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

[Imaro]

????

SAN doesn't interact with learning or using magic in D&D. And no, there's no sign any of these characters even have the slightest "minor madness". That's why I point to the Fear/Stress rules, which reflect a "tangible mental toll".

Yeah definitely disagree with the madness perspective... it's interspersed throughout the entire series. San interacts with any knowledge (including Arcana) that would usually use Int

EDIT: So an example would be deciphering a spell created by the Old gods in a book written in their language.... Upon opening the book and viewing the blasphemous writings...make a San save vs. DC X (& if necessary roll for madness)... then in order to actually decipher it roll a San check with Knowledge Arcana proficiency vs DC Y

 

[Aldarc]

Additionally, although the Alien Mythos is not my thing, I'm curious how the Alien RPG plays in action, particularly its Stress & Panic mechanic. From what I have read, I could see how a similar mechanic could work for Lovecraftian, cosmic, or Cthulhu horror.

That's certainly what it looks like to me, and it's not at all recent. Ever since the concept of milestone leveling was popularized in what, late 3.5E, I've seen people adopting it, and I keep seeing it. I believe it also tends to be supported by official adventures (I haven't read enough to be sure its universal). I suspect if you polled all D&D players perhaps a majority would be using that or something like it, with the smaller portion using XP, but you never know.

I kinda like how SotDL does leveling. It's a bit more structured than "GM says you leveled." It's nominally tied to completing an adventure. You finish one, then you level. Adventures are tied to one of four tiers: starting, novice, expert, master. This offloads a lot of pressure from both GMs and players regarding both XP or when's an appropriate time to bump players up a level.

I'm also a fan of character-based XP from Dungeon World. Your fails, resolving bonds, actions that lean into your alignment or class, etc. provide XP. It's a bit more difficult to do when multiclassing is a thing, but this could be tied to backgrounds in 5e or drives.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I kinda like how SotDL does leveling. It's a bit more structured than "GM says you leveled." It's nominally tied to completing an adventure. You finish one, then you level. Adventures are tied to one of four tiers: starting, novice, expert, master. This offloads a lot of pressure from both GMs and players regarding both XP or when's an appropriate time to bump players up a level.

I'm also a fan of character-based XP from Dungeon World. Your fails, resolving bonds, actions that lean into your alignment or class, etc. provide XP. It's a bit more difficult to do when multiclassing is a thing, but this could be tied to backgrounds in 5e or drives.

We've basically been using "DM says you leveled" for years (because we kept forgetting milestones lol after abandoning XP) and it's worked really well. Obviously requires a DM who actually wants the PCs to level up of course.

Dungeon World's approach works great for Dungeon World, where it doesn't hugely matter what level you are, and it's more of a lateral than vertical power gain (i.e. broadening the approaches you're likely to succeed with and giving you more tools to assert fiction or the like), but my experience is that it often produces situations where there's a 2-3 level disparity between the highest and lowest level PCs, and whilst 5E can absolutely handle that, it doesn't always feel great, so I'd be cautious of applying a similar solution. I think 5E works amazing when everyone is exactly the same level, and as you deviate from that it becomes less ideal as a system.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The advantage of fixed-event or fixed-time leveling is that players can plan for it reasonably. When its "whenever the GM decides" we're back to players often not really having a clue.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The advantage of fixed-event or fixed-time leveling is that players can plan for it reasonably. When its "whenever the GM decides" we're back to players often not really having a clue.

I've been playing D&D for 30 years and the idea that players "plan for leveling" outside of power-gamers who have a spreadsheet listing every ability they're intending to take for the next 20 levels seems pretty hilariously nonsensical to me, I have to say.

Really, we used XP-based leveling up to the end of 3E, and no-one except power-gamers was "planning" for their level up. In no D&D group I played in. After 3E, in 4E and 5E, I've played in groups using milestone (so fixed-event) and DM chooses and even one using XP, and in none of these have players been "reasonably planning" for their level-ups, again, except power-gamers. Some players have some vague idea what they want, some have a precise one, but the idea that knowing approximately when they're going to level helps with this? That just seems profoundly theoretical and nonsensical. YMMV of course but I am really pulling a very skeptical face here.

In addition, it hasn't actually mattered in 4E or 5E.

Why? Because literally all the 4E and 5E groups I've played in have been using digital stuff (except at the very beginning of each edition), so people just level up characters with the click of a button, and are presented with the choices. In 5E, I don't think it would matter even if it wasn't digital, because your choices are so narrow.

I do admit that if I was playing 3.XE, PF1, or 4E, and I wasn't using any digital stuff (and I guess with 4E you can't now?), then it might be slightly annoying, but, that's so last century.

 

[Aldarc]

I've been playing D&D for 30 years and the idea that players "plan for leveling" outside of power-gamers who have a spreadsheet listing every ability they're intending to take for the next 20 levels seems pretty hilariously nonsensical to me, I have to say.

I think the meaning of "players can plan for [leveling] reasonably" has more to do with general pacing of play rather than level-by-level character-planning, though I could be wrong by @Thomas Shey's meaning.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think the meaning of "players can plan for [leveling] reasonably" has more to do with general pacing of play rather than level-by-level character-planning, though I could be wrong by @Thomas Shey's meaning.

Still not sure I entirely get it though I might be dumb. No sane DM is going to say "LEVEL UP!!!!! DING! CONGRATS!!!" in the middle of a session or something. That's actually more likely to happen with milestone than DM-sez. In fact the only times I can think of that happening IRL are milestone or XP-based leveling groups. With DM-sez in my experience all leveling will be at the end of a session, though I mean I guess you theoretically could get a DM who was a tremendous level-troll and just like, two fights into a dungeon, he's like "DING!!! POG!!! Time to level up losers!".

 

[Aldarc]

Still not sure I entirely get it though I might be dumb. No sane DM is going to say "LEVEL UP!!!!! DING! CONGRATS!!!" in the middle of a session or something. That's actually more likely to happen with milestone than DM-sez. In fact the only times I can think of that happening IRL are milestone or XP-based leveling groups. With DM-sez in my experience all leveling will be at the end of a session, though I mean I guess you theoretically could get a DM who was a tremendous level-troll and just like, two fights into a dungeon, he's like "DING!!! POG!!! Time to level up losers!".

I'm not imagining the GM saying that in the middle of a session or GM-sez. It's more the general uncertainty at the end of a session, which I have experienced even as both a player and GM, of "umm... I don't know. I guess we can say that y'all have leveled." As a player it can sometimes feel like, "But did I earn this or are we being up-leveled for the sake of planned future content or just because we asked the GM if we hit a milestone yet?" It's more about providing a bit more structure and benchmarks for PC leveling without having to make these sort of judgment calls as a GM. So the actual milestone is a bit more concrete: it's when the adventure/module is done.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I've been playing D&D for 30 years and the idea that players "plan for leveling" outside of power-gamers who have a spreadsheet listing every ability they're intending to take for the next 20 levels seems pretty hilariously nonsensical to me, I have to say.

I'll just note that, as two recent examples coming to mind, there are enough steps and decision-making in leveling in both 4e and PF2e that I'd rather not do it at the last minute.

Its not about power-gaming per se (though in the 3e days you could absolutely find that if you didn't plan down the road that you'd walked yourself into a feat chain corner) but decision-paralysis. If you've never had any players prone to it, you won't get it.

 

[loverdrive]

Why? Because literally all the 4E and 5E groups I've played in have been using digital stuff (except at the very beginning of each edition), so people just level up characters with the click of a button, and are presented with the choices. In 5E, I don't think it would matter even if it wasn't digital, because your choices are so narrow.

Also it's not like a levelup is going to be in the middle of a session, so they'll have plenty of time to consider their choices.