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

[Ovinomancer]

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

Sorry, there have been recent claims in other threads actually make a serious statements that Blades works due to retcons. It's an annoyingly persistent claim about a host of games that use narrativist approaches. Don't take it personally.

 

[prabe]

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?

So, first: I haven't run a heist. I don't care much for hacking Flashbacks in, and I really don't want to do as much prep as it seems it'd need. If it were to happen, I'd probably ask the players how they wanted the impending heist to run and go with their preference.

Otherwise, I haven't had much trouble with the mechanics. The varying sorts of adventures the parties I'm running have had, have all fit pretty securely into 5e without a whole lot of hacking. The mystery of ratiocination was challenging to run, because I didn't want the players to get frustrated or to find it too easy--getting that calibration right took some thought. That wasn't a problem of mechanics, exactly, though.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Sorry, there have been recent claims in other threads actually make a serious statements that Blades works due to retcons. It's an annoyingly persistent claim about a host of games that use narrativist approaches. Don't take it personally.

Didn't know that, and I won't!

 

[Ovinomancer]

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...


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.

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.

5e offers very little to no support for a lot of things, horror and heists being some ckear examples. A given GM can create ad hoc rulings to accomodate, but that's not the 5e system doing any work.

Meanwhile, Blades offers a lot of support for heists. This, however, doesn't mean it works for you. A system can have a lot of support for a thing and ypu can still not like it. Doesn't mean that the system doesn't do the thing, though.

One of the largest piroblems in these kinds of discussions is how much preference is substitited for analysis. People like 5e, and so use that preference in place of actually analyzing the system and then you get arguments that 5e does heists just fine when, in reality, it's doing so because of the work a GM is doing to hold together play the system doesn't do anything for. Simultaneously, you get statements that use dislike for a system to dismiss the support a system has for a thing.

Bluntly, 5e has no support for heists. Blades has lots. You can still prefer to ad hoc with 5e than use Blades, and that's just fine.

 

[prabe]

5e offers very little to no support for a lot of things, horror and heists being some ckear examples. A given GM can create ad hoc rulings to accomodate, but that's not the 5e system doing any work.

I think of horror as more of an atmosphere thing than a mechanical thing, and I can do horror by description/s, not even rulings. Is it possible we have different ideas, here?

Bluntly, 5e has no support for heists. Blades has lots. You can still prefer to ad hoc with 5e than use Blades, and that's just fine.

As I said, 5E doesn't have specific rules for heists, but if you want to go the plan-ahead-then-act route I think you can do so without specific rules for doing so. Well, without much of them. There'd be adjudication as far as info-gathering and planning and such, but that's the expected role for the DM in 5E and as such I'm not sure "ad hoc" is the best descriptor, here.

If you want to go all flashbacky and non-linear, then I agree that 5E does not support that playstyle, and that BitD does. I think the point some in this thread have made is: That's not the only possible way to do a heist.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

People like 5e, and so use that preference in place of actually analyzing the system and then you get arguments that 5e does heists just fine when, in reality, it's doing so because of the work a GM is doing to hold together play the system doesn't do anything for. Simultaneously, you get statements that use dislike for a system to dismiss the support a system has for a thing.

Bluntly, 5e has no support for heists. Blades has lots. You can still prefer to ad hoc with 5e than use Blades, and that's just fine.

This is true but you're kind of doing it yourself by claiming 5E has "no" support for heists.

D&D has no rules that are specifically designed to support heists, but it does have a lot of general purpose rules which support heist-based gameplay. So claiming it has "no" support seems excessive.

Equally, claiming BitD has lots of supports for heists is somewhat misleading - it has a lot of support for a highly specific cinematic approach to heists.

If you narrowed your claim to "cinematic heists" (i.e. ones where the pre-planning isn't shown in detail, only possibly as a montage sequence or the like), and said D&D doesn't support that, and BitD does, you'd be right, but I think that illustrates the problem. Overly-broad claims.

I think of horror as more of an atmosphere thing than a mechanical thing, and I can do horror by description/s, not even rulings. Is it possible we have different ideas, here?

I think we've getting closer to the point here.

D&D does not have any inherent mechanics which support horror-based play. It has certain mechanics which go against horror - specifically levels and HP, and the extremely powerful magic PCs can routinely wield, which tends to allow PCs to "just say no" to a lot of horror situations.

Whereas some other RPGs do have mechanics which explicitly support horror-based play, and have no mechanics which go against it.

But obviously horror isn't just rules - it's also about description and everyone buying into the atmosphere and so on. The issue is that when you're relying on description and buy-in as the sole generators of horror, it's like a soap bubble. It might not burst. It might even land on a surface and sit there for minutes or hours (I mean, okay, this is a tough soap bubble, but stay with me lol!). But it's very easy for that horror bubble to be burst by D&D's mechanics, esp. if even one player isn't buying in or was but reverts to normal D&D play under stress or forgetfulness.

Whereas in games where the mechanics also support horror (and/or don't contraindicate it), then it's more like a slightly under-inflated balloon than a soap bubble. It's a lot harder to burst. It naturally tends to stay together. Hell, some horror games are so well-designed they sort of automatically get people back on track if they temporarily veer off course, because the mechanics innately support the theme.

But can you do horror with D&D? Yes. It just tends to be a lot more fragile and rely more on buy-in, and also on the DM very carefully picking the monsters and so on.

With 5E specifically I'd say it works a lot better at lower levels, because once you get to a certain point you have so many HP and spells and fallbacks that even scary-ass monsters tend to have to spend a lot of time messing with you to do anything, which diverts things from horror to mechanical challenge.

EDIT - As an aside, it's interesting to compare say, Earthdawn to 5E in terms of horror support. ED basically has levels, kinda-sorta has HP, and whilst its magic is never as powerful as D&D, it's pretty common. But the issue is, ED was designed to support horror, so the enemies have more ways to mess with PCs, the PCs have less absolute defences, less ways to say "Just no..." to stuff, and the level/health gain isn't arranged the same way as D&D, so it remains pretty horror-friendly the whole time. Plus there's the, well, Horrors, who are often designed in ways to be specifically horrifying inside that mechanical scheme, where many "scary" or "horror"-themed D&D monsters are merely mechanically challenging and have little/no mechanical horror component.

 

[hopeless]

I ran what was effectively an Aliens game using FASA's Star Trek rules, I have even run a variation of the start of the Phantom Menace using Traveller 1.0 except no Jedi just a group of Marines protecting the Ambassador.

I also ran a sort of superhero game using d&d 3e rules using magic items as the source of their powers I think the Diablo book was involved, its been a few years since then so I don't remember how it came across.

The only restriction you have with d&d games is the DM and the players.
Their imagination is about the only limitation you need to worry about.
A session zero may help guide you if there's something special you want to run as not everyone's cup of tea are those indie games.

 

[Imaro]

5e offers very little to no support for a lot of things, horror and heists being some ckear examples. A given GM can create ad hoc rulings to accomodate, but that's not the 5e system doing any work.

5e has support for both... now whether you feel the degree is adequate and whether it supports it in a way you want could be debated. But claiming it has no support for it is false.

Meanwhile, Blades offers a lot of support for heists. This, however, doesn't mean it works for you. A system can have a lot of support for a thing and ypu can still not like it. Doesn't mean that the system doesn't do the thing, though.

No one claimed it didn't do it...

One of the largest piroblems in these kinds of discussions is how much preference is substitited for analysis. People like 5e, and so use that preference in place of actually analyzing the system and then you get arguments that 5e does heists just fine when, in reality, it's doing so because of the work a GM is doing to hold together play the system doesn't do anything for. Simultaneously, you get statements that use dislike for a system to dismiss the support a system has for a thing.

No, I think one of the largest problems is lack of nuance in these discussions. People make a general statement... BitD is great for heists without the nuance around things like... You won't actually be playing the set up or preparation.

Honestly outside of it's general resolution system which isn't heist specific what support specifically for heists does BitD offer?

If I am using the skills provided by 5e (stealth, climb, perception, etc.) and I am setting DC's for actions in the heist per the rules of 5e, and I am using the resolution system of 5e... what exactly am I holding together... Yes I am designing the adventure (Or using a heist adventure as an example) but that's part and parcel of playing D&D. So what support is it missing? Can you give me a straight answer to this question?

Bluntly, 5e has no support for heists. Blades has lots. You can still prefer to ad hoc with 5e than use Blades, and that's just fine.

What is the "lots" of support BitD offers? Again can you give a straight answer to this question?

EDIT: Just to be transparent I am curious in actually comparing and contrasting what BitD mechanics allow you to do in a heist vs. what D&D mechanics allow you to do... Right now it seems BitD allow for flashback sequences/no prep style... but in turn doesn't allow for elaborate planning and playing out of prep heists.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I ran what was effectively an Aliens game using FASA's Star Trek rules, I have even run a variation of the start of the Phantom Menace using Traveller 1.0 except no Jedi just a group of Marines protecting the Ambassador.

I also ran a sort of superhero game using d&d 3e rules using magic items as the source of their powers I think the Diablo book was involved, its been a few years since then so I don't remember how it came across.

Not to argue, but TPM, and Superheroes are all essentially the same genre as D&D - heroic adventure, and Aliens, depending on how it's run as a scenario, can be anywhere from near-pure horror to near-pure heroic adventure. My experience is that most TT RPG DMs run it more like the latter, because that's more fun, and meshes better with the highly-practical mindsets of most SF RPG players.

So that's not exactly showing limitless potential. Rather it's confirming that for stuff that's heroic adventure, D&D isn't a bad starting point.

And you can run anything with anything. You don't even need rules at all, really, if you have enough buy in. You can go totally freeform. That doesn't mean that it's necessarily the greatest plan.

The point most people talking about other RPGs are trying to make is that system matters, and if you have a system that supports what you're trying to do, rather than contradicts it, that's incredibly helpful.

 

[prabe]

D&D does not have any inherent mechanics which support horror-based play. It has certain mechanics which go against horror - specifically levels and HP, and the extremely powerful magic PCs can routinely wield, which tends to allow PCs to "just say no" to a lot of horror situations.

Whereas some other RPGs do have mechanics which explicitly support horror-based play, and have no mechanics which go against it.

The obvious thought is that you're talking about CoC-style Madness, but I'm wondering if maybe you have something else in mind for "mechanics which explicitly support horror-based play?" Mostly, to be honest, because I didn't find that Madness really did that ...

I do agree, though, that D&D's approach--levels and HP and all-a-that--doesn't exactly work with horror.

But obviously horror isn't just rules - it's also about description and everyone buying into the atmosphere and so on. The issue is that when you're relying on description and buy-in as the sole generators of horror, it's like a soap bubble. It might not burst. It might even land on a surface and sit there for minutes or hours (I mean, okay, this is a tough soap bubble, but stay with me lol!). But it's very easy for that horror bubble to be burst by D&D's mechanics, esp. if even one player isn't buying in or was but reverts to normal D&D play under stress or forgetfulness.

Yes, buy-in around the table matters, without question, at least as much as anything the DM does. I've found that once elements have been established, buy-in becomes somewhat easier, even at higher(ish) levels. I have some 15th-level PCs who are about to dance with some Very Bad Things; I'm curious to see if it plays as Horror or as something else.

But can you do horror with D&D? Yes. It just tends to be a lot more fragile and rely more on buy-in, and also on the DM very carefully picking the monsters and so on.

With 5E specifically I'd say it works a lot better at lower levels, because once you get to a certain point you have so many HP and spells and fallbacks that even scary-ass monsters tend to have to spend a lot of time messing with you to do anything, which diverts things from horror to mechanical challenge.

Yeah, monster selection matters, and descriptions, and buy-in. If all else fails, you can go for the gross-out.

It also kinda helps if the horror is between the PCs and their goals, I think. At any rate, I don't think we're particularly disagreeing about the limitations of Horror in 5E, much.