What is the essence of D&D

[Tony Vargas]

So being a war game with asymmetric information and Fantasy Vietnam have different associations to me. To me Fantasy Vietnam implies that game is stacked against you in an unfair way and a referee who is not acting in a neutral manner.

The impression I've had of "Fantasy Vietnam" is of sudden death, grinding paranoia, and morality being, at best, ambiguous.

And, yeah, old-school D&D could certainly deliver some grinding paranoia.

But, the style is probably accessible in nearly any RPG, it's just up to the GM to go that dark.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

@Tony Vargas

But then what? What would you have actually "refuted"? Are you claiming that the players who cite reason R are lying or mistaken about their own motives? Because what they say doesn't make sense to you? Really?

Third time I've asked these questions now. You might want to address them before telling me that I'm the one who has to put up.

 

[Garthanos]

But, the style is probably accessible in nearly any RPG, it's just up to the GM to go that dark.

Some take more effort to do it than others....
Life is cheap (really easy to create characters)
And Fragile (die in one shot and death saves mean this never really ends statistics will do you in if you do not just avoid conflict - see also runequest crit hits)
speaking of which Stealing is good (gets way more experience and much safer) whereas actually actively opposing evil not so much.
Dm advice (no your job isnt entertaining or having fun it's challenging and rewarding "skilled play" and making sure they do not get away with anything.
Make sure giving too much treasure which might make play less dangerous for characters (like magic items) gets mocked really well - sure its more a culture thing but I think it has the game designers sig on it.
Add example modules showing its definitely the way the "real men play" not for them pansies

 

[Zardnaar]

You can die in one shot in a few RPGs, D&D might be the exception not the norm.

Death also isn't the end in 1E.

 

[Garthanos]

You can die in one shot in a few RPGs, D&D might be the exception not the norm.

RuneQuest critical hits were intended to be mentioned there in... D&D is a bit more split personality on the issue.

 

[Tony Vargas]

@TheCosmicKid

If you have something of substance to share, I invite you, again, to do so.

 

[Tony Vargas]

1E predates the expectation of getting to level 20 which didn't actually show up until level 2E.

The 1e PH had tables that went /past/ level 20, and any class that didn't have a hard level cap could advance without limit.

Level 1 to 20 is a big thing of D&D now though. It's a sacred cow I wouldn't touch.

3e Epic Handbook broke it without undue consequence.

 

[Campbell]

For me personally it is far more about game play than game balance. I want the ability to make decisions that make an impact on whether we win or lose. I want to exercise my skill at playing the game. The Fighter could do 10.000 damage with each attack, but if it is boring to play I would not care. In my mind when it comes to combat the Fighter should be at leas as interesting to play as a spell caster.

I do not think this needs to come from rationed abstract resources though. I am actually not really a fan of that. It's a legacy of 4th Edition design that 5th Edition retains that I broadly do not like. Games like Runequest and the new Legend of the Five Rings do a good job at making martial characters interesting to play without such features. It looks like Pathfinder 2 does the same. We're about to find out.

 

[Hussar]

And your assertion that it does... by the same standards, doesn’t that deny our experiences that it really doesn’t?

Or is either statement really just a personal perspective that shouldn’t be seen as trampling over each other? This is the heart of the edition war - denying that either side had a point and belittling each other’s perspectives.

I'm going to disagree with that point.

The heart of the edition war was a small group of disaffected fans who were so personally insulted that 4e wasn't written with them in mind that they couldn't bear to think that anyone else might actually enjoy the game. So, they embarked on a repeated assault in any way they could, never, ever letting up and never ever just walking away.

There's a reason you didn't see that sort of thing on, say, the Paizo boards. Folks that didn't like Pathfinder just didn't bother with it. They didn't spend hours and hours and hours writing lengthy treatises about why 4e was a steaming pile of crap. I get the notion of wanting to say the edition warring was two sided, but, it really wasn't. It was one group trying to enjoy their hobby while another group repeatedly piled scorn and insult and made sure that every one knew it.

I mean, FFS, we're 5 YEARS into 5e and people are still repeating that "minatures wargame" meme garbage that is completely unsupportable but, still remains.

Seriously, the only thing @Tony Vargas has said here is the thing that really differentiates 4e from other D&D's is the primacy of magic in the system. That doesn't make one system better than another, just that 4e is the outlier here. The essence of D&D, as evidenced by every edition that is considered by all to be part of the D&D family is the primacy of magic in the game. He's presented a pretty decent list of evidence to support his assertion. In response, all we've seen is folks drag out every edition war talking point and rehash the same old pointless crap that we had to constantly listen to for years.

So, no, the heart of the edition war really isn't about both sides denying the other had a point. If folks who didn't like 4e had just done what most people do when they don't like something and move on, the edition wars wouldn't have happened at all. But, they couldn't stand the fact that other people might enjoy a different kind of D&D and set out to very deliberately destroy 4e every chance they could.

 

[Zardnaar]

The 1e PH had tables that went /past/ level 20, and any class that didn't have a hard level cap could advance without limit.

3e Epic Handbook broke it without undue consequence.

Core books, 2E had the high level campaigns.

1E depended on the class it was all over the place. No adventure released was beyond level 12-14.