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

[Lanefan]

Dungeon World is structured with a set of agenda and principles that, in light of the rest of the games mechanics, pretty well shows you what to do next. The GM is the 'fan of the PCs', his agenda is basically to give them a chance to be big heroes by pushing them, throwing adversity at them, and seeing what happens. If they get themselves out of one pickle (out of the frying pan) by gosh you make the "Reveal an Unwelcome Truth" move and now THEY ARE IN THE FIRE!

Heh - a relatively new DM in our crew tried running some DW online last year while her main in-person campaign was on hold (same players). I guess she must have dialled the volume up a bit beyond 10 as she TPKed them something like three times in the first ten sessions or so.

Something to consider for those who are saying throw the farm at them.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Heh - a relatively new DM in our crew tried running some DW online last year while her main in-person campaign was on hold (same players). I guess she must have dialled the volume up a bit beyond 10 as she TPKed them something like three times in the first ten sessions or so.

Something to consider for those who are saying throw the farm at them.

That sounds like things weren't working as intended.

 

[Hussar]

Anyone used Sandy Petersons Cthulhu Mythos for 5e rules? I have them, but I haven't used them. I really like the take on Mythos monsters in that book, but I haven't looked at what it recommends/alters to create Cosmic Horror. I will have to take a look when I get home.

EDIT: I just checked the PDF and there is Dread and Insanity with about 7 pages of description (4 pages of which are descriptions of 8 different types of insanity) on what they are and how to use them. Dread is similar to Exhaustion with 7 levels, but mind/sanity based. Sanity is hard to describe, you jsut need to read it. Nothing like sanity points that I can see though. Seems like a very interesting and 5e style implementation.

Good find. Thanks for that.

But, again, in the context of this thread, I'm not sure how that is terribly different from suggesting a different game. A several hundred page supplement to help you do one small part of a campaign seems a bit overkill. Remember, we're not supposed to talk about someone who is basing a whole campaign on this change. They just want to run one or two adventures.

So, can someone please tell me how a several hundred page door stopper for doing Lovecraft in D&D is better than just suggesting a 4 page free pdf? And that somehow a 4 page pdf is insulting and bad but it's perfectly fine to suggest that someone go out and buy this?

((Note, I love the idea of the book, and I'm probably going to buy it when I have a bit of extra cash, but, we're talking about giving advice to DM's and how it's bad to suggest other games.))

 

[Hussar]

D&D pretty much does this with all of it's abilities... either defining them as encompassing other things... Like intelligence being a measure of memory or totally made up... Wisdom being how attuned you are to the world. I figure if you are playing D&D you choose to accept the given definition for an ability... shrug.

EDIT: As long as they do define it, I'm not understanding what the issue is?

Really?

Strength - how strong is my character
Dexterity - how agile or fast is my character
Constitution - how hardy is my character
Intelligence - how smart is my character
Wisdom - how attentive is my character
Charisma - how likeable is my character

vs

Sanity - how well can I learn insane things while going insane.

One of these things is not like the other.

 

[Hussar]

Also, just as a question, as the person who brought up the 5e sanity rules in the first place.

Is it fair to say when several people talk about how bad it is and only one person defends it, that it’s probably bad?

 

[Aldarc]

Also, just as a question, as the person who brought up the 5e sanity rules in the first place.

Is it fair to say when several people talk about how bad it is and only one person defends it, that it’s probably bad?

No, because we are all bad GMs, Hussar, and that lone defender is the only one who is doing it right, and it is only through their noble condescension that they may teach us the full perfection of 5e D&D.

 

[Hussar]

No, because we are all bad GMs, Hussar, and that lone defender is the only one who is doing it right, and it is only through their noble condescension that they may teach us the full perfection of 5e D&D.

Now hang on. Yes, I'm probably the last person to say this because I've brought up the Oberoni thing more than a few times. But, dogpiling like that isn't cool either. We could all benefit from ratcheting down the tension several notches. While I might disagree with @Imaro, to my knowledge, he hasn't really claimed that any of this is "easy" or "simple" and has more than a few times shown a willingness to discuss rather than just pontificate.

Like I've said earlier, no one disagrees that you can do these things in D&D. Where the disagreement generally comes is whether it's worth the effort. And, that has SOOOO much to do with what your table is like. From @dave2008's descriptions, his experience with the game is completely different from mine. Because 5e is much more opaque in design than 4e, the variations from table to table are much more stark in contrast.

Even small changes like class choice, will produce quite different experiences in 5e. In that sense, 5e is closer to AD&D in that it becomes much more difficult to discuss experiences between tables because everyone is playing a different game, sometimes so different that they aren't really the same system anymore.

 

[Aldarc]

Now hang on. Yes, I'm probably the last person to say this because I've brought up the Oberoni thing more than a few times. But, dogpiling like that isn't cool either. We could all benefit from ratcheting down the tension several notches. While I might disagree with @Imaro, to my knowledge, he hasn't really claimed that any of this is "easy" or "simple" and has more than a few times shown a willingness to discuss rather than just pontificate.

Too bad he refused to show me the same courtesy despite my own best efforts to engage in good faith.

 

[dave2008]

Good find. Thanks for that.

But, again, in the context of this thread, I'm not sure how that is terribly different from suggesting a different game. A several hundred page supplement to help you do one small part of a campaign seems a bit overkill. Remember, we're not supposed to talk about someone who is basing a whole campaign on this change. They just want to run one or two adventures.

So, can someone please tell me how a several hundred page door stopper for doing Lovecraft in D&D is better than just suggesting a 4 page free pdf? And that somehow a 4 page pdf is insulting and bad but it's perfectly fine to suggest that someone go out and buy this?

((Note, I love the idea of the book, and I'm probably going to buy it when I have a bit of extra cash, but, we're talking about giving advice to DM's and how it's bad to suggest other games.))

I was just asking if any one has used it. I don't see the need to get into a debate over this simple question.

I acquired it through the Kickstarter a while back, but I haven't run any of it (I had already run my Cthulhu 5e game at that point). Interestingly, though it offers some new races and feats and subclasses (no new classes), it doesn't restrict the use of any existing D&D classes.

 

[dave2008]

And, that has SOOOO much to do with what your table is like. From @dave2008's descriptions, his experience with the game is completely different from mine. Because 5e is much more opaque in design than 4e, the variations from table to table are much more stark in contrast.

Be careful with that assumption. On the old WotC boards I was constantly told I was playing 4e wrong too. How we played 4e at our table seemed to be very different than a lot of other people. Heck we played a 4e adventure without powers once, completely improv - just player description and DM adjudication!