D&D 5E Is 5E Special

[doctorbadwolf]

4e had GW7e

A wild comparison. Gamma World is a very specifically focused game. I love it, but it isn’t a game that is going to meaningfully compare to the generic fantasy game.

Most TTRPGs don’t combine simplicity with OC builder chargen, and a generic set of setting assumptions and game type.

A game that is purpose built to tell one kind of story will not blow up like 5e has.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

First: although I'm pretty sure you were being flippant, tons of us do like advantage/disadvantage. I adore it. Faster, simpler, more dramatic, and rolling more dice is always better than doing math. I'm so spoiled by it that I'm not sure I'd want to play a RPG that didn't have that mechanic now.

But second, if we're comparing this to 4e, how is it more same-y than adding two to your attack roll every time you have "combat advantage"? I don't see a lot of difference between adding two vs. adding two vs. adding two.

In 4e you have constantly changing bonuses or penalties, some of which stack and some of which don’t.

So, yeah, A/D is a lot less dynamic, but that also works in its favor, because it’s hyper-simple, while still being fun.

 

[Parmandur]

Fun being relative. I'd much rather get a chance to succeed on a check I normally wouldn't instead of trying again.

Everything is relatove, but experience and observation auggest that rolling more dice is very fun for most people.

 

[Parmandur]

I mean, does it?! Can you tell us what those are, if so?

You listed four games with superficially completely different profiles in virtually every regard that I can think of.

CoC is a mechanically extremely old-fashioned TT RPG with a horror/investigation vibe, which often plays out a lot like one of those investigation board games/experiences rather than an RPG. The players can't really influence the narrative at all, and it's very adventure/story-driven. Low-ish crunch, low rules complexity.

PtbA/FitD is an extremely mechanically modern game that almost works better for people unfamiliar with TT RPGs because it challenges a lot of typical approaches. The players have a huge influence on the narrative, and in many PtbA/FitD games the narrative is driven largely by them too (to the point where they may be making up locations, characters, and so on). Low crunch, low-to-moderate rules complexity.

World of Darkness has various iterations, but is generally a fairly modern design (I mean, it was ahead of its time in the '90s), yet has a fairly classical approach to the player/Storyteller roles. The players may have more influence on the narrative that is typical in D&D, but essentially this is only because of the type of stories being told, rather than because of the mechanical characteristics of the game. Moderate to the low end of high crunch, easily moderate rules complexity, again trending towards the higher end of moderate.

D&D 5E has a retro-modern mechanical design, like it's like the revival of Midcentury furniture and beards, it resembles the past, but in a modern way. The mechanical approach to player/DM narrative control is positively antediluvian, literally nearly identical to the earliest RPGs, just with more positive suggestions ("be a fan of the PCs" etc.). Low end of high crunch, probably the most confused/inconsistent rules-design of any of the games (which is still vastly more together than say, 2E, but perhaps less than 3E or 4E), and the most complex rules, though not by a huge margin over WoD.

To me these are very different games and I don't see any real consistent similarities. Accessibility varies widely, and 5E is arguably the least-accessible of them, yet the most successful.

But am I missing something?

My experience World of Darkness is entirely in watching the Critical Role two parter where Taliesin Jaffe had made all of the characters for his players, so maybe that was just an example of very slick GMing on his part because the resolution mechanic seemed very smooth and elegant for the players who were clueless about the rules (Sam Riegal, per his usual tradition, had done zero homework going in).

All of these systems have very, ery smooth resolution mechanics, and at least PbtA, CoC and 5E are easy to make a character or get a handful a pregen and get going with minimal work on the part of the player beyond showing up and acting within the story.

 

[Parmandur]

In 4e you have constantly changing bonuses or penalties, some of which stack and some of which don’t.

So, yeah, A/D is a lot less dynamic, but that also works in its favor, because it’s hyper-simple, while still being fun.

It's probably the best idea in D&D since ascending AC...and probably before.

 

[clearstream]

It's probably the best idea in D&D since ascending AC...and probably before.

A/D comes to 5th via 4th from 3.5 (Bo9S). It's interesting to see it appear in more PbtA games also, e.g. Stonetop (so you sometimes roll 3d6 and keep the two highest/lowest).

 

[Parmandur]

A/D comes to 5th via 4th from 3.5 (Bo9S). It's interesting to see it appear in more PbtA games also, e.g. Stonetop (so you sometimes roll 3d6 and keep the two highest/lowest).

The latest iteration of Traveller also uses the same mechanic as PbtA you describe here.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

My experience Wprld of Darkness.is entirely in watching the Critical Role two parter where Taliesin Jaffe had made all of the characters for his players, so maybe that was just an example of very slick GMing on his part because the resolution mechanic seemed very smooth and elegant for the players who were clueless about the rules (Sam Riegal, per his usual tradition, had done zero homework going in).

All of these systems have very, ery smooth resolution mechanics, and at least PbtA, CoC and 5E are easy to make a character or get a handful a pregen and get going with minimal work on the part of the player beyond showing up and acting within the story.

Okay, I can actually see that!

So yeah, I agree. That is something I was missing. All four of those games have rules that, moment-to-moment, resolve pretty quickly and smoothly, without a lot of checking books or details or so on. The level of crunch and complexity varies a lot, but in all cases the momentary resolution is relatively quick.

This isn't true of a lot of other games - Cyberpunk 2020 often didn't resolve that quickly, nor does Shadowrun in any recent edition. 3E/PF1 would be right out (the sheer modifier math alone can make things take a very long time). 4E would be less successful on this basis but nowhere near as bad as 3E/PF1. Hmmm it feels like there's something more.

Oh I think that's the other thing - none of these games is likely to cause analysis paralysis when you're taking a turn, as your real options at any moment, tend to be quite limited. Combine that with the smooth resolution and you get these more fun-to-play games. I think this holds back Savage Worlds and PF2, both of which are well-designed, better designed than most of the above, mechanically, but easily create situations where you as a player can suffer from analysis paralysis, and where you do sometimes have to go back and forth checking stuff. PF2 for example has this very clever "3 action" system, but means that your choices at any given time, of what you COULD do, are much wider than D&D, which obviously good on one level, but can easily cause people to take a lot longer to decide what to do, as well (system expertise can help with this of course - but you show how WoD, for example, worked well without system expertise!).

Another factor I think is that of multiple actions generally - games which have multiple actions as a routine thing (Shadowrun, Champions, etc.) pretty much never run that smoothly without serious system expertise/player experience.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

A/D comes to 5th via 4th from 3.5 (Bo9S). It's interesting to see it appear in more PbtA games also, e.g. Stonetop (so you sometimes roll 3d6 and keep the two highest/lowest).

Yeah I noticed Advantage-style mechanics popping up a lot. Definitely agree with @Parmandur that it's 5E's big contribution to game design.

 

[Vaalingrade]

A/D comes to 5th via 4th from 3.5 (Bo9S). It's interesting to see it appear in more PbtA games also, e.g. Stonetop (so you sometimes roll 3d6 and keep the two highest/lowest).

Pathfinder used it to its IMO best effect; as a sometimes food game change and luck mechanic instead of the smothering blanket that ate any other design.