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

[Slobber Monster]

Things like HP and levels didn't even occur to me as being sacred cows - rather they're core mechanics of the system! Even then you could change them to some other mechanics and still have something very DnDish by holding on to the setting assumptions built into the game.

When I think of DnD sacred cows I think of things like:

core races
vancian magic
arcane / divine magic split
schools of magic
turn undead as something different from magic
fighting clerics
standard adventuring party = fighter, mage, rogue, cleric
alignment as a tangible property of creatures, items, and spells
planar cosmology
dragons categorized as metallic = good, colored = evil with matching breath weapons
hill / stone / fire / frost / cloud / storm giants
a multitidue of somewhat redundant humanoid races
wands and staves as charged items rather than foci
low power level invisibility which dispels on attack
characters using a multitude of spells and magic items which individually provide relatively small bonuses to attacks, ac, abilities, saves, etc.

 

[KB9JMQ]

my hat of it would know no limits.

Arrr. What he said.

 

[Ghendar]

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'm not saying it couldn't be a good system without the sacred cows, but it wouldn't be D&D to me.


EDIT, Hmm guess I should have read before posting. Ari said it well

I'm not saying you couldn't have a perfectly good fantasy RPG without classes and levels. It just wouldn't be D&D.

 

[WayneLigon]

Slaughtering some sacred cows would not turn D&D into GURPS. There are a number of ways you can kill almost all of them without going that route. We've already seen a number of things pointing down that road, even among the d20 crowd.

True20 kills off attributes, consolidates classes, uses a different damage mechanic, and no Vancian casting.
d20 Cthulhu effectively does away with classes and just presents skills packages.
Iron Heroes effectively does away with magic and magic items completely, and has a different skill buy mechanic.
Arcana Unearthed kills off several beloved spells, kills the arcane/divine divide, and gives the casters way more options than core.

Each one of them takes a cow and makes it into tasty, tasty steak with nice garnishing on the side and all of them are more or less compatible with core D&D. Now just take all of that a few steps further.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Yeah, exactly. As I said in my post above, why not just play any of the hundreds of RPGs that don't use any of D&D's sacred cows? Plus, I just don't buy the whole "new technology" notion. Yeah, AC was changed, but the basic concept and mechanic remained. Improve upon what's there, that's one thing. Scrapping it entirely, that's quite another story.

But there are a lot of internal inconsistencies even in the game itself.

CR doesn't work.

Player hit points being different then every other thing in existance? Stupid.

% chance to miss with spells thanks to concealment/blur, etc...? Stupid.

Turning undead? Stupid as currently written.

Unified mechanics that can be used for various levels of play that don't get bogged down at higher levels? That's worth cooking some steaks.

 

[Sejs]

If you want to play GURPS, then play GURPS! Don't redesign D&D to be exactly like GURPS and then call it D&D. The same for the World of Darkness, etc.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Psion]

The assignment of the term "sacred cow" carries the assessment that the thing to be "sacrificed" is uneccessary, undesirable, or outdated.

I don't share the self-loathing and guilt that somehow empowered the notion that in any way are many of the things that are being labeled "sacred cows" are in any way outmoded gaming based on a minority view of the hobby. Indeed, many of these supposed "holdbacks" have been proven to be sorely missed aspects by those who have played other systems (frex, I hear how lack of hp, which is a "sacred cow" per the OP/poll, is a big stumbling block for people's enjoyment of playing True20.)

 

[3d6]

I don't think I could cope with the loss of levels or hit points. Levels are just to strongly associated with D&D, and hit points are simply the easiest way to track damage, and combat doesn't need more complication.

 

[Choranzanus]

But there are a lot of internal inconsistencies even in the game itself.

True, but...

CR doesn't work.

True, but that is hardly sacred cow.

Player hit points being different then every other thing in existance? Stupid.

It is not realistic, but I would not call it stupid. The game works surprisingly well.

% chance to miss with spells thanks to concealment/blur, etc...? Stupid.

Turning undead? Stupid as currently written.

Again not exactly sacred cows, and not really large problem.

The point buy system you suggest is appealing at first, but not so good in actual play. In GURPS there are classes too, but only two: you are either intelligent or dextrous.

 

[Voadam]

I'm with the Jedi as well.

I don't think I'd like T20's damage save mechanics or the star wars vitality type concepts.

Armor as DR I could deal with. Parrying would be like palladium, inefficient for mechanical resolution IME but OK.

Any character class could be ditched or kept, completely non vancian magic would be fine and can be done now in a campaign and still call it D&D and I'd enjoy it. I prefer warlock at will invocations to vancian slots or spell points or skill checks.