Gritty Campaigns. How you play one?

[GlassJaw]

I understand that not everyone agrees that running a G&G campaign with 5E is a good idea or even viable. That said, I find it quite annoying that on page 2, I suggested that those that share that opinion start a new thread for that discussion.

However, 2 pages later, people are still rehashing the same argument whereas others want to actually discuss our game. You aren't offering anything new and useful to the thread. Heck, even mods are chiming in...

 

[jgsugden]

100% disagree. It is mostly mechanics.

OK. Then go ahead and figure out your rules and then use them to run a Care Bears, Rainbow Bright, Monchi-chi campaign that is true to the original source material. If it is mostly mechanics, then this should work to create a gritty campaign.

(For the record, yes, you can tell a Gritty story with these characters... but not one true to the source material).

 

[Sacrosanct]

OK. Then go ahead and figure out your rules and then use them to run a Care Bears, Rainbow Bright, Monchi-chi campaign that is true to the original source material. If it is mostly mechanics, then this should work to create a gritty campaign.

(For the record, yes, you can tell a Gritty story with these characters... but not one true to the source material).

To this point, I'd say that WFRP 1e is one of the most gritty games out there. A few years ago, a friend converted a WFRP 1e campaign to 5e. We played 5e RAW, and it felt almost as gritty as when we played WFRP. I think people confuse grit with lethality. There's some overlap, but they are different things.

To the OP's point, you asked for suggestions, and here's another one: take a campaign or adventure from a system known for being gritty (like WFRP) and convert it to 5e. That, with usage of some of the optional rules in 5e (like less healing, focus on exhaustion, disease, etc), and you'll have a game that feels pretty gritty. My original comment mentioned AiME (which is 5e), but that isn't the only conversion by any means to make the game feel more gritty.

 

[the Jester]

Dnd has always been intended as a high magic game, you can see that from the magic items list, and pretty much every adventure every written for it. 5e doubled down on this by adding magic to almost every subclass, and making at-will cantrips fundamental to caster balance. Sure, you can have a party of just mundane barbarians, fighters and rogues, but you're not really playing 5e anymore.

I find your one-true-wayism disappointing. Please stop telling people they aren't playing D&D because they aren't playing it your way. You are indeed really playing 5e if your party consists of all non-magic-using characters.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No amount of narration is going to make any game that has Vicious Mockery gritty.

Well... if you could manage to make a Bard using Vicious Mockery or Uncontrollable Hideous Laughter come off like the Joker... maybe.

Same for glamor bards and whatever that fire is druids cast that give allies advantage ditto. As I understand that one, failed skill check means the victims glow basically like the guys from Twilight. That is the opposite of gritty and no voice acting will save it.

Faerie Fire, and no, I suppose even the name does not exactly scream 'gritty.' ;P

But that's just the lowest-hanging fruit on the heavily-laden D&D-magic-isn't-the-least-bit-gritty tree.

Dnd has always been intended as a high magic game, you can see that from the magic items list, and pretty much every adventure every written for it. 5e doubled down on this by adding magic to almost every subclass, and making at-will cantrips fundamental to caster balance. Sure, you can have a party of just mundane barbarians, fighters and rogues, but you're not really playing 5e anymore.

5e is also intended as a starting point, so no matter how heavily you modify it, you're still running 5e. Ban 35 out of 40 PH sub-classes? Still 5e. Replace hp & HD with wounds/vitality & reserves? Still 5e. Roll 3d6 instead of d20? Still 5e....

 

[BookBarbarian]

play AiME, or the very least steal the shadow point system from it (Adventures in Middle Earth is the 5e version of Middle Earth)

I'll second this.

Adventures in Middle Earth has stripped the spellcasting out of 5e. It does have magic, but it's very subtle and based in class abilities or feats rather than spells. Things that wouldn't even slow down 5e PCs can be big concerns here. There is no spells for food and water, no Goodberries. No spells to cure exhaustion or resurrect.

Beyond that, as has been pointed out the Shadow Point system is an excellent way to represent the spiritual/emotional toll it takes to constantly put yourself out there and fight evil, and the temptation to use evil's methods yourself.

Even in games where my players didn't earn shadow points, the description of the setting can invoke a very gloomy feeling. I ran the Don't leave the Path adventure form Wilderland Adventures and getting though Mirkwood felt like a breath of fresh air even though the party really only had 2 fights in the forest itself.

If Tolkien isn't your thing the material could be easily adapted to a non-Middle-Earth setting of your choice. I could see a lot of what's in there working in a Westeros setting with very little tweaking for example.

 

[robus]

Oh, there's no need for debate.
Thanks to DM Empowerment, 5e is a viable system for any use. It may not be recognizable when you're done ignoring, over-ruling, & modding it, but it'll be viable.

Sadly, no, just ideas. If I were to start with the D&D versions of arcane magic - bookish wizardry, warlock pacts, inborn sorcery - I'd break it down with each having a cost or danger: Wizards become obsessive (indeed, must be obsessive to finish their training successfully) and go insane; warlocks imperil their souls and risk being possessed permanently; sorcerers slowly transform into their supernatural ancestor.

The stumbling block is a good spiraling mechanic for incremental loss of control of your character.

I would add that concentration could also add some risk of exhaustion. At the start of your turn roll a constitution save (DC 10 + the spell level) roll under and you must choose to take a level of exhaustion or end the spell.

 

[robus]

5e is also intended as a starting point, so no matter how heavily you modify it, you're still running 5e. Ban 35 out of 40 PH sub-classes? Still 5e. Replace hp & HD with wounds/vitality & reserves? Still 5e. Roll 3d6 instead of d20? Still 5e....

Totally agree on nixing sub-classes (and even classses) and not impacting 5e, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to replace HP and HD and the d20 and still try to call it 5e! At some point players are going to go WTF?!

 

[robus]

I understand that not everyone agrees that running a G&G campaign with 5E is a good idea or even viable. That said, I find it quite annoying that on page 2, I suggested that those that share that opinion start a new thread for that discussion.

However, 2 pages later, people are still rehashing the same argument whereas others want to actually discuss our game. You aren't offering anything new and useful to the thread. Heck, even mods are chiming in...

Them's the breaks in an open forum. Just choose who you want to engage with within the thread and ignore the noise if it's not your cup of tea. And sometimes there are pearls in the tangents.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Totally agree on nixing sub-classes (and even classses) and not impacting 5e, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to replace HP and HD and the d20 and still try to call it 5e! At some point players are going to go WTF?!

Oh, cutting classes (cutting all but the 5 sub-classes in the PH that don't use magic also cuts all but 3 classes) impacts 5e. That's the point, to change the nature/feel the mechanics force on the campaign. Without slots as a resource, the party won't be able to face as many encounters per day. Pile that on top of the longer time requirements to get the benefit of a rest, and pacing would slow down a great deal.

But it's still 5e.

(OK, maybe replacing the d20 is pushing it.)