Would you play D&D if the sacred cows were sacrificed?

[Technomancer]

Elric was well versed in summoning gods at the start of the series. In the first book he summons the king of water elementals to save him from drowning. He's still using an artifact sword at that point, but it's the old Eternal Champions, Eural Aubek (misspelled that first name.)

Not that I agree that D&D does real sword and sorcery well, but to be fair, the start of the first book may be the beginning of the story, but it is by no means the beginning of Elric's career. He is already mid to high level (in D&D terms) when the story begins.

 

[DestroyYouAlot]

At the risk of going a bit off-topic... [long, slightly off-topic rant]

Y'know, no matter how much folks love to knock 3e as inconsequential and sub-par (and they do), and assume 4e will sweep "lesser roleplaying sheep" along with it (because that's who plays 3e, right?) through sheer marketing gravity, there's a couple of things wrong with the assumption.

First off, there's common comparisons made between the switch from 2e to 3e, and every "edition change" before it. And every edition has had its holdouts, those who prefer an older edition of the game to what came after. Nothing wrong with that, far from it. But there's a phenomenon that's peculiar (so far, at least) to 3e.

3e attracted a lot of players, plenty of them new to the hobby; however it also attracted a) players who had resisted the changeover from 1e to 2e, or even OD&D to 1e (I've talked to and played with a few, myself), and b) people who had dropped out of the hobby entirely (myself included). Why? Because it's a good system. You may not like it, and everyone's entitled to their opinion, but 3e cleared up a lot of what some people never liked about D&D (THAC0 and weird save categories was just the tip of the iceberg), and did a lot of stuff that people had been house ruling in for a long time, anyway. Add that to the d20 mechanic and CR system - which are amazing DM tools, whether or not they're "perfect" - and you've got a system that was what a lot of folks had been looking for for years - and it works. (Personally, I took one look at the 3.0 PhB, and - after a eight-year hiatus - picked up the dice again, just like that.)

d20 and OGL is just the icing on the cake - but it's tasty freakin' icing. There are enough quality supplements out that you could game for years without mining out the potential. When D&D goes to 4e, WotC may or not leave d20 completely behind, or attempt to create a new OGL standard that fits with what they do with 4e, but I don't believe they've got the clout to shut the Pandora's box they opened with OGL the way it stands. That's a pretty heavy incentive to stay with 3e-based fantasy roleplaying, right there. And if the OGL (as it stands now) goes the way of the dodo, d20 supplements on eBay get real cheap, real fast. I know I'll be stocking up.

I guess what I'm getting at, is 3e has some pretty substantial staying power, even if it's no longer published, and not just as a "niche" for grumpy grognards. (Again, grumpy grognards for which I have the utmost respect, and who got us where we are today, but let's call a spade a spade. ) Don't be surprised if plenty of kids who got started with 3.0, or even 3.5 (I still haven't made that switch) decide that they like their core rules the way they are, thanks, and WotC be damned. [/long, slightly off-topic rant]

 

[Odhanan]

If say 4th ed comes out and all of the sacred cows get slaughtered (hit points, AC, levels, etc) would you play?

No, I wouldn't play, or at least less 4E than previous editions of the game, because 4E then wouldn't be "D&D" to me. If I want to play without sacred cows of D&D, I can use WFRP, Stormbringer, RuneQuest, whatever other system I want. When I play D&D however, I want the sacred cows to be there, the AC, the HP, the Levels, the XP. That's part of the D&D experience to me.

 

[billd91]

In the officially published adventurers, if there was just as much if not more treasure, that would indicate that by the book, the advneturers required just as much equipment no? are you just handwaving away part of TSR's publishing history with one hand and trying to cling to some part of it with the other?

I don't disagree with your philosphy, but it doesn't hold up 'officially'.

The designers of 3E have explicity stated that they expected the PCs to have a certain amount of gear to be up to snuff when dealing with CRs of their own level. There is no such statement about 1st edition. The presence of lots of magic in the old adventures doesn't mean any such thing in 1st edition, nor was it true with monsters being, generally, a lot weaker. I would say that just about the strongest inference you can make regarding the amount of treasure in the old modules is that the designers thought such treasure was an appropriate award to hand out for the situation (treasure being both a monetary reward an an XP reward) or they wanted to include specific items for use within that module or later in the series of modules.

If you want a strong implication that 1st/2nd edition design expected PCs to have as much or more equipment than 3E in order to face level-appropriate challenges, you're going to need a lot more than the treasure dished out in the old modules.

I'd say more about Elric embarking on his second career in the stories, but Technomancer has already done so quite well.

 

[Warbringer]

...but I find it a bit too bland. I'm not fond of any system that has the possibility of death from a single blow when you're otherwise unhurt).

Cheers!

You mean like D+D, or do you ignore the massive damage rule?

 

[Cadfan]

I voted neutral because this poll tells me what this hypothetical 4th Ed doesn't have, but not what it does.

If its a good game, I'd play it.

That being said, I like hit points, ac, and so forth. They may not be perfectly realistic, but they're fun and functional and require little bookkeeping. So I don't see why those would need to go.

 

[Lanefan]

The designers of 3E have explicity stated that they expected the PCs to have a certain amount of gear to be up to snuff when dealing with CRs of their own level. There is no such statement about 1st edition. The presence of lots of magic in the old adventures doesn't mean any such thing in 1st edition, nor was it true with monsters being, generally, a lot weaker. I would say that just about the strongest inference you can make regarding the amount of treasure in the old modules is that the designers thought such treasure was an appropriate award to hand out for the situation (treasure being both a monetary reward an an XP reward) or they wanted to include specific items for use within that module or later in the series of modules.

In 1e the DM was left to challenge the party with whatever seemed suitable for their levels-equipment-abilities, and any half-cognizant DM fairly quickly learned what their parties could and couldn't handle. 3e has this CR mechanic which, because it's in the rules, some (many?) DM's feel they have to use regardless of other factors...in this case, equipment level...thus, a DM is somewhat forced to have a certain level of magic in his-her game to make that system work.

CR is a fine candidate for a cow - maybe not yet sacred - to become hamburger...

Lanefan

 

[Mercule]

If you get rid of classes and levels, then it ain't D&D. Really, if you got rid of all the cattle, there'd be nothing holding me to D&D over Hero besides modules and maybe a setting, though I tend to homebrew. Currently, it's a combination of that and quicker on-the-fly NPCs and rules adjudication.

Also, I'd say the 6 stats, ranging from 3-18, are a major cow that needs to stay.

Conversely, I don't think Vancian magic is. What needs to stay are things like magic missle, fireball, etc. Any system that would include the majority of the old staple spells would fit my bill.

 

[Templetroll]

Due to some discussion on other threads I got asking a question. If say 4th ed comes out and all of the sacred cows get slaughtered (hit points, AC, levels, etc) would you play? For the sake of arguement the new D&D plays very well without the Sacred cows. What sacred cows could you not live without? What are the "must have SCs?

I would continue to play D&D, whether it is 3.5 or previous versions.

I think D&D should keep the whole herd.

 

[mmadsen]

Due to some discussion on other threads I got asking a question. If say 4th ed comes out and all of the sacred cows get slaughtered (hit points, AC, levels, etc) would you play? For the sake of arguement the new D&D plays very well without the Sacred cows. What sacred cows could you not live without? What are the "must have SCs?

If the game plays well without the sacred cows, I don't need the sacred cows.

The closest thing to a must-have sacred cow is the design philosophy that D&D is a game that is meant to be played. It's not a mathematical exercise, and it's not a dramatic toolkit; it's a game with fun bits borrowed from other fields (mathematical models, literature, etc.).

When I think of what makes D&D D&D -- in the good sense -- it is most certainly not THAC0, or hit points, or magic missile, or save vs. death magic. I know that, because I've played "D&D" with various rules -- some official D&D, some not -- and what made it interesting for me and my friends was the open-ended challenge of interacting with a dangerous fictional world, not memorizing esoteric rules -- which we did too, of course.