What *isn't* D&D?

[Arlough]

I just recently started looking into the 5e boards, and I keep finding people talking about what isn't D&D.
Things like

If it doesn't have 6 ability scores, it isn't D&D.​

and

If it doesn't have vancian magic, it isn't D&D.​

So I am wondering, what is the line for you? What isn't D&D.

This is just gathering info, not a place for argument. If you disagree with someone, create a new thread to argue on, and quote them to draw them there.

Also, this forum is about what isn't D&D. If you want to talk about what is D&D, you can do that here.

I'll see about updating this list periodically.

What isn't D&D?

• If it doesn't have 6 ability scores, it isn't D&D.
• If it doesn't have vancian magic, it isn't D&D.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Games outwith the fantasy genre.
Classless points-based systems such as GURPS.
Damage systems that don't use hit points.
Games that lack a plethora of monsters and magic items, though this is an option I think is worth considering for D&D, where the DM creates them all.
Games that don't use lots of funny dice.
Games that don't use alignment.

Arguably, armour as damage reduction and death spirals aren't D&D.
Also arguably, games without an extensive spell selection, though this would mean that OD&D and Basic aren't D&D.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

For me, if it's not set in a vaguely medieval European-flavored setting, it's not D&D.

 

[Ellington]

Well, there are only a few dealbreakers I have for D&D.

For me, D&D has to be an RPG set in some sort of fantasy setting and have:

-Multiple classes for players to pick from.
-Multiple races for players to pick from.
-Arcane and divine magic.
-Classic D&D monsters.
-Combat, exploration and social situations.
-Multiple ways for the game to be run.
-Multiple ways for the players to handle situations.
-A solid set of rules that encourage creativity and allow for smooth gameplay.

And most importantly, it has to have dungeons and dragons, of course.

There are other things I associate with "classic D&D", like alignments, the classic four classes, elves, dwarves, halflings, AC, etc. but if removing some of those things was to create a better system I'd be all for it. Minor elements like those aren't dealbreakers to me.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Call of Cthulhu

 

[Andor]

What isn't D&D...

... 4 color super-heroics! Or any color for that matter.
... High-tech anything. D&D can, barely, stretch to encompass some steam-punk bits although it does magic-punk better.
... Civilization and empires. Seriously. There is a reason D&D worlds are always either starting up, collapsing or have collapsed. Because that's when doughty bands of individuals can be deciding factors and that's what we want to play. When you've got Imperial Rome whose response to any problem is to send a 5,000 man army, your 6 wanders are out of a job.
... Economics.
... Dark, grim, gritty realism. It just doesn't.
... All-powerful magic. Not that Wizards/Clerics/Druids aren't powerful, depending on your edition, but it doesn't do the Ars Magica/Hogwarts end of the spectrum where magic is everything and does everything and if you don't have it then life sucks for you. Complaints about quadratic wizards aside I've never once seen an all-wizard party. I don't think I've even seen an all-spellcaster party.

 

[TrippyHippy]

It's not a game that exclusively focusses on tactical, simulational or narrative gameplay, but combines all elements in varying degrees (which are broadly determined by the group playing it).

 

[Lanefan]

What is not D&D?

* - Considerations of grid trumping considerations of realism
* - Economics beyond simple treasury division (thanks, [MENTION=1879]Andor[/MENTION] )
* - A boardgame
* - Any game system significantly missing any of the elements I listed (and quoted) in the "What is D&D" companion thread to this one
* - Characters played as if they were pieces on a game board, without personality or character, and always doing exactly what is expected of them
* - A game where character "build" and-or optimization trumps character play
* - A game that uses a non-medieval (or earlier) setting as its base

However...

Civilization and empires. Seriously. There is a reason D&D worlds are always either starting up, collapsing or have collapsed. Because that's when doughty bands of individuals can be deciding factors and that's what we want to play. When you've got Imperial Rome whose response to any problem is to send a 5,000 man army, your 6 wanders are out of a job.

... this is one thing I've found the game can handle just fine, if for no other reason than the "6 wanders" can usually get to lots of places the 50 Centuries can't.

Lan-"sometimes, the party puts the army out of a job"-efan

 

[Akaiku]

To me, it is always a turn-baised tactical fantasy fighting game where oddball misanthropes+one guy who can talk go and save the world from a mad god/wizard who's out to control everything with an awesome magic spell.


Other considerations are not specific to DnD.

 

[Tony Vargas]

D&D isn't:

• a floor wax
• a science fiction game*
• a lifestyle choice
• an elitist club*
• a nerds-only hobby
• played only by guys
• too sophisticated for a player with a low-average IQ
• a noble calling
• a reason to get killed in a steam tunnel
• a Satanic plot
• a primer on the occult
• something worth staying up to 2am gabbing about*

*OK, it shouldn't be...