D&D General Styles of D&D Play

[Maxperson]

It's not as good as a game that is purpose-built for a specific purpose, but because of the factors listed above, it is reasonably good at a number of different things.

I've been saying for years that this is D&D's greatest strength. It isn't really great at anything, but it does virtually everything decently to well with a minimum of effort.

Going back to the OP, I've found that most games fall into "Mixing it Up." In my experience most players like combat, and roleplaying, perhaps with a little humor, etc. They just place varying degrees of emphasis on the various playstyles the game is using. You'll have the guy who loves character driven play and is okay with combat next to the guy who loves combat and is okay with character driven play. Then there's Bob the Bard who likes some slapstick(usually pies to his face). All of that can be done in a single D&D game.

Now if the divide is too great, a player might not fit into a specific group, but there will be a group out there for him

 

[Campbell]

We're speaking to a difference in content here (different sorts of fictional content). Not a difference in style. There is literally nothing here that speaks to how a GM prepares and runs their game, what the priorities of the other players are, how we determine what actually happens. It does not speak to the actual disciplines involved.

 

[Oofta]

We're speaking to a difference in content here (different sorts of fictional content). Not a difference in style. There is literally nothing here that speaks to how a GM prepares and runs their game, what the priorities of the other players are, how we determine what actually happens. It does not speak to the actual disciplines involved.

Why does it matter? If a game can be played in specific styles, to me it doesn't matter if it was specifically designed for that style. A socket wrench of a specific size may work better, but a crescent wrench will still do the trick almost every time.

Or maybe I just have no clue what you're trying to say.

 

[Bedrockgames]

one thing to keep in mind is this article was inspired by Jennell Jaquays Campaign Source and Catacomb Guide. If I recall the section of the book in question was really about csmoaign styles. There is I believe a section on player styles too. But it was all in the context of D&D. The book itself very much gets into the in’s and outs of gm prep. It is actually a key to understanding 2E because it was originally meant to be part of the DMG and was removed for space. I didn’t really understand how to run and plan a functioning 2E game until I hit that book. Do keep in mind it was written in the 2E era so it isn’t going to address many of the issues that have become important in the intervening years and it assumes the play sensibilities of that era

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That's fair I suppose. I was presupposing 5e. Although, to be honest, even different editions still don't really support the 4 points I made. At least, not very well.

4e could swing the "historical sim" angle if you restricted things to the Martial power source, maybe with a very light touch of magic (e.g. Avenger, Barbarian, Monk, and maybe Bard) and used the Inherent Bonuses rules rather than magic items. It'd still be rather cinematic high-flying action, but it would remain relatively grounded, particularly in comparison to the things people believed were possible back in Antiquity and the Medieval Period.

Skill based rollplay and Freeform roleplay are both valid playstyles.

The ironic aspect of a large coterie of fans deriding the first even though D&D handles it better than freeform due to the strong magic and difficulty of wearing down resources in low combat play.

Good old "Give me a Wisdom check. You can add X if you are proficient" is sooooo good. D&D in all editions handles that well.

Serious question: Is it possible for any game to not handle that well? Because from where I'm sitting, I genuinely do not see how it is possible for that to not be handled well. It is, quite literally, "check for bonus, roll a die, add, compare." I don't see how it is possible to have an RPG with numerical stats and dice that doesn't achieve this with identical alacrity, unless it's been actively designed to be cumbersome to use (see: trash-fire games like FATAL.)

 

[Minigiant]

Serious question: Is it possible for any game to not handle that well? Because from where I'm sitting, I genuinely do not see how it is possible for that to not be handled well. It is, quite literally, "check for bonus, roll a die, add, compare." I don't see how it is possible to have an RPG with numerical stats and dice that doesn't achieve this with identical alacrity, unless it's been actively designed to be cumbersome to use (see: trash-fire games like FATAL

Two Three ways and it happens often

1. As you said. A cumbersome and complex resolution system
   1. as you said games like FATAL
2. A system of where the bonuses and dice are not obvious, causing confusion and hindrance.
   1. Happens when skills and bonuses aren't clear. What's a Heart check? Can I add my Guts modifier to this?
3. A unbalanced system of bonuses compared to the obstacles expected in frequency or power
   1. D&D 5e got better but there used to be a bunch of super skills as well as a bunch of niche skills
   2. D&D's ability scores/mods have only grown in power but the imbalance between them is never dealt with, leaving it up to the DM to discourage having a bunch of Dex/Cha strikers.

 

[Clint_L]

People sometimes claim that Dungeons & Dragons only supports a narrow range of play styles, but that is not my experience. I've seen the D&D rules used to support a variety of games, and as a DM, you should comprehend this versatility and use it to your advantage. Along the way, you should figure out not only your preferred style but also your group's preferences. In this article, I'll explain some of the different styles of play I've encountered.

Hack-and-Slash​

In this popular style of play, the game centers around combat. Characters battle one monster after another, with little thought given to the non-martial elements of the game. It's thrilling for players who love battle scenes and immediate action, and this style is often where younger players begin with D&D. However, it can become monotonous over time, and most experienced players seek deeper experiences.

I'm a teacher, so I will be awarding grades. I will be assessing in the context of 5e. Here, D&D earns an "B." If you want a basic, dungeon crawling TTRPG experience, it works well enough, but other versions of the game were arguably better.

Problem-Solving​

This style of play is aimed squarely at the thinkers. It encourages players to employ problem-solving skills to overcome various intellectual challenges. These could include things such as mysteries, logic puzzles, and riddles. Problem-solving can also include circumventing lethal traps, neutralizing weird tricks, and locating valuable items or important places. One standard framing device is the so-called "funhouse" dungeon, full of puzzles and tricks.

Another "B." I like involving problems in my game, and D&D works as well as any other game system that I've used, and better than many. The wide variety of spells allows me to craft clever traps and puzzles, if I put the time in.

Character Driven​

Here, the social or role-playing aspects of the game are at the forefront. Players immerse themselves in their characters, prioritizing character development over killing monsters, gaining loot, and leveling up. Many sessions can pass in such games without a sword drawn or a blow struck. Players often devise dramatic arcs for their characters and spend the sessions progressing this arc by interacting with each other and various NPCs.

I hate to do it, but another "B." D&D does this well enough, and there is support in the rules for building a more rounded character, but if you want a purely character driven game there are other games with that as the explicit design goal (c.f. Monster Hearts).

Historical Simulation​

This style focuses on recreating specific historical periods, often with minimal supernatural elements. Players might experience medieval England, ancient Rome, or even World War II! The session's goal is often to experience a critical historical moment, such as the assassination of Caesar or the D-Day landings. This style, though rare in my experience, is enjoyed by those already steeped in the history of an era. I've also seen it used in educational settings.

Ummm...a "D"? I mean, you can do it, and people have, but this is basically down to the DM basically just building their own Roll20 game out of 5e.

Slapstick​

This style of play is light-hearted and humorous, filled with anachronisms, satire, and dreadful puns. It features bizarre scenarios and characters that often parody contemporary culture. While enjoyable in short bursts, this style can soon overstay its welcome.

I dunno. "C"? Seems to me this is pretty much up to the players in most systems, unless you buy something very specific like the recent Monty Python TTRPG.

Monty Haul​

In a Monty Haul game, characters receive vast amounts of loot or levels with little correlation of risk to reward. Characters advance rapidly during these games and soon find themselves capable of facing mighty foes. This style appeals to some players, especially those with limited time and a desire to experience the game's higher levels. However, such easy advancement can cheapen the gaming experience, and "Monty Haul" has historically been used as a term of derision.

Another "B." Sorry. Most earlier versions of D&D would be an A in this aspect, but 5e uses things like attunement to put a lid on it.

Tactical​

This style is about employing optimal strategy and tactics within a well-defined rules framework. Players who favor this type of play often spend much time optimizing their character builds, and games consist of a series of set-piece battles. Tactical games are similar to hack-and-slash games, but differ in their focus on rules mastery.

A "B+." People can, and do, spend ages designing optimized builds, and there are popular YouTube channels devoted to it. We use miniatures and terrain for combat and it works great. But there are games, including earlier versions of D&D, that offer even more.

Political​

This game style involves players in political intrigue and power struggles. Scenarios can range from momentous events, such as negotiating treaties between empires, to minor conflicts, like settling disagreements between market vendors. Characters spend sessions interacting with NPCs, researching background information, and devising ways to create leverage in negotiations.

A "C." Much like the slapstick game, you can do it, but there's little in the rules to actively support you. But much like the slapstick game, you don't need that many rules.

Mixing It Up​

It is standard practice to borrow elements from multiple styles for your game, using variety to maintain interest and keep things fresh. For example, the best classic dungeon crawls contain hack-and-slash, problem-solving, and even political elements (such as negotiations between dungeon factions). Even when the group prefers a play style, it is a good idea to switch things up with a different style occasionally. For example, after your tactical group completes a long adventure involving numerous set-piece battles, you might have a session featuring a banquet and focused purely on character development.

It's even possible to include some of the more eclectic play styles in an otherwise straight campaign. For example, Zart, the god of tricks, might transport the characters to a slapstick cartoon-inspired world, where they take on the role of Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck and compete in the Looney Tunes Olympics. Or perhaps they pass through a magic portal and find themselves a historical situation, helping 300 Spartans defend Macedonia against a massive Persian army.

An "A+." I consider this the strength of 5e, and I suspect it's where most campaigns actually land.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Two Three ways and it happens often

1. As you said. A cumbersome and complex resolution system
   1. as you said games like FATAL
2. A system of where the bonuses and dice are not obvious, causing confusion and hindrance.
   1. Happens when skills and bonuses aren't clear. What's a Heart check? Can I add my Guts modifier to this?
3. A unbalanced system of bonuses compared to the obstacles expected in frequency or power
   1. D&D 5e got better but there used to be a bunch of super skills as well as a bunch of niche skills
   2. D&D's ability scores/mods have only grown in power but the imbalance between them is never dealt with, leaving it up to the DM to discourage having a bunch of Dex/Cha strikers.

I don't really see the difference between #1 and #2. Cumbersome and complex is how I would describe a game where it is sufficiently unclear that you don't actually know how to use it.

And I would argue #3 is still a problem for 5e on both of its prongs. Niche skills include Investigation (which is poorly-understood, difficult to use, and rarely necessary), Animal Handling (often redundant with Nature, and rarely useful overall), Survival (most of its listed tasks can also be done with some other skill, mostly Perception or Nature), and Performance (almost completely useless). Athletics and Sleight of Hand are both in danger of falling into that category as well, only saved by having very basic utility value. Super skills include Perception, Persuasion, Stealth, Deception, and to a lesser extent due to being context-specific, Nature, Medicine, and Insight.

4e actually took steps (in an exception-based way) to address the gaps between the various abilities. 5e threw that out the window, and the rather weak effort to make all six stats into saves did not even remotely address the gap. Dexterity is still the top stat, followed by Wis and Con, unless you're a Charisma caster, then Cha probably fits between Dex and Wis/Con.

So, I guess then what I'm saying is...it seems like, if 5e is so good at that "give me a Wisdom roll" process, despite being plagued by some of the very problems you mentioned here, I'm not really sure how any game that isn't really, really badly designed would not also do this.

E.g. I've played SR5e and W20, and both of those games have nigh-identical, very straightforward mechanics for such rolls. In W20, you add your Attribute (ability score, a number of dots usually from 1-5) to a relevant Ability (which includes both "skills" and other stuff, again usually dots but 0-5), and then roll that many d10s, target number is usually 6-7. Add up stuff at or above TN, subtract off the 1s. If it's positive, you succeeded. Easy-peasy. Shadowrun works very similarly, making a dice pool from your attributes + relevant skill, but uses d6, TN is 5 or 6, and 1s don't subtract success, they just make complications if there are lots of them (nasty complications if you also fail the roll.)

Obviously, dice-pool systems differ from single-die systems, but overall the effect seems the same. Tally up your bonus, roll the dice, check if you succeeded, move on with your day. If the system is even merely competently designed, I don't see how the original statement doesn't apply.

 

[MichaelSomething]

So are Adventure Paths a combo of character driven and problem solving?

And what of domain management and hex crawling??

 

[Minigiant]

don't really see the difference between #1 and #2. Cumbersome and complex is how I would describe a game where it is sufficiently unclear that you don't actually know how to use it.

The difference between #1 & #2 is how you are confused about #3

Investigation (which is poorly-understood, difficult to use, and rarely necessary),

Investigation is for when you look around for clues and make deductions based on those clues,

People get confused and think you can use Perception for that. Perception only lets you see the surface level. Investigation lets you put the things you sense openly to make guesses about what you can't sense.

Survival (most of its listed tasks can also be done with some other skill, mostly Perception or Nature)

Actually you can't RAW.

Performance (almost completely useless)

Because again it's unclear. Performance is very strong if you understand what it is. Actually the RAW definition makes it way overpowered in way I refuse to elaborate out of fear of spread it on the net.

This is what #2 is about. Lack of clarity creates slow gameplay and imbalance use.