D&D General How has D&D changed over the decades?

[Thomas Shey]

WotC has not made errors in the past regarding its own market?

See my response to Micah on that.

 

[Helldritch]

Then this discussion is actually pointless because no discernable trend can be determined. You say modern D&D has changed the nature of the game, I say the rules have caught up to how I've played since the 2e. Ergo since this is highly specific, I argue there has been no real change to the game culture since I'm running my game the same way I always have, except a lot of things I used house rules to do are now part of the core rules.

So now it's nothing but dueling anecdotes. You say "nu-uh" and I say "ya-ha" infinitely.

Really? Anecdotes? A series of anecdote, when long enough, will become a trend. More and more DM are dissatisfied with the current mindset. At least, it seems to be a trend in my little corner of the world and on this very forum as well ( and others too).

But as soon as someone claims to be dissatisfied or criticise a bit too much 5ed, he gets flamed, accused of restraining player's rights and creativity or simply too old and grognard to understand. Strangely, a 17 year old DM shared the same thoughts a few days ago. I do not think he was there in OD&D... and this is not the only teenager sharing this mindset, nor is it restricted to my corner as the first one I mentioned is tye daughter of one of my best friend 600km away from my town. I have my share of "anecdotes" that goes the same way as I do yet, I do not even have this problem at any of my tables, simply because I promote discussions and tolerance. But once a concensus is reached, it is pretty much set in stones for the rest of the campaign.

Again, 5ed removed a lot of the controls the DM had on the game while claiming the opposite. What was given on one hand was taken by the other and then some more. In some games I have witnessed, the DM is nothing but the dice roller for the opponents, and he better not be to lucky on the dice.

What you claim is anecdotal, I claim to be a trend and thus, a big change in how the game is expected to be played.

 

[Cadence]

Then this discussion is actually pointless because no discernable trend can be determined. You say modern D&D has changed the nature of the game, I say the rules have caught up to how I've played since the 2e. Ergo since this is highly specific, I argue there has been no real change to the game culture since I'm running my game the same way I always have, except a lot of things I used house rules to do are now part of the core rules.

So now it's nothing but dueling anecdotes. You say "nu-uh" and I say "ya-ha" infinitely.

So, either
(a) you had as many races and classes as 5e, the ability scores added as much to rolls and as little to which spells you could cast as 5e, every class had the same level advancement, you modified modules to have as few magic items as 5e, you gave Wizards more hp (than d4) more spells (than 1) and cantrips, you got rid of racial bonuses on thief skills, you had short rest recovery like 5e, you allowed full healing up over night, etc...
or (b) none of those things have affected your games or the expectations for it in any noticeable way
or (c) ______________?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Really? Anecdotes? A series of anecdote, when long enough, will become a trend. More and more DM are dissatisfied with the current mindset. At least, it seems to be a trend in my little corner of the world and on this very forum as well ( and others too).

But as soon as someone claims to be dissatisfied or criticise a bit too much 5ed, he gets flamed, accused of restraining player's rights and creativity or simply too old and grognard to understand. Strangely, a 17 year old DM shared the same thoughts a few days ago. I do not think he was there in OD&D... and this is not the only teenager sharing this mindset, nor is it restricted to my corner as the first one I mentioned is tye daughter of one of my best friend 600km away from my town. I have my share of "anecdotes" that goes the same way as I do yet, I do not even have this problem at any of my tables, simply because I promote discussions and tolerance. But once a concensus is reached, it is pretty much set in stones for the rest of the campaign.

Again, 5ed removed a lot of the controls the DM had on the game while claiming the opposite. What was given on one hand was taken by the other and then some more. In some games I have witnessed, the DM is nothing but the dice roller for the opponents, and he better not be to lucky on the dice.

What you claim is anecdotal, I claim to be a trend and thus, a big change in how the game is expected to be played.

While everyone has to do their best to assess things in the context of what they've seen, as happens with me frequently the response can easily be "Doesn't fit my experience at all" and at that point it really is ancedotal, even if its on a larger scale.

After all, I've been seeing people fighting against a high level of GM dominance for at least 30 years now, so how new is that trend? I'd argue not much.

As for "more and more GMs are dissatisfied..."--you're always going to hear more from people who are unhappy with the current status quo than those who are. After all, those who are don't have much to talk about in regard to it. That doesn't tell you anything other than that the numbers of those who are dissatisfied are non-trivial.

 

[Remathilis]

What you claim is anecdotal, I claim to be a trend and thus, a big change in how the game is expected to be played.

The plural of anecdote is not data. Humans are notorious in finding confirmation bias that supports their view of a topic. For every post, blog or video citing how the sequel trilogy has killed Star Wars is another who thinks Mandolorian and Obi-Wan will be the best Star Wars content yet. You will always find the info that confirms your bias and reject that which doesn't. (And that's not even straying into anything remotely political...)

So unless you got statistically backed hard data backing up your assertion, all we can do is trade anecdotes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The plural of anecdote is not data. Humans are notorious in finding confirmation bias that supports their view of a topic. For every post, blog or video citing how the sequel trilogy has killed Star Wars is another who thinks Mandolorian and Obi-Wan will be the best Star Wars content yet. You will always find the info that confirms your bias and reject that which doesn't. (And that's not even straying into anything remotely political...)

So unless you got statistically backed hard data backing up your assertion, all we can do is trade anecdotes.

Those aren't even the same thing. I didn't care for the sequel trilogy, but all the TV content is pretty solid. I expect future TV content to be pretty solid (really excited for Obi-Wan) but am very leery of any future film projects.

 

[Remathilis]

So, either
(a) you had as many races and classes as 5e, the ability scores added as much to rolls and as little to which spells you could cast as 5e, every class had the same level advancement, you modified modules to have as few magic items as 5e, you gave Wizards more hp (than d4) more spells (than 1) and cantrips, you got rid of racial bonuses on thief skills, you had short rest recovery like 5e, you allowed full healing up over night, etc...
or (b) none of those things have affected your games or the expectations for it in any noticeable way
or (c) ______________?

Cute. By the end of 2e: I had removed level limits, removed most race/class restrictions, eased alignment restrictions for some classes, added max HP at first level, increased spells known for wizards, allowed max HP/spell refresh on a rest, and had begun the process of rebalancing ability scores to fix the dependency of 15+ scores to get a bonus. I also had allowed any race to multi-class or dual-class. I had started fixing the Thief class to give them some much needed combat ability beyond the highly situational and often useless backstab.

When I was much deeper into 3e, I had likewise started to fix issues with that (cantrip like abilities that were at will, fighter only feats that added to endurance, etc) that 5e corrected later (after I made a brief stop in Pathfinder due to not liking how 4e tried to fix said problems).

So yeah, it wasn't literal, but many of the ideas I added to fix issues ended up being fixed more elegantly in the next edition. I wager my scant 5e house rules (bonus spells for sorcerer and ranger) will be part of the new version in 2024. I didn't predict every change, but WotC seems to think the things that bother me are important enough to fix in later edition.

 

[AnotherGuy]

See my response to Micah on that.

The decrease in lethality and item destruction is a legacy item from 4e which has been carried over. You rightly say WotC do know their market (as can be seen by the turnover figures year on year), in the same breath I can say that the DMs Guild and 3PP reflect that a harder core is also quite popular.

 

[Remathilis]

Those aren't even the same thing. I didn't care for the sequel trilogy, but all the TV content is pretty solid. I expect future TV content to be pretty solid (really excited for Obi-Wan) but am very leery of any future film projects.

People were filing autopsies after Rise of Skywalker about how Star Wars was dead, the brand would limp along on life support and nothing could save it, only to be buying Baby Yoda merch not one year later. It all goes to show you can find what you want to support your view: if you think Star Wars is forever ruined, you can point to the movies as proof. If you think Star Wars is healthy, you can point to the TV as proof.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The decrease in lethality and item destruction is a legacy item from 4e which has been carried over. You rightly say WotC do know their market (as can be seen by the turnover figures year on year), in the same breath I can say that the DMs Guild and 3PP reflect that a harder core is also quite popular.

Things can be "quite popular" without being a majority. If a quarter of the people in the D&D sphere want a harder core experience or a more GM-centric one, that's a sign of something that's pretty popular; its also still a minority of D&D users.

That's the gig: "A lot of GMs and players want things different" and "Current D&D serves the majority of its market properly" are entirely compatible statements.