D&D (2024) Does anyone else think that 1D&D will create a significant divide in the community?

[Thomas Shey]

Personally, I distinguish between D&D the brand and the genre. Anything set of rules that serve a D&D experience is D&D for practical purposes.

The phrase I use is "D&Doids" or "in the D&D sphere". There's enough similarity within that (as in contrast with all the other games in the hobby) that there are certain common assumptions taken as a given there (and there are plenty) that would not be assumed the moment you get outside of it, and they tend to be clustered together (you'll only rarely find levels in games that don't also do classes and a bunch of the other things, for example, and you rarely see AC as a method of reducing chance to hit in games that don't deal with level-elevating hit points).

 

[Haplo781]

Of course it's going to divide the community. Every time they have a new edition some people like the old one better. If they screw up badly enough, the new edition resembles the one two before (as happened with 5e and 3.5e)...and some people will still like the one that gets replaced.

Now that they sell older editions, they can make even more money!

Opening up older editions on DM's Guild would be so amazing

 

[Parmandur]

The phrase I use is "D&Doids" or "in the D&D sphere". There's enough similarity within that (as in contrast with all the other games in the hobby) that there are certain common assumptions taken as a given there (and there are plenty) that would not be assumed the moment you get outside of it, and they tend to be clustered together (you'll only rarely find levels in games that don't also do classes and a bunch of the other things, for example, and you rarely see AC as a method of reducing chance to hit in games that don't deal with level-elevating hit points).

I mean, I just use the term "RPG."

 

[Thomas Shey]

I mean, I just use the term "RPG."

Except D&Doids share a large number of common traits that are not common elsewhere in the hobby: classes, levels, elevating hit points, armor-as-reduction-to-hit and others. They're clearly a separate family of games, just as BRP derivatives are.

 

[Arilyn]

I've borrowed Robin Laws' term F20 to cover these games.

 

[Parmandur]

Except D&Doids share a large number of common traits that are not common elsewhere in the hobby: classes, levels, elevating hit points, armor-as-reduction-to-hit and others. They're clearly a separate family of games, just as BRP derivatives are.

Some RPGs are closer to or farther from D&D, they do all have D&D in their DNA, but an RPG is an RPG, but D&D is specifically D&D.

 

[Clint_L]

I've used the Dread rules for entire games in my D&D campaign, and all they are is basically a Jenga tower. So I'm pretty rules agnostic. Other folks take the rules very seriously - kids in my D&D Club will furiously debate D&D vs. Pathfinder, which I find adorable, like passionately arguing over whether regular-stuffed or double-stuffed Oreos are better. At the end, as long as the story is good and the game is fun, who cares?

So the only thing I worry about with OneD&D is whether I will be required to buy a bunch of new stuff. As long as the answer is "only when you want to," then I'm good.

 

[payn]

I've used the Dread rules for entire games in my D&D campaign, and all they are is basically a Jenga tower. So I'm pretty rules agnostic. Other folks take the rules very seriously - kids in my D&D Club will furiously debate D&D vs. Pathfinder, which I find adorable, like passionately arguing over whether regular-stuffed or double-stuffed Oreos are better. At the end, as long as the story is good and the game is fun, who cares?

So the only thing I worry about with OneD&D is whether I will be required to buy a bunch of new stuff. As long as the answer is "only when you want to," then I'm good.

This is an awful attitude. Unfortunate for those kids.

 

[Bedrockgames]

As an outsider who doesn't play 5E, it seems like anything they do that changes 5E could result in fractures, because the hobby feels fairly organized around 5E (to a degree it wasn't organized around D&D in the past, in numbers exceeding anything we've had in recent years). I am also following some of the debates and it seems there are a few issues around changes that could be contentious. If the changes are sufficient enough that blocks of fans are not satisfied with the new edition, that could create an opening for alternative systems to step in (the way pathfinder did when 4E came out). And the pie is pretty big these days so there is tremendous incentive for that. But I am not keyed in enough to really assess because I am just catching the vague contours of the debate and not sure how many of the changes would be deal breakers for people. I just have a sense that this is as big as the D&D pie probably gets, and unless that assumption is wrong, changes seem fraught with risk (but then I suppose it goes the other way, where not making the changes that some segments might want, could result in a competitor swooping in from that direction as well).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Some RPGs are closer to or farther from D&D, they do all have D&D in their DNA, but an RPG is an RPG, but D&D is specifically D&D.

This is comparable to you saying that cats are cats and all other animals are just animals and there's no point in talking about vertebrates, mammals or any other subclassifications.

You can hold this idiosyncratic view if you wish, but you should know that it's going to seem weird to most people. The best leg to stand on here is a legalistic IP one, not one about game design.