D&D General D&D tries to be a little of everything, and that's its secret strength (and weakness)

[Micah Sweet]

Most of what you're saying only applies to certain editions of D&D and not others. Some were more focused, others less so. Some had rich and in-depth lore, others less so. There's very little, especially playstyles, that have a solid through line across D&D editions.

For me, that's the crux of it. 5E doesn't do anything particularly well as a game...unless let the players just win all the time without breaking a sweat is an intentional design choice for gameplay. 4E knew what it was trying to do and did it quite well. Not a lot of D&D players wanted that from a game called D&D, so it didn't last. 3X knew what it was trying to do and did it...until it fell under its own weight re: rules for everything. So too with 2E and AD&D. The rules produced a particular kind of play. Whether people liked that style or not largely determined whether they liked that edition or not.

No. D&D has been more or less focused depending on the edition. 5E absolutely tries to be all things to all people.

It all depends on what you mean by "benefit." Would the game be better designed as a game? Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt. Would sales go down? Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt. Sales would likely drop if they put out a more unified, directed, or focused vision of what they wanted the game to be. Anyone who didn't like that vision would leave the game.

Near as I can tell, WotC stumbled into 5E's popularity. They designed it as the last edition of D&D, as in this is it, the brand is being rested, one last chance to make the game. Only because of a quirk in the design, i.e. the encounters per day math and PC resources, WotC stumbled into a fantasy superhero game where the PCs are gods even from low levels, there's no risk or danger and the game delivers power fantasy by the truckload. But that's down to the adventuring day math and almost no one sticking to that, so PC resources wildly, dramatically, absurdly outstrip just about every single encounter put in front of them. And apparently that's exactly what D&D fans were in the mood for. Because...boom.

All that said, D&D is...generally speaking...fairly unified in its design goals. It's always been a monster-fighting game. It does that to varying degrees of success. But it's always about fighting monsters. That some people don't play it that way in no way changes that being the absolute fundamental core of the game's design across editions.

Well, the rules supported it being a game about going into dangerous place and bringing back treasure up through 2e (more so in theme in 1e and before of course, but the rules were still there after). In the WotC era, however, you are absolutely right.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've been saying for many years that D&D's biggest strength is that it does pretty much any playstyle decently to well, but not great. Then DMs can tweak things from there to make it a bit better at the style that they run.

But only a bit, when you get down to it.

 

[Oofta]

I don't accept the assertion that people would be better off playing another game. I think that ignores a lot of nuance and shuts down innovation. D&D can be "fixed" to fit your table's desires, and it isn't nearly as difficult as a lot of people want everyone else to believe.

I'm not saying change the core game for this, I'm just saying, this anti-DIY attitude in the D&D audience is boring, anti-innovation, and exists only to shut down conversation. I don't want to play another game that is radically different. I want to modify D&D to do what I want it to do. And if I want to talk about how I want D&D to change, I shouldn't have to wade through a sea of "Screw off loser, play a different game" to figure out some cool ways to modify the rules.

I disagree. I think at a certain point people should consider other games. Some people seem to really hate core concepts of D&D, and no system can be stretched to do everything for everyone. Yes D&D can be stretched and morphed into something significantly different, I think that's one of it's strengths. But you still have to accept some of the core concepts. For example D&D is never going to be as good a narrative game as a PbtA game. So if a Dungeon World campaign is what you really want, you're better off playing that game instead. Because while you can add narrative elements to a game, and many people do, it will always

Nothing, no game ever invented, can be the right thing for everyone under the sun. There are a ton of options like Level Up if you want a crunchier game. You can play space fantasy using the same core concepts and structures with Esper Genesis. But ultimately you're still playing D&D, with all of it's limitations and assumptions. The game is flexible, but every game has it's breaking point.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I don't accept the assertion that people would be better off playing another game. I think that ignores a lot of nuance and shuts down innovation. D&D can be "fixed" to fit your table's desires, and it isn't nearly as difficult as a lot of people want everyone else to believe.

I'm not saying change the core game for this, I'm just saying, this anti-DIY attitude in the D&D audience is boring, anti-innovation, and exists only to shut down conversation. I don't want to play another game that is radically different. I want to modify D&D to do what I want it to do. And if I want to talk about how I want D&D to change, I shouldn't have to wade through a sea of "Screw off loser, play a different game" to figure out some cool ways to modify the rules.

The thing that gets me about " I want to turn 5e into WFRP" or whatever isn't that it can't be done.

It's just why?

Just go play WFRP it's waayyyy less work on your part to just read that and use that thing made to do the grimdark thing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

while i do agree his wording could be far better I do think the idea he buried in his unfortunate choice of words, that changing the game for the people on the fringes is silly is a sold one. Far too many people come to forums looking for ways to fix D&D when they'd be far better off with another game system. Or the ones who, when you finally get them to admit it are trying to stealth mod thier d&D game into something else because their players refuse to play their game of choice. I've even seen people post that they don't like D&D but it's the most popular game so they want it fixed.

And of course, there are plenty of people hurt by the idea that they used to not be on the fringes of D&D, but have become so as the official game has changed hands, changed rules, changed sensibilities, and changed priorities.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't accept the assertion that people would be better off playing another game. I think that ignores a lot of nuance and shuts down innovation. D&D can be "fixed" to fit your table's desires, and it isn't nearly as difficult as a lot of people want everyone else to believe.

I'm not saying change the core game for this, I'm just saying, this anti-DIY attitude in the D&D audience is boring, anti-innovation, and exists only to shut down conversation. I don't want to play another game that is radically different. I want to modify D&D to do what I want it to do. And if I want to talk about how I want D&D to change, I shouldn't have to wade through a sea of "Screw off loser, play a different game" to figure out some cool ways to modify the rules.

I would say fixing D&D more to your liking and playing a different game are both viable options. It depends of which is more appealing to you. What seems less viable is, "complain on a fan site until WotC fixes it for you". Fix it yourself or play something else.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The thing that gets me about " I want to turn 5e into WFRP" or whatever isn't that it can't be done.

It's just why?

Just go play WFRP it's waayyyy less work on your part to just read that and use that thing made to do the grimdark thing.

People have an attachment to D&D though, and quite frankly the version of D&D we have now is not the version we've always had. It has been, to use your example, closer to WFRP in the past. And at other times it has had a more narrative bent.

 

[overgeeked]

The thing that gets me about " I want to turn 5e into WFRP" or whatever isn't that it can't be done.

It's just why?

Just go play WFRP it's waayyyy less work on your part to just read that and use that thing made to do the grimdark thing.

Mostly because even with ridiculously heavy modding and house rules, there’s still orders of magnitude more players out there for D&D when compared to any other game, even something like WFRP.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Mostly because even with ridiculously heavy modding and house rules, there’s still orders of magnitude more players out there for D&D when compared to any other game, even something like WFRP.

Yeah, that makes sense. I sometimes lose sight of the fact that some people have to pitch and run public games with strangers.

That's about the only reason I can think of though.

But I'm lazy, so if my choice was between being an unpaid game designer on top of being an unpaid GM?

I choose couch.

 

[payn]

D&D is a good general fantasy RPG. If I want/need something more specific, i'll look at something more bespoke. YMMV.