactordev]

Surely a companion app wouldn’t count, right? I couldn’t DM without it. I would need binders and binders of information or my iPad. I prefer my iPad.

[sirwhinesalot]

It 100% counts. As a somewhat irregular DM, DnD is a very poorly designed game.

Using digital tools as a DM for any sort of TTRPG is justifiable for the same reasons we use computers instead of books.

But the real problem is that players need digital tools too as the character sheet for any character with spellcasting is unworkable by hand.

Any prepared caster would need to manually copy every spell of the right level from their spell list onto paper every few level ups. If they don't write out the spell exactly as written (i.e, if they summarize) then you're opening the flood gates of rules lawyering and googling/book opening mid session.

Many other TTRPGs don't have this problem because they are designed with "playing with paper" in mind.

[galagawinkle489]

Book opening is fine. Post-it notes exist. You can easily open the book to the right spell. Just write down the names of the spells you have chosen to memorise for the day on a piece of paper and cross them off when you cast them.

As for rules lawyering... That is just playing by the rules. That is how the game is meant to be played: rules as written except as modified by the group by agreement. Rules lawyering just means sticking to what the rules actually are.

Maybe you mean something else?

As for googling, why would you need to google a spell?

[sirwhinesalot]

It's a horrible experience. I can only suggest you try out TTRPGs that don't need this. I haven't tried it yet but Daggerheart seems to avoid the problem by providing spell cards. You can do the same in DnD and I suggest doing so, but it's not assumed by the game's design.

All the old-school OSR inspired stuff doesn't have this problem.

You should not need to repeatedly and consistently open the rule-book to play what is essentially a board game. That's ok the first time you play a board game, not ok the 20th time. You google a spell because it is much faster than opening the book. DnD combat is already way too slow as it is.

[reactordev]

Investing in a refillable printer and card stock is great for this.

I used to make MTG style cards for spells, quest items, etc. something physical the players can keep with them.

This made casting extremely efficient as the caster has the card with the info on it. All they have to do is turn it in, roll the dice, and describe their action.

[galagawinkle489]

It isn't a board game. Maybe that's your problem. It is a roleplaying game. The mechanics of spellcasting aren't very important because combat just isn't very important. Most people don't even play with a grid and figurines (at least traditionally).

You haven't explained why it is a "horrible experience" to look at a photocopied piece of paper or to open a book to a post-it note bookmark. I do these things every day with other books, for things like work.

Are you just bad at reading books or unfamiliar with how to use them?

[sirwhinesalot]

> Most people don't even play with a grid and figurines (at least traditionally).

This is simply not true. If you want to play a pure roleplaying game, play a rules-light one. DnD is not that.

Everyone homebrews little bits so I'm not going to harp too much on that, but there's no point discussing the issues of DnD's design if we're not talking about DnD's design but rather whatever your homebrewed version of DnD is.

Did you know the game is balanced around 8 combat encounters per session? Do you know how many tables actually play that number of combats per session? It's a badly designed game.

[roxolotl]

To be honest as someone who's built a dozen dice rolling and dming tools for myself I've recently switched mostly back to paper. There's just something really nice about rolling physical dice on a physical table while flipping through physical books and notes. It's super cumbersome and I don't think there's anything wrong with using digital tools. I play most of my games over a digital tabletop since those I play with aren't near by.

[reactordev]

Yes on the physical dice rolling, no on the tombs and tombs of dead trees to lug around with me. Even just the handbooks are over 1,000 pretty printed shavings of poplar pulp. Having a cardboard paper screen and a small scratch pad and empty character sheets is the most paper I’ll bring.

Physical books feel better because it’s physical. You can touch it, you can smell it, you can read it, and some you can hear (when you open them or turn the pages). This is why we prefer it. However, I reserve those for the shelves at home.

[galagawinkle489]

Referring to books as "dead trees" is such a pathetic thought-terminating cliché.

If you don't want to cart books around that's fine but you can easily play the game with only the basic three (and players just need one).

If you are using a book just for a spell or an item or two you can just photocopy the page.

[reactordev]

Sir, I’m in the middle of a 20 year campaign…

[notjustanymike]

There's plenty of games where either the setup is tedious, or some of the rules create confusion. Game of the year "Wingspan" confused everyone in my group the first time we played, and only made sense after watching a YouTube explanation. A confident system would have been great.

Setting up a game can be tedious as well; Axis and Allies is notorious for taking longer to set up than to play, but it's a lot of fun once you get going.

[sirwhinesalot]

I actively avoid boardgames with overly long setup times. There's no reason to spend more time prepping than playing if you can play something else with better prep time instead. Time is in limited supply as an adult. If a game needs a digital support device, then there's no reason to waste time on the "board" aspect. Why not just play digital game instead?

Confusing rules can be ok, it depends on how complex they are (as in, what interactions they have). If the confusing rule is mostly self contained, then after playing a few times you'll learn it and it's no longer a problem. If the confusion stems from how the rule interacts with other rules, then it's a much bigger issue since you constantly need to cross-check the rules reference or worse, youtube videos and forums, on what to do.

One of my favorite games, Arkham Horror the card game, has some pretty complicated rules, but as long as they're just part of the player cards or base mechanics you eventually learn them and they become a non-issue.

It's a whole other issue when the complex rules are on specific campaign cards. Each campaign is only played a few times, so that means you never get familiar with the rule and learning it doesn't really "pay off". The campaign experience is lessened because you had to stop the game to check youtube or a forum to resolve the discussion, or just bicker and argue until a consensus is reached nobody is happy with.

As new campaigns get released the complexity of the campaign cards just keeps getting worse, requiring more prep-time as well, and my enjoyment of the game lessens as a result. The first couple of campaigns remain the most enjoyable, even on repeat plays, because they're just easier to explain to new players.