Wandering Adventure Party

I literally just explained a thing you cannot do. You cannot play Dragon Age in D&D. It either won’t be Dragon Age, or it won’t be D&D. This game of make-believe is still a game with rules and limits, and it can’t do everything.

No, they definitely asked the wrong question. If they ask “how can I do [thing]”, it assumes it’s possible to do [thing]. But if they can’t do [thing], the question is invalid, and there is no correct answer.

Honestly, the way you put it, it’s like they don’t actually want to fix the problem. They just want their solution to be right. Anyone who doesn’t tell them what they want to hear is the REAL problem, even if what they want to hear is a lie.

Do you want me to lie?

See, that’s the point of the XY problem. They asked the wrong question.

Playing Dragon Age in D&D simply would not work. Even after a significant amount of effort, you’d either end up with something entirely unlike Dragon Age or something that barely resembles D&D. So I have to tell them “no” or I’m lying. And if someone stops listening and considers me hostile because I’m not willing to lie to them, then it’s absolutely on them.

I have seen people try to add systems to D&D to let them play Dragon Age within the system. I have then turned my head to the left and looked at the Dragon Age RPG on my shelf. If you want to play Dragon Age as a TTRPG, I’ll tell you the easiest way to do that. No gutting, no retrofitting, no ship of Theseus…

If you see that as hostile, that’s on you.

This is called the X/Y problem. You ask “how do I use X to do Y”, and the answer is you don’t. You don’t even want to. You want to do Y, and just assumed that X is how you’d do it. So the answer might actually be “don’t use X.”

To some people, they see your question as “How can I do [thing] in [game that does not do thing]?” Since they see it as an inherently flawed question, they try to fix your root issue and explain how to do [thing]. It’s not the answer you wanted, but it might be the one you need.

I will admit, some people just like to shit on [game you’re playing], and will take every opportunity to hype up [game they’re playing]. But just as often, I see people defending [game they’re playing] just because they’re already playing it. And there is no harm in playing multiple games.

I have a game on my shelf built for pure fight scenes that can’t do downtime (Panic at the Dojo), and a game built for wholesome slice-of-life that doesn’t let you do combat (Golden Sky Stories). They simply cannot do what the other does, and I wouldn’t like either of them as much if they did.

I’d just turn it into a running joke that roughly 50 different bandits have the same picture of the same woman in a locket, and another 30 keep sending money to the same “mother”. Then I’ll make a cult where the phrase “For the light in my darkness” is some twisted mantra.

No, the world is enormous and you only need to worry about a small part of it. There is literally nothing over there, and no reason you’d want to go there. The game is over here. Leaving this area is the same as leaving the game, which you are free to do.

I think better advice in that situation is to find players who want to play the game you’re running. It might be fun to make a tunnel-exploration campaign, but I’m running that dungeon over there. We’ll do the tunnel thing another time.

Also, to rephrase your dad’s advice, know enough of the world to be able to add shit where you need to. I don’t even know if the world is round, but I don’t need to. If the players are in a church, I’ll make sure to know the popular religions in case I need to roleplay as a priest.

I found a map-making site that is, let’s be honest, shit. The maps it makes can only ever be “good enough”, and never great. This means I don’t waste time trying to make them great, and can actually finish the dang things. Plus, if the players decide not to go to the noble manor, then it’s no big loss.

This idea goes for a lot of the game, actually. If you spend less time on the story, then it’s no big loss if the plot takes a tangent. And they probably weren’t going to be as invested in a forced narrative as they would be for something more organic.