D&D 5E D&D compared to Bespoke Genre TTRPGs

[Steampunkette]

And this is my problem with these types of claims... 5e has 3rd party publishers, DM's Guild, and supplements that go beyond the first 3 books... so when you make a statement like this limiting it to the first 3 books published doesn't give an accurate snapshot of what's actually available for 5e.

EDIT 1: It's like claiming GURPs/Cypher/FATE/etc... doesn't really do different genres well... just look at the corebook that was published and you will see many genres are under-served.

EDIT 2: Why does it seem like D&D is the only game we hold to this it's got to be in the core standard...

5e certainly has supplements that go beyond the first three books. And all of them are fairly devoted to... the exact same things.

Here's Tasha's Table of Contents.

20 whole pages devoted to Patrons! A Social Pillar change to the game!

And another 70 pages devoted to different ways to do combat with each class, another 130 pages of spells and magic items, and then another 30ish pages devoted to Exploration options.

50 compared to 200 in an already stacked deck of "Mostly Combat with a little social/exploration"

As to 3rd Party Content... I really don't count it -as- D&D. It's people's personal creations and homebrew being presented. Which is fine? It's -good-, even. I use it in some of my stuff.

But when you sit down at an Adventurer's League game, you can't pull out some 3rd Party social-centric character class and expect it to be accepted 'cause it's not D&D.

For comparison, here's the Xanathar's Guide.

Almost entirely combat-focused, even the massive list of encounters/traps, and Downtime Revisited is where you get the social/exploration/crafting stuff.

The only books that D&D really releases that have more Social or Exploration than Combat are their campaign setting books. SCAG, E:RftLW, GGtR... And almost all of them only include the Social/Exploration pillars in the sense of "Here are some places you can go and people you can meet" rather than Systems and Crunch like LevelUp's Journeys.

So yeah.

Even if you pile it all high, with all the 3rd party content, it still comes out to "Mostly combat, some exploration and social stuff". 'Cause most third party content is classes/races/monsters/spells/combat styles/combat systems/etc.

 

[Imaro]

I don’t think offense was intended, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. Saying that making all these changes to get D&D to do whatever you want and just as good or better than a game specifically designed to deliver said experience...it’s dismissive of the efforts made to design that game. It’s dismissive of the effort to learn those games.

Emphasis mine... I and a few others have said this numerous times, and I'm not sure why it won't stick... But literally no one in this discussion has claimed this,

We’ll have to see. I’m sure that Ravenloft will incorporate some rules to try and dial up the horror. And I’m sure some of those will be pretty cool. But I’m sure that other elements will remain exactly the same, and that those may undermine any changes they do make....resulting in a game that’s probably a bit incoherent in spots.

My expectation is that it’ll be D&D with a sheen of gothic horror on top. Essentially, the PCs will be killing more undead and other horror-themed monsters instead of orcs and dragons. There may be some kinf of Horror Factor rules bolted on, and maybe even some “Corruption” type mechanics.

I would expect that if you wanted a persistent horror campaign, then chances are you’d be better off with any number of other systems rather than Ravenloft.

But cue the “well I only want to do horror for one adventure and then shift to pulpy heroics, so of course D&D is better” response.

Well I have a different take, in that there are different types of horror and that D&D will be really good at some styles (mainly action horror in the realm of Resident Evil Village, Demon City Shinjuku, Kingdom on Netflix, etc.), mediocre at other styles of horror and bad at some others...wouldn't use D&D to do something like "The Ring" or the series "Them" on Amazon Prime.

 

[Imaro]

But...but....forum posts are what he’s complaining about. If they carry no weight, then what’s the problem?

He can just dismiss the ones that aren’t convenient like you’re doing.

He's not using them to claim specific data points.

 

[Imaro]

5e certainly has supplements that go beyond the first three books. And all of them are fairly devoted to... the exact same things.

Here's Tasha's Table of Contents.

20 whole pages devoted to Patrons! A Social Pillar change to the game!

And another 70 pages devoted to different ways to do combat with each class, another 130 pages of spells and magic items, and then another 30ish pages devoted to Exploration options.

50 compared to 200 in an already stacked deck of "Mostly Combat with a little social/exploration"

As to 3rd Party Content... I really don't count it -as- D&D. It's people's personal creations and homebrew being presented. Which is fine? It's -good-, even. I use it in some of my stuff.

But when you sit down at an Adventurer's League game, you can't pull out some 3rd Party social-centric character class and expect it to be accepted 'cause it's not D&D.

For comparison, here's the Xanathar's Guide.

Almost entirely combat-focused, even the massive list of encounters/traps, and Downtime Revisited is where you get the social/exploration/crafting stuff.

The only books that D&D really releases that have more Social or Exploration than Combat are their campaign setting books. SCAG, E:RftLW, GGtR... And almost all of them only include the Social/Exploration pillars in the sense of "Here are some places you can go and people you can meet" rather than Systems and Crunch like LevelUp's Journeys.

So yeah.

Even if you pile it all high, with all the 3rd party content, it still comes out to "Mostly combat, some exploration and social stuff". 'Cause most third party content is classes/races/monsters/spells/combat styles/combat systems/etc.

Before I engage further since we are moving into the realm of specifics... what exactly are you looking for in exploration for D&D... and just so you know I don't think page count is an accurate determiner for how well something is handled...since that would mean D&D actually handles magic and spells better than nearly any other rpg...

In other words forget page count... what doesn't D&D cover in the exploration sphere that you feel it should?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Emphasis mine... I and a few others have said this numerous times, and I'm not sure why it won't stick... But literally no one in this discussion has claimed this,

I would say no one has openly claimed it, but that a lot of what is being said certainly implies it.

For example, to evoke the Alien movies, you can just use a dragon and an isolated location and a race to a vehicle. Terms like “easily accomplished” and “not difficult” and “just as effective” have been used pretty regularly.

Hence the pushback.

Have you noticed how no one is saying “it’d be good advice to tell someone who specifically wants to play only D&D but wants to use horror to just play Call of Cthulhu or Alien?”

 

[Imaro]

I would say no one has openly claimed it, but that a lot of what is being said certainly implies it.

For example, to evoke the Alien movies, you can just use a dragon and an isolated location and a race to a vehicle. Terms like “easily accomplished” and “not difficult” and “just as effective” have been used pretty regularly.

Hence the pushback.

Have you noticed how no one is saying “it’d be good advice to tell someone who specifically wants to play only D&D but wants to use horror to just play Call of Cthulhu or Alien?”

I've only seen D&D put forth as an alternative for general feel which has been clarified quite a few times now in this thread. I don't think if you said a group wants to play Aliens... or wants to play Star Wars or wants to play LotR or Dragon Age that anyone is going to argue they'd be better off playing D&D as opposed to the specific game made for that property.

 

[Steampunkette]

Before I engage further since we are moving into the realm of specifics... what exactly are you looking for in exploration for D&D... and just so you know I don't think page count is an accurate determiner for how well something is handled...since that would mean D&D actually handles magic and spells better than nearly any other rpg...

In other words forget page count... what doesn't D&D cover in the exploration sphere that you feel it should?

I also don't think D&D spellcasting is handled better than other RPGs... but most of them -are- combat-focused was the general thrust.

As for what D&D doesn't cover: Exploration-focused gameplay. Gameification of travel. Things of that nature.

Most of D&D travel is just presented as "Roll on a series of tables and describe the results and then run specific (usually combat) encounters based on the tables". Exploration isn't the game, it's just the place where the game tends to happen. It's got rules for getting lost, which is a nice start, but there's not a lot of stuff about what to do when you -are- lost except roll a fresh check to see if you -stay- lost. Unless you've got a Ranger in the party, in which case you never roll to get lost in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, random combat encounters are absolutely a core part of travel in a high fantasy setting. But most encounters are going to amount to "Here is monster, here is environment, here is current weather. Kill pls. You gain an XP!" A DM making a dungeon for exploration certainly has the option to put in skill challenges, but the direct result of many of them (Traps, pits, other physical obstacles) is still going to be lost hit points, lost spell slots, lost gear, and slightly less effectiveness for your next combat encounter because that's what the actual gameplay is mostly focused on. There's no game elements specifically -about- exploring in D&D.

Meanwhile LevelUp, for example, gameifies travel through the Journey System. It creates a separate resource-pool that the party relies on, spends, and replenishes during travel. It gives combat and non-combat encounters a way to interact with that resource pool that doesn't have to involve combat-effectiveness. It also adds a wealth of interesting activities to pursue while journeying that are specific to the journey in an interesting way. Like Befriending an animal as you travel through a region and getting an "Early Warning System" for danger out of it.

Bunch of worms infested the ship's stores? Best get to clearing them out and check the supplies to find out how bad it hit our "Travel Hit Points" and how much time we're now going to have to devote to replenishing our stocks during the journey. Storm struck? We'd best avoid the shoals and head to deeper water to avoid getting shipwrecked, adding to travel times.

It even adds an Exploration-System element to combat encounters, because those supplies are essential. Bandits attack you and the party on the road? They might not all try to fight or die when a few of them can sneak out of the woods to steal some of your supplies and run away.

Ultimately, of course, the system comes down to Fatigue, in the end, which plays into combat as the penalty for hitting 0 before a long rest... But it adds -so much- before it gets to that point that I can't even be mad at it.

I'm hoping there's similar social gameification coming... though I wrote up a Journey System alternative to gameify the gaining of wealth/prestige as a character in an urban campaign, because one doesn't exist, yet, and the Journey System is pretty adaptable to that purpose.

 

[loverdrive]

Except FATAL. Everything is better than FATAL, though, because it's just such a low bar to trip over.

Nah, there's RaHoWa.

 

[Steampunkette]

Nah, there's RaHoWa.

That's not a game. It's just a hate crime. sagenod

At least FATAL gives us some funny stories about characters dying during character creation.

 

[Aldarc]

Flummoxed =\= upset. You came into this thread angry and aggressive, and have been nothing but combative ever since, taking umbrage with every little thing, taking the most negative possible outlook on the posts of anyone who disagrees with you.

It’s exhausting. Please stop.

When you are done making this personal, would you like to answer my question?

Find such a claim and show it to me, and I will join you in skepticism.

Do you believe that there are things that 5e can't do well? What are the limitations of hacking the gaming? What are the breaking points for D&D 5e when hacking the system or adding things to it? When would you not?

EDIT 1: It's like claiming GURPs/Cypher/FATE/etc... doesn't really do different genres well... just look at the corebook that was published and you will see many genres are under-served.

EDIT 2: Why does it seem like D&D is the only game we hold to this it's got to be in the core standard...

Believe it or not, I don't get my knickers in a twist or hyper-defensive every time someone says D&D, my favorite games, or the games you listed can't do different genres well. I think it's important to acknowledge the strengths and limitations for every system that I'm using. If the only way you'll feel better about any perceived slights lobbed at D&D is that we knock other games down a few petty pegs as well, we can certainly talk about the weaknesses of these other games when it comes to genre emulation as well. Even if a game system can do other genres, which is a banal accomplishment to be sure, I'm not simply interested in whether they can do them, but I'm also interested in how they do it and the experiences that the system cultivates and accentuates within genre play.

Simply playing in a genre is easy. You could pick up D&D 5e and use it to play Jane Austen if you wanted. It won't necessarily emulate it well or support that experience well as written without first mechanical adjustments or the GM/players doing a lot of the heavy lifting of genre emulation themselves. Likewise, a post-apocalyptic game will feel different using Gamma World vs. Apocalypse World vs. Mutant Year Zero vs. Godless vs. Tiny Wastelands vs. Cypher System (e.g., Numenera), etc. because each of these systems will emphasize or deemphasize certain gameplay experiences, genre elements of post-apocalyptic sci-fi/fantasy, or GM/player responsibilities.

So I do hold others games to this core standard that I hold D&D. But I suppose it's easier to somehow paint the 800 lb. gorilla in the room as the victim of an unfair standard. People generally just overly sensitive when their pet game is the one under scrutiny, especially IME when it comes to D&D, about which people seem particularly touch about.