Legends & Lore: Roleplaying in D&D Next

[dd.stevenson]

[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] said:

"D&D started out as a roleplaying game, and D&D Next plans to embrace the concept of roleplaying your character. How? Mike shares some of the current thoughts of the D&D Next team on the topic of roleplaying your character." I find that phrasing odd - 'D&D started out as a roleplaying game' implies - to me at least - that it no longer is. WotC appear to be getting in on the Edition Wars! I'm sure that's not what Mike meant.

I think that Mearls is writing from this perspective:

The company’s also been busy expanding D&D to new products: Earlier this week, owner Hasbro announced a collaboration with video game company DeNA to develop two new free-to-play D&D mobile games; WotC is planning to release an enhanced edition of the classic video game Baldur’s Gate 2 later this year; and Cryptic Studios’ massively multiplayer online role-playing game Neverwinter recently went into beta, and should be released soon.

All of these products are being developed in tandem with D&D’s core developers in an effort to create a unified whole, says Nathan Stewart, brand director for Dungeons & Dragons at Wizards of the Coast. “I think the future of Dungeons and Dragons is not the D&D Next rule set or even the tabletop RPG, but it’s this feeling that you get playing Dungeons & Dragons, no matter where you do it.”

My take:

To a guy who probably spends the lion's share of his time polishing proposals for D&D themed products, "D&D began as a role playing game" might seem like a natural thing to lead off with.

To fans who are ambivalent about wotc's efforts to push the brand into more profitable spaces, this same statement seems awkward and ill-considered.

 

[Morrus]

Sure. For me, it's not about the brand. That's WotC's business. D&D for me is a tabletop RPG, not a brand. So the phrase “I think the future of Dungeons and Dragons is not the D&D Next rule set or even the tabletop RPG, but it’s this feeling that you get playing Dungeons & Dragons, no matter where you do it.” turns me off completely. It says transmedia IP, not a D&D RPG, and I have no interest in the lego-like things, MMOs, etc. I thought that was all just to keep things going while D&D Next was being developed, but that statement makes it sound like it's not the stop-gap measure, but the long term aim.

Which probably means I'm not the target audience any more. I guess that's OK; I just have to learn to spread my wings and try other tabletop RPGs!

 

[Sunseeker]

I like the idea of bonds, flaws and ideals. I certainly would like them even more if they have no crunch factor to them, or at least a very minor, situational crunch. IE: favoring law and order, while having a weakness of being a bad liar and having a cousin in the Imperial Guard means that guards will generally be inclined to trust you and not beat you up for no reason(though not always). AS an example see the Pathfinder "Blood of..." with various minor, situational racial traits. I think those are a good representation of what I'm thinking of IF official crunch is needed at all.

Not sure I like the idea of "fate points" in exchange for good RP, but I like the idea that DMs are encouraged to encourage their players with a carrot, rather than with a stick for good role-play.

 

[The Shadow]

The day D&D becomes FATE is the day D&D dies.

Wow, laying it on a bit thick, aren't we? Show me where I advocated turning D&D into FATE. You said that mechanics to reward roleplaying were antithetical to the very concept of a roleplaying game; I pointed out that there are perfectly good roleplaying games that have such mechanics. Now apparently this means I want D&D to die?

Here is the core conceit of D&D and what Next is getting wrong:
In D&D the role you play is your Class.

Surely the 'core conceit' - the thing that made D&D unique and different at the time - was the idea of playing a character at all? But we can't use that as a differentiating element any more, because all roleplaying games do that. There must be something besides classes that make D&D stand apart from all other games, and I personally find there are great masses of such things. Good grief, the game has become a genre all its own!

And logically speaking, if there's nothing more to one's role than character class, then surely all fighters, all clerics, all thieves, all magic-users are the same? (Well, magic-users would have different spells, I suppose.) One fighter is interchangeable with every other. If that's fun for you, more power to you, but it assuredly is not fun for me.

And given that all versions of D&D have had ability scores and alignment, plainly there's more to things than just class. AD&D even had races and random tables for background!

To be clear, fictional personality performance is not a required element of D&D. Neither is it explicitly role playing.

Of course people pretended a different personality at times, but it wasn't necessary.

So tell me, why do you get to define 'role playing' with such authority? Or make proclamations about what is or is not 'necessary' to the hobby, or how the game is played at my table?

And it definitely wasn't an excuse for playing the game in a derogatory manner towards others.

Pot, meet kettle?

Theater acting isn't necessary in any game or sport, but you can do it in any of them. You can do so in D&D, but that is not why it is an RPG. D&D is about excelling at role performance, like a chess player or star athlete.

So, once again, I'm not in touch with what D&D is 'about', I concentrate on things that are 'unnecessary', so plainly I don't get it. (Never mind that I've been playing since 1981.) The developers should listen to experts like you, not the great unwashed. Who have been playing the game the way they like for years, and shell out their hard-earned dollars for the game, just like you.

The idea of role playing may have changed for many, but no game is an RPG because of strung in rules to entice players to act out a fictional persona. We're dealing with two fundamentally different definitions of game play and frankly, baking in the current "storification of all things game" divorces D&D Next from the first 20 years of the hobby.

Dude. Is anything stopping you from just *not using it*? Just don't give out inspiration, problem solved? If I'm right and there are class features that depend on it, just turn them into 'uses per day' and call it good. Or just allow someone X inspirations per session, to be spent where they like?

Heck, why not give out inspiration for 'playing your class' in whatever way you want to reward?

 

[TarionzCousin]

When I run D&D, I have a standard rule in effect: +1 to your d20 roll if you describe what you are doing in entertaining detail. I want my players to add to the "coolness" factor of the game, not just engage the mechanical aspects of the rules.

If everyone at the table laughs, applauds, or cheers in amazement, you get at least a +2.

A few times, I have awarded an automatic success for overwhelming displays of awesomeness.

But it's not required. If you want, you can just roll the die without the bonus. Of course, I have been known to add up the total and say "Oooh, you just missed. Do you want to go for the description bonus?"

 

[thundershot]

Sure. For me, it's not about the brand. That's WotC's business. D&D for me is a tabletop RPG, not a brand. So the phrase “I think the future of Dungeons and Dragons is not the D&D Next rule set or even the tabletop RPG, but it’s this feeling that you get playing Dungeons & Dragons, no matter where you do it.” turns me off completely. It says transmedia IP, not a D&D RPG, and I have no interest in the lego-like things, MMOs, etc. I thought that was all just to keep things going while D&D Next was being developed, but that statement makes it sound like it's not the stop-gap measure, but the long term aim.

Which probably means I'm not the target audience any more. I guess that's OK; I just have to learn to spread my wings and try other tabletop RPGs!

I think of it more in terms of... Transformers. I grew up on them. The toys. The cartoon. The comics.

Then in 2007 the movie comes out and all of a sudden all these people are suddenly Transformers fans. They know I like Transformers, so try to talk to me about them like they're experts or something. However, when I mention things like how Blaster and Goldbug abandoned the Autobots when Grimlock was the leader... or how Nightbeat it one of my favorite characters. Or that Ratchet defeated Megatron significantly THREE TIMES in the comics.. people look at me like I grew a third eye.

D&D as I grew up with (I was born in 1975) is how I think of D&D. I remember when, on my group's very first adventure, everyone died except for one and he took everyone else's equipment and booked for other ventures. I remember when our characters explored the Isle of Dread and befriended the Rakasta tribe and made allies out of them that would last even to this day. I remember when my group conquered Dragon Mountain... and the characters decided to completely clean it out and turn it into a huge headquarters. They even built a spelljamming port for their ship...

Now, looking to the future, D&D is more than just a tabletop RPG. It's board games. Video games. Card games. Online games. Kre-O toys. Do any of those things appeal to me? Nope. It gets the brand name out there and maybe, just maybe, some of them will leak into what *I* enjoy as D&D. If it keeps D&D from disappearing into obscurity, it really can't be bad. As long as I still have my dice and books, I'm still content, no matter what edition I play.

At least I know that Ratchet is Megatron's TRUE enemy. lol

 

[Sunseeker]

I think of it more in terms of... Transformers. I grew up on them. The toys. The cartoon. The comics.

Then in 2007 the movie comes out and all of a sudden all these people are suddenly Transformers fans. They know I like Transformers, so try to talk to me about them like they're experts or something. However, when I mention things like how Blaster and Goldbug abandoned the Autobots when Grimlock was the leader... or how Nightbeat it one of my favorite characters. Or that Ratchet defeated Megatron significantly THREE TIMES in the comics.. people look at me like I grew a third eye.

D&D as I grew up with (I was born in 1975) is how I think of D&D. I remember when, on my group's very first adventure, everyone died except for one and he took everyone else's equipment and booked for other ventures. I remember when our characters explored the Isle of Dread and befriended the Rakasta tribe and made allies out of them that would last even to this day. I remember when my group conquered Dragon Mountain... and the characters decided to completely clean it out and turn it into a huge headquarters. They even built a spelljamming port for their ship...

Now, looking to the future, D&D is more than just a tabletop RPG. It's board games. Video games. Card games. Online games. Kre-O toys. Do any of those things appeal to me? Nope. It gets the brand name out there and maybe, just maybe, some of them will leak into what *I* enjoy as D&D. If it keeps D&D from disappearing into obscurity, it really can't be bad. As long as I still have my dice and books, I'm still content, no matter what edition I play.

At least I know that Ratchet is Megatron's TRUE enemy. lol

I agree with this position. I may not enjoy every product related to the products that brought me into the fold, but that doesn't mean nobody does. And it certainly doesn't mean that people who enjoy a different version of the IP I enjoy will never come to like my version of it. I'm G1 transformers fan, but undeniably the live-action movies, Prime, Animated and even those weird Japanese ones brought people into the general Transformers fold. "Growing the brand" is not just about expanding into new product lines, but about incorporating things everyone loves from the genre. Transformers is a great example, take the mecha designs from Prime for example, they tie in the classic "bulky robot" look, with that sort of sci-fi tech look we got from the LA movies, and a little bit of that stylish, samurai-inspired armor design the Japanese brought in.

 

[Remathilis]

The day D&D becomes FATE is the day D&D dies.

Hogwash. It survived Thac0, Monks, Cavaliers, Dual-wielding Rangers, Character Points, Warforged, Upwards AC, Free-range multiclassing, gnome necromancers, Warlords, and Come and Get It, it will survive this.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Now, looking to the future, D&D is more than just a tabletop RPG. It's board games. Video games. Card games. Online games. Kre-O toys. Do any of those things appeal to me? Nope. It gets the brand name out there and maybe, just maybe, some of them will leak into what *I* enjoy as D&D. If it keeps D&D from disappearing into obscurity, it really can't be bad. As long as I still have my dice and books, I'm still content, no matter what edition I play.

At least I know that Ratchet is Megatron's TRUE enemy. lol

I agree with this position. I may not enjoy every product related to the products that brought me into the fold, but that doesn't mean nobody does. And it certainly doesn't mean that people who enjoy a different version of the IP I enjoy will never come to like my version of it. I'm G1 transformers fan, but undeniably the live-action movies, Prime, Animated and even those weird Japanese ones brought people into the general Transformers fold. "Growing the brand" is not just about expanding into new product lines, but about incorporating things everyone loves from the genre. Transformers is a great example, take the mecha designs from Prime for example, they tie in the classic "bulky robot" look, with that sort of sci-fi tech look we got from the LA movies, and a little bit of that stylish, samurai-inspired armor design the Japanese brought in.

I agree, with a caveat: there's a danger going into the future that these merchandised lines could become D&D, and the TTRPG product could grow increasingly vestigial and eventually be cancelled altogether. Given what we know about the TTRPG market, I rather suspect this is the outcome the D&D brand owners are actively courting.

I hope I'm wrong, of course.

 

[howandwhy99]

Surely the 'core conceit' - the thing that made D&D unique and different at the time - was the idea of playing a character at all?

No, or Gygax would have called it a theatre exercose. He wanted a game, an activity that allowed for strategy, not group storytelling. This is why we've inherited large books stuffed with numbers and not a small rules pamphlet mostly about character portrayal. That the term "role playing", as it was understood in the 1970s, fit the bill perfectly is largely forgotten.

And logically speaking, if there's nothing more to one's role than character class, then surely all fighters, all clerics, all thieves, all magic-users are the same? (Well, magic-users would have different spells, I suppose.) One fighter is interchangeable with every other.

That's like saying all mountain climbers are the same because they all have limbs. Class diversity is gained and defined through play, not gamed beforehand. If you want deeper setting specific features, take or submit a subclass.

And given that all versions of D&D have had ability scores and alignment, plainly there's more to things than just class. AD&D even had races and random tables for background!

Ability scores defined many of the features the mental puppets had and their players didn't have to actually do at the table. Race is about changing the default "puppet" version. And Alignment, like Saving Throws, AC, To Hit class, and so on, is a class stat.

So tell me, why do you get to define 'role playing' with such authority? Or make proclamations about what is or is not 'necessary' to the hobby, or how the game is played at my table?

I'm not.

So, once again, I'm not in touch with what D&D is 'about', I concentrate on things that are 'unnecessary', so plainly I don't get it. (Never mind that I've been playing since 1981.) The developers should listen to experts like you, not the great unwashed. Who have been playing the game the way they like for years, and shell out their hard-earned dollars for the game, just like you.

Lay off the dramatics. I bet they'll listen to you too.

Heck, why not give out inspiration for 'playing your class' in whatever way you want to reward?

See my first comment on what I think of the topic. Not everything is as simple as it seems. Also, XP already is the reward for playing one's class and I'd rather not include another one just for players to metagame.