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

[Imaro]

I think the way to run a heist without flashbacks would be to run it as linear as possible. You (the DM) would have to prep the place to be heisted, then y'all would have to play out all the info-gathering, planning, and anything else (such as social-engineering) that needed done before the heist, then y'all would have to play out the heist. You (the GM) would have to have the players' trust that you'd run all of that in good faith.

I think 5E could work pretty well mostly as-is for this. I think it's an entirely different playstyle than BitD is aiming for, and I'm not sure how much anything from it (other than maybe clocks) would be applicable. It's plausible, as @tetrasodium seems to imply, that maintaining believability will be difficult if there's asymmetry of real-world security expertise between the players and the DM. You're a far better judge of whether that's likely to be a problem at your table than anyone else in this thread is likely to be. (IMO, if no one is an expert in the field, it probably won't be a problem.)

I pretty much agree with what you are stating here, which is what is baffling to me about the claims that D&D can not do certain things. Is it really that it cannot do heist adventures, horror adventures, exploration adventures, etc. Or that it can not do them in the specific way another game does them and/or that a particular poster hasn't been successful in running them...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There's no retcons in Blades. Flashbacks cannot change any established fiction.

/rolleyes You know what I meant, sorry for using simplified language lol

 

[prabe]

I pretty much agree with what you are stating here, which is what is baffling to me about the claims that D&D can not do certain things. Is it really that it cannot do heist adventures, horror adventures, exploration adventures, etc. Or that it can not do them in the specific way another game does them and/or that a particular poster hasn't been successful in running them...

I suspect the thing is that doing a heist the way it'd work in 5E would take a lot of prep work. Like, really, a lot. And, there'd be playing out all the pre-heist stuff, which might also be a lot, so, it might take a session or two before you got to the heist. While there are some people dedicated enough to do that (to be clear, I'm not) I think more people just want to get to the heist--this is why heists in meda are often structured the way they are (with at least some degree of nonlinearity) and it's why BitD is structured the way it is. If you just want to dive right in, you can (in BitD, I think you kinda have to--I don't think it supports actually doing the planning in the kind of detail you'd need if you weren't using Flashbacks).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I pretty much agree with what you are stating here, which is what is baffling to me about the claims that D&D can not do certain things. Is it really that it cannot do heist adventures, horror adventures, exploration adventures, etc. Or that it can not do them in the specific way another game does them and/or that a particular poster hasn't been successful in running them...

Is anyone actually claiming "cannot", though? There are thing D&D can't do without severe rules modifications, and there are things D&D is inherently not very good at, even with severe rules modifications.

The reality is there are basically two kinds of people discussing this - those who accept that D&D is good at some things, bad at others, and not ideal for everything, and those who either outright don't accept that (thus rejecting "system matters" and putting us back in the 1980s lol), or who accept that, but have an extremely low bar for what's "good enough".

I'm not saying there are two "sides" note, because it doesn't match up with any apparent "sides" in this discussion.

(in BitD, I think you kinda have to--I don't think it supports actually doing the planning in the kind of detail you'd need if you weren't using Flashbacks).

Yeah this is why my heist-happy group doesn't really like BitD, it seemed like it was forcing you into a less-planning or even close to no-planning, just freestyle it and use flashbacks and so on to establish stuff you'd normally plan.

And, there'd be playing out all the pre-heist stuff, which might also be a lot, so, it might take a session or two before you got to the heist.

I've run a ton of heists in D&D and I don't find that it usually takes that long, unless you're running really short sessions.

 

[Bedrockgames]

There's no retcons in Blades. Flashbacks cannot change any established fiction. This us actually an absolute bedrock core conceit in Blades -- once a thing is established in the fiction, it's in the fiction. At best, you can alter the level of effect with a resist roll, but that's changing, "the thug stabs you in the chest, collapsing your lung, level 3 harm," to, on a Resist, " the thug stabs you through the arm, take level 2 harm, stabbed in the arm." You can (sometimes) change the level, but you can't change you got stabbed.

Just an obversation I have noticed when people say they want genre, that really can mean two different things. It can mean they want a game that emulates the story logic and style of a genre (which could include things like flashbacks and scenes where the police showing up drives things in a more dramatic direction), or it could mean they just want genre tropes and they want a world or setting built with those tropes in mind. I think for folks who want the former, D&D is going to be perfectly serviceable. You may need to modify things, impose some restrictions on classes or spells, bring in optional classes and feats, but you can run it with D&D. But if you are going for the latter, then I think you are going to want games that specifically model those things (and you can hack D&D to make it do those things as well, but it will take more work). My sense about this stuff is too often we see this as a zero sum game: either indie games win or D&D wins. But really a better approach is to identify what it is someone really wants, and then give advice for connecting them with a system that will really do that (even if it means they don't go for the game we hope more people play: whether that game is D&D or blades in the dark). I got to a point where I don't really enjoy playing D&D that much anymore. Once in a while I want a D&D experience. But even then I tend to lean more on older editions these days. And when I want genre games, I am open to different approaches, but tend to lean on the genre trope setting approach rather than the emulation of the style and story approach. So for me, Savage Worlds is a good, go to genre game.

 

[Imaro]

Is anyone actually claiming "cannot", though? There are thing D&D can't do without severe rules modifications, and there are things D&D is inherently not very good at, even with severe rules modifications.

Well I thought there were some claiming it couldn't do certain things at all like horror... and what @prabe just stated doesn't require severe rules modification... it just doesn't play out like a heist from Blades. That's kind of my point...

The reality is there are basically two kinds of people discussing this - those who accept that D&D is good at some things, bad at others, and not ideal for everything, and those who either outright don't accept that (thus rejecting "system matters" and putting us back in the 1980s lol), or who accept that, but have an extremely low bar for what's "good enough".

Yes but if I and my group want a heist where we play out everything leading up to the heist well BitD is an objectively worse choice than D&D. So good enough if that's the type of heist I want to run isn't a "low bar" if I choose D&D over it. I just think it is more nuanced than some are making it seem in this thread.

Yeah this is why my heist-happy group doesn't really like BitD, it seemed like it was forcing you into a less-planning or even close to no-planning, just freestyle it and use flashbacks and so on to establish stuff you'd normally plan.

I've run a ton of heists in D&D and I don't find that it usually takes that long, unless you're running really short sessions.

This is why I would prefer BitD for that specific experience of heists... but, seeing as my group enjoy playing out their prep for the heist... have no problems running a heist in D&D.

 

[prabe]

The reality is there are basically two kinds of people discussing this - those who accept that D&D is good at some things, bad at others, and not ideal for everything, and those who either outright don't accept that (thus rejecting "system matters" and putting us back in the 1980s lol), or who accept that, but have an extremely low bar for what's "good enough".

I think there's maybe a third kind of person. At least I think I'm the third kind of person in the sense I'm thinking about.

I'm running 5E because I really like it and because I really understand it, and I don't really plan the sessions out much past the start of a given session; I prefer to have whatever story emerges, emerge. That last bit includes the kind of story, too. Mystery of ratiocination; treasure quest; revenge; travelogue. If I see something coming (the way I did with the mystery of ratiocination) I'll figure out how to run it. It is plausible-shading-to-probable that I will from time to time end up in a kind of story that is, at a minimum, not playing to 5E's strengths. I'd rather bend the game rules than force the story to go a different way.

Dunno if that's clear. It's certainly not intended to be an argument. Much.

 

[Imaro]

I think there's maybe a third kind of person. At least I think I'm the third kind of person in the sense I'm thinking about.

I'm running 5E because I really like it and because I really understand it, and I don't really plan the sessions out much past the start of a given session; I prefer to have whatever story emerges, emerge. That last bit includes the kind of story, too. Mystery of ratiocination; treasure quest; revenge; travelogue. If I see something coming (the way I did with the mystery of ratiocination) I'll figure out how to run it. It is plausible-shading-to-probable that I will from time to time end up in a kind of story that is, at a minimum, not playing to 5E's strengths. I'd rather bend the game rules than force the story to go a different way.

Dunno if that's clear. It's certainly not intended to be an argument. Much.

I'm curious how much effort have you found it to be to run different types of games in D&D. I'll be upfront with you about my own opinion... It is that D&D gives you the tools necessary to run a wide range of adventure types (And yes I count 3rd party supplements in this.. and no I don't believe I ned to read an entire 200+ page book to yoink what I need for a specific purpose out)... but it is on you to define the extent and process for said tools. I'd be curious to hear what you think?

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think there's maybe a third kind of person. At least I think I'm the third kind of person in the sense I'm thinking about.

I'm running 5E because I really like it and because I really understand it, and I don't really plan the sessions out much past the start of a given session; I prefer to have whatever story emerges, emerge. That last bit includes the kind of story, too. Mystery of ratiocination; treasure quest; revenge; travelogue. If I see something coming (the way I did with the mystery of ratiocination) I'll figure out how to run it. It is plausible-shading-to-probable that I will from time to time end up in a kind of story that is, at a minimum, not playing to 5E's strengths. I'd rather bend the game rules than force the story to go a different way.

Dunno if that's clear. It's certainly not intended to be an argument. Much.

One thing I can say about D&D is it works. Again, don't play it that much these days. But when I do, one of the things I notice is how easy it is to sit down and prep. Some of that is familiarity gained with it over the years (but I have always played lots of different systems so it isn't just that). I think the elements that make up D&D are just highly gameable things. And you can bend a genre to D&D conceits and have great fun. Some of my most enjoyable campaigns were bending D&D to wuxia and martial arts (but keeping many of the normal trappings of D&D: monsters, dungeons, etc). I also hear from a lot of GMs who say exactly what you are saying. I think one of the other benefits of D&D is its immense popularity means you can more easily recruit players and those players are likely to have a range of interests, so a campaign that is mystery one day, heist the next, that kind of organically emerges in a lot of groups. Whereas when I have run genre stuff it is tougher to find a group of players who all want to play a goodfellas campaign for the whole duration. Now it is a lot easier. I think there was a big cultural shift in gaming with d20. Prior to that, we had little problem getting a Fengshui or Cthulhu game off the ground (or more obscure stuff like OG or TORG). After d20, D&D really became the only game in town where I was (I still remember how excited I was to find a group who actually played savage worlds----and that was thanks to the internet). So there is also this element of if you want to run games regularly, D&D is just an easier sell sometimes.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yes but if I and my group want a heist where we play out everything leading up to the heist well BitD is an objectively worse choice than D&D.

Yeah, though to be fair D&D is also not a top choice if that's the primary motivator. If I was actually trying to focus on pre-planned fantasy heists I think I'd be leaning towards something more like Savage Worlds, because D&D's approach to skill checks suuuuuuuuuuuucks. Or even Worlds Without Number, at least that has a vastly superior skill system to D&D 5E, despite being OSR.

So good enough if that's the type of heist I want to run isn't a "low bar" if I choose D&D over it. I just think it is more nuanced than some are making it seem in this thread.

Definitely agree. But I think there's a bit of an issue in both directions here, where people are being a bit excessively "It can't do that!", but equally others are saying stuff like "I ran a Cthulhu-themed game in D&D and it think it worked!" as if that means D&D works well for that, which isn't really true (hence my low bar comment).

This is why I would prefer BitD for that specific experience of heists... but, seeing as my group enjoy playing out their prep for the heist... have no problems running a heist in D&D.

Yup. BitD is one of the most surprising RPGs for my group, in a bad way. It sounded like an RPG precisely designed for us, based on the setting/description, because we loved fantasy heists, both in games and books (and now you have it on TV too lol with Shadow and Bone, which takes a very BitD approach!), but then all the rules were basically "Nooooooooooooooo, don't actually plan it! Don't actually prep! Just use the rules to establish the fiction as you go along!" and that was like, so alien to us. It's like a heist game for the people who like the idea of heists, but not the nitty-gritty. I guess we'd want the Torchbearer of fantasy heist games lol.

I'm running 5E because I really like it and because I really understand it

I feel like from your posts you're in the "understands 5E has things it is better and worse at" group. It's perfectly fine to understand that and still use D&D - in fact I think people who do are the ones who will incorporate rules best.

One thing I can say about D&D is it works. Again, don't play it that much these days. But when I do, one of the things I notice is how easy it is to sit down and prep.

See, to me, I think what's different now, in 2021, to say, 2005 or 1995, is that most modern TT RPGs "work".

That did not used to be true. Like, it used to be, there was a good chance, if you played an RPG, that it was a goddamn mess. That it had like big rules issues that easily came out in actual play. That still happens - just look at recent editions of Shadowrun lol - but it's a lot more rare. Almost all PtbA games "just work" for example. As do a lot of others.

So I don't really feel like 5E has a special advantage there except maybe in it's "weight class". D&D is either at the top of rules-medium, or the bottom of rules-heavy in weight of rules. And in that area, games which don't "work" are a lot more common. Indeed in rules-heavy games, not working very well is pretty common.

As for "easy to sit down and prep", I don't agree, again, except relative to weight class. I've played countless different RPGs over the years, DM'd dozens. 5E is not among those I'd describe as "easy to prep". 4E was drastically easier to prep (not going to argue this, I feel like I could demonstrate it as objective fact due to the way mechanics worked in 4E, but it'd be a boring few posts). 3E was harder to prep (but that's why 3E caused the rise of Paizo and their APs and so on). 2E was slightly easier or about the same. Something like Shadowrun, which is deep into "rules heavy" is basically harder to prep, often a lot harder. But majority of games out there now? I'd say they were a lot easier than 5E. Especially if you're looking at adding in further rules for genre simulation. I accept that you might not find that, but I think experience and a particular approach to prep may be the factors here (esp. if you didn't find 4E easier to prep).