D&D 5E Heteroglossia and D&D: Why D&D Speaks in a Multiplicity of Playing Styles

[Umbran]

What responsibility do you take for the accuracy of the claims you make?

None, it seems.

Mod Note:
Hey, how about we dial down the antagonistic tone several notches, okay? Thanks.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

So, who wants to talk about heteroglossia?

 

[Voadam]

So, who wants to talk about heteroglossia?

Sure.

I think the heteroglossia you talk about in the OP as in people playing the same game differently happens in other RPGs as well.

Thinking about Vampire the Masquerade as a big popular game with a large player base I think plenty of people were playing it differently.

Vampire supers.

Personal horror.

Politics.

Cross-over urban fantasy.

Those who are excited about metaplot and or lore.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Sure.

I think the heteroglossia you talk about in the OP as in people playing the same game differently happens in other RPGs as well.

I agree- there is nothing that is necessarily exclusive in the concept to D&D. I think that the concept is useful in that it helps to distinguish a salient different between certain games that are effective because they have a more unified concept (or conceit) as opposed to games that are effective because they allow multiple styles simultaneously.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure.

I think the heteroglossia you talk about in the OP as in people playing the same game differently happens in other RPGs as well.

Thinking about Vampire the Masquerade as a big popular game with a large player base I think plenty of people were playing it differently.

Vampire supers.

Personal horror.

Politics.

Cross-over urban fantasy.

Those who are excited about metaplot and or lore.

Taking 5e out of the mix for a moment.

Do you really believe that all rpgs contain equal levels of heteroglossia? I think we all agree that all rpgs can be played somewhat differently. But are some games potentially better at that than others? Are games that have a more unified concept or more narrow scope or more intertwined mechanics worse at allowing different play styles than games which have a less unified concept, a more broad scope and less intertwined mechanics? What about games that actively encourage high levels of heteroglossia in their very rules text. Does that potentially increase heteroglossia?

 

[Thomas Shey]

Taking 5e out of the mix for a moment.

Do you really believe that all rpgs contain equal levels of heteroglossia? I think we all agree that all rpgs can be played somewhat differently. But are some games potentially better at that than others? Are games that have a more unified concept or more narrow scope or more intertwined mechanics worse at allowing different play styles than games which have a less unified concept, a more broad scope and less intertwined mechanics? What about games that actively encourage high levels of heteroglossia in their very rules text. Does that potentially increase heteroglossia?

I don't know that I'd say all of them do. But I think I'd claim most (depending on what "most" means--there are an enormous number of virtually unknown boutique games that if you start counting literally all of them the argument would look funny) are, and virtually all trad games are.

In fact I'd claim that a large number contain more (there are a fair number of things baked into D&D's structure that make it actively fight against some styles--for the most blatant example, consider that even as RPGs go, D&D has an enormous amount of its structure wrapped up in combat: even non-martial classes are full of class features and related things that are, in the end, about fighting support. This doesn't mean other games don't lean into that fairly commonly too, but I can think of several general purpose games where its entirely possible to generate a character who is absolutely not about combat in any meaningful way. I'm not saying this is a super-common desire in a hobby that's all about adventure fiction, but its a telling example that D&D has made decisions virtually from day one that narrow its scope intrinsically. And I'm not just talking about the genre things here. I know there's a lot of "but we don't want icky mechanics in our social interactions" in the trad hobby, and particularly in big parts of D&D fandom, but if you're going to run a game that's very heavily based around social manuevering, just what does D&D actually do for you?)

That's the thing about claims that D&D is especially well suited to a variety of styles: compared to what? At the very least it always seems like people really cherry-pick the counter-examples to claim it at best, and at worst want to make claims about the narrowness of a number of other games that is not clear to be true.

 

[Campbell]

Taking 5e out of the mix for a moment.

Do you really believe that all rpgs contain equal levels of heteroglossia? I think we all agree that all rpgs can be played somewhat differently. But are some games potentially better at that than others? Are games that have a more unified concept or more narrow scope or more intertwined mechanics worse at allowing different play styles than games which have a less unified concept, a more broad scope and less intertwined mechanics? What about games that actively encourage high levels of heteroglossia in their very rules text. Does that potentially increase heteroglossia?

I think it makes more sense to talk about these things in more nuanced ways.

What's the overall scope of the fiction?
Who determines the scope of play?
How socially free are players to set the agenda for their characters?
Is the game built around the group concept or individual characters who sometimes work together, sometimes work independently and may even work at cross purposes?
Are characters integrated into the setting or wanderers? There are different sorts of freedom and restrictions inherent in each.
How much of the setting is embedded into the rules? Does the game embed stuff like how much magic works and the like?

So one thing I think is true is that the overall flexibility of a game with conflict resolution mechanics is about the same in terms of overall flexibility as one where the GM decides what happens. It allows the GM less flexibility to direct play but offers players much more flexible to direct play. That's only a single dimension of play though.

 

[Campbell]

@Thomas Shey

I would clarify that our hobby is only mostly concerned with adventure fiction. There is at least a significant minority of us that care as much about dramatic fiction (focused on interpersonal relationships) or at the very least games integrate a strong focus on dramatic fiction and slice of life elements.

 

[Voadam]

Taking 5e out of the mix for a moment.

Do you really believe that all rpgs contain equal levels of heteroglossia?

I am not sure why you seem to think I said equal levels.

I think we all agree that all rpgs can be played somewhat differently. But are some games potentially better at that than others? Are games that have a more unified concept or more narrow scope or more intertwined mechanics worse at allowing different play styles than games which have a less unified concept, a more broad scope and less intertwined mechanics?

Is Vampire where you play a political urban fantasy gothic-punk vampire an example of a more narrow scope game with more intertwined mechanics here?

What about games that actively encourage high levels of heteroglossia in their very rules text. Does that potentially increase heteroglossia?

I am just taking what Snarf said about heteroglossia and applying it to the non-D&D game I have probably played the most that is super popular and seeing that a lot of the heteroglossia still applies.

Pretty much every aspect seems similar with heteroglossia except for the grid combat.

Can you provide an example of a popular or well-known RPG that is narrowly tailored and not heteroglossic so that the differences can be highlighted?

I've played a bit of GURPS and my experience is that while it is a universal system the mechanics are designed for gritty level, highly defined characters, (sort of a low level D&D with really detailed granular skills) but I also have sourcebooks for GURPS Supers and GURPS Mage the Ascension and such which seems to me like they are play style concept games that go counter to the mechanics. Despite view that this is a clash I've also heard of people having rolicking fun in high powered GURPS supers games.

 

[Thomas Shey]

@Thomas Shey

I would clarify that our hobby is only mostly concerned with adventure fiction. There is at least a significant minority of us that care as much about dramatic fiction (focused on interpersonal relationships) or at the very least games integrate a strong focus on dramatic fiction and slice of life elements.

"All about" was mostly hyperbole. Mostly.