D&D General If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?

CapnZapp · Jun 25, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Valid concerns can be expressed without relying on double standards. It's not that hard a bar to clear.

And, answering concerns in detail is not dismissal.

This thread sure fails to keep those apart. It is full of people that can't or won't understand there's more to "hit point scepticism" than simplistic double standards.

I have provided the explanations needed. Not sure you're in a position to claim this is such a breeze...

CapnZapp · Jun 25, 2019

Maxperson said:
No I'm not, which is why.........................what I described was explicitly NOT ducking and weaving. I said moving forwards and backwards. Watch a combat sometime. The combatants will move sometimes dozens of yards while fighting. What they do not do is sit in one spot not moving and just swing at each other.

Dunno. I'm not talking about that, either.

And I was obviously talking about movement during melee. The squares a melee combatant occupies during a melee would also change significantly in a typical combat.

D&D isn't about typical combats.

My point is that any movement not modeled by D&D is "ducking and weaving" even if it means backing up a staircase and then climbing back up.

And how that isn't relevant. Since it isn't modeled.

What is relevant is the player's choice; how to move his or her character across the battle map.

I'm claiming that the damage model impacts the player's decisions for movement.

One damage model leads to a more cautious, natural mode of movement; the other doesn't.

Since you didn't understand the difference, you were able to draw a likeness between melee and ranged.

But as I've explained, that was not my argument.

Paul Farquhar · Jun 25, 2019

D&D doesn't model this very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=24&v=4MqmpL6X_8w. That doesn't make the setting unsuitable.

And it can do this just fine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9nW4w5tHVM

(Assuming The Man With No Name is a high level fighter with Extra Attack and Action Surge).

Oofta · Jun 25, 2019

D&D is pretty decent at many things, but being overly realistic simulation of combat of virtually any kind is not one of them. Are there other games that are better at modeling real combat of various types? Absolutely. But being a realistic simulation or supporting and encouraging any specific fighting style whether that's taking advantage of cover and advancing cautiously or mimicking fencing along a 45 ft long line does not necessarily make for a more enjoyable experience for the majority of people.

Reality can be quite boring, I prefer D&D's simple to run reasonably fast paced combat.

MarkB · Jun 25, 2019

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] I still feel that your argument that D&D favours moving to close in to melee rather than using cover feels more like theory crafting than actual gameplay practice. But even conceding that it might occur in standard D&D, I still don't see that it will be a factor in a Western setting.

In a Western setting, ranged combat is king. Your primary damage dealers are pistols and rifles and shotguns, with things like knives and tomahawks coming in second and also being throwable.

So, in this setting, where's the motivation to charge into melee? What purpose is there in a character running around in the open? Sure, the HP model may somewhat mitigate the downside of such a tactic, but what's the upside? Why wouldn't people make tactical use of range and cover in those circumstances?

Oofta · Jun 25, 2019

MarkB said:
@CapnZapp I still feel that your argument that D&D favours moving to close in to melee rather than using cover feels more like theory crafting than actual gameplay practice. But even conceding that it might occur in standard D&D, I still don't see that it will be a factor in a Western setting.

In a Western setting, ranged combat is king. Your primary damage dealers are pistols and rifles and shotguns, with things like knives and tomahawks coming in second and also being throwable.

So, in this setting, where's the motivation to charge into melee? What purpose is there in a character running around in the open? Sure, the HP model may somewhat mitigate the downside of such a tactic, but what's the upside? Why wouldn't people make tactical use of range and cover in those circumstances?

There's a couple of problems with that in a D&D/fantasy setting. There are a lot of monsters that won't be stopped by a few bullets. That troll is going to laugh at you while it charges into combat to rip you to shreds. A bullette is still going to pop up in the middle of your party and ruin your day. A T-Rex is still going to eat you. I've played in a few range heavy parties, they still have to deal with melee because the encounter distances tend to be fairly short and many monsters don't have ranged attacks or are significantly better at melee.

But I do agree. If you don't allow the sharpshooter feat, there's no reason to not snipe at each other from cover. Advance in units with one group under 3/4 cover readying an action to shoot anyone that pops up while another group advances would be a valid tactic. Make the assumption that fantasy armor is effective against firearms (or come up with more modern equivalents) and you're done.

But would it be fun? Would you still be supporting different character types like tank warriors? A lot of video games that have firearms still have tanks simply by having characters that have heavy weapons and armor and pretty much just stand out in the open blasting away. Or you just hand-wave some stuff and encourage melee combat because it's fun like TV/movies do in everything from Star Trek to Arrow to anything where the hero is a martial arts expert.

In any case I don't think you'd have to change all that much, just figure out how to make strength based characters reasonably effective at ranged combat, give your orcs firearms and be done with it.

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 25, 2019

Of course...

An argument could be made- possibly quite strongly by the OP- that a Wild West situated in a D&D style fantasy world might not have invented gunpowder due to the ubiquity of magic.

There might still be an analogous situation to the shootout at high noon, but it would involve spell casting or use of magical items.

See also Murlynd.

Oofta · Jun 25, 2019

Dannyalcatraz said:
Of course...

An argument could be made- possibly quite strongly by the OP- that a Wild West situated in a D&D style fantasy world might not have invented gunpowder due to the ubiquity of magic.

There might still be an analogous situation to the shootout at high noon, but it would involve spell casting or use of magical items.

See also Murlynd.

Or Eberron or ... well any number of fantasy novels. In my world gunpowder exists but as a weapon? Not particularly useful. Want flash/bang stuff that will frighten your enemies? Cast some low level spells. Start to make gunpowder useful? Some wizard somewhere is going to invent a "spark" cantrip that seeks out gunpowder to ruin your day, or just cast heat metal on your gun to have it go off when you don't want it. But basically early firearms are so much less effective than even low level spells that it's never been developed much beyond fireworks.

I do the same thing with steam power ... it could exist except that things that approximate life have a tendency to develop a will of their own. Not often, but often enough to discourage it.

The other option is that it just doesn't work. Nobody ever said in a world of dragons that chemistry works exactly the same or that stable gunpowder could be developed.

Sacrosanct · Jun 25, 2019

CapnZapp said:
This thread sure fails to keep those apart. ...

This thread is about what other genres would you like to apply D&D mechanics to. Not a discussion on how D&D rules suck for genre X or to discuss the merits of HP.

Every thread you start, at some point you tell anyone who disagrees with you to stop posting. Now, I won’t ever ask people to leave if they don’t agree with me, but I will ask to remain on topic and not to threadcap. So maybe you should follow your own advice that you keep telling everyone else to do in threads you create.

Wishful thinking on my part? Probably.

CapnZapp · Jun 25, 2019

Oofta said:
D&D is pretty decent at many things, but being overly realistic simulation of combat of virtually any kind is not one of them. Are there other games that are better at modeling real combat of various types? Absolutely. But being a realistic simulation or supporting and encouraging any specific fighting style whether that's taking advantage of cover and advancing cautiously or mimicking fencing along a 45 ft long line does not necessarily make for a more enjoyable experience for the majority of people.

Reality can be quite boring, I prefer D&D's simple to run reasonably fast paced combat.

This is a straw man. You don't need D&D or hit points to run reasonably fast paced combat. Nobody has called for an "overly realistic simulation".

The difference is instead the hit points itself. The presence of absence of a "backpack shield generator" informs how your characters act during play.

Neither is bad. But disregarding criticism against one as merely a call to "modeling real combat" is.