D&D 5E 2024 D&D is 2014 D&D with 4E sprinkled on top

[EzekielRaiden]

Maybe simulationism was a mistake

It's not a mistake. As much as I may have my criticisms of specific applications thereof, I won't accept that level of dismissal. There's a reason it tickles the little grey cells so. To ignore such a thing is unwise.

My problem is hegemonic simulationism. Simulationism that must have all its boxes ticked, all the t's crossed and all the i's dotted, that demands first and foremost placement, rather than being one goal among many, pursued when it is not unreasonable to do so, but accepting that there are times when it is unreasonable to do so.

It's why I have a whole category in my "game(-design) purposes" taxonomy for that specific topic: Groundedness and Simulation. It's also why I differentiate (in a way others don't, which I find very strange) between "Simulation" and "Emulation", because I find almost always that people who pursue one are at best only mildly interested in the other, and frequently negatively interested. (For an extremely simplified summary, it's the difference between "modeling" and "mimicking". The former desires predictive power, the latter does not.)

But that's neither here nor there for the topic of this thread.

 

[Nefermandias]

There's almost nothing actually from 2e in 5e. The only thing that's even partially similar is subclasses and kits.

I really don't understand why so many people insist that 2e is hugely informing what 5e is. Where are the mechanics? It's not THAC0. It doesn't have the obscure, abstruse save categories of 2e. 2e emphatically did not do "bounded accuracy". 2e had tons of weird, idiosyncratic rules with no analogue today. Multiclass rules are absolutely nothing whatever like 2e's.

Where is the 2e in 5e?

2014 5e, when played fully vanilla (no feats or multiclassing) feels very similar to 2e.

Especially when you use things like Slow Natural Healing and Gritty Realism to enforce some sense of attrition into the game.

 

[GobHag]

2014 5e, when played fully vanilla (no feats or multiclassing) feels very similar to 2e.

Especially when you use things like Slow Natural Healing and Gritty Realism to enforce some sense of attrition into the game.

I think future DnD should do away with attrition being a big part of balancing.

 

[GobHag]

Maybe simulationism was a mistake

Yes. No two ways about it.

Or more accurately is that the majority of new players unknowingly eschew against that style.

 

[GobHag]

This is not a defense of Lord Twig, but a commentary on this particular point.

This board is way too balkanized. And everyone (even myself) is guilty of it.

We don't act like D&D players. We act like 2014 players, 2024 players, Level Up players, Shadowdark players, 4e players, Pathfinder players, OSR players, etc etc. And we fight like we are going to convert everyone else to our preferred version and thus our team wins. If I can just show you how wrong your beliefs are, you'll see the wisdom and join my side. Thus, we fight for every inch of land in this evangelical war. And most of the time, the fights are exactly to highlight why MY interpretation is correct, and YOURS is inaccurate.

Half the D&D 2024 threads are full of people who don't play 24, won't buy 24, haven't kept up with the 24 changes, but sure as hell have opinions on 24. The same is and was true of 4e. Of OSR games. You get the idea. Nothing generates content like controversy and the quickest way to do that is criticism.

So yeah, I can see why people people opt for a "if you don't like it, don't talk about it" take. Because defending what you like day after day is tiring. And it's not like we're having overly new arguments. We're still arguing about martials vs casters, evil humanoids, sport vs war, and the nature of HP. And now we all have a game or edition that supports our vision, so we're all right and all wrong at the same time.

I dunno, I just wish somehow there was more about what united us as "D&D players" less about why my version is superior to yours. Whatever happened to "it's all D&D"?

Rant over. Continue with your regularly scheduled thread.

Because while it's 'all' D&D, I want more of my D&D and less of that kind of D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Isn't that what I've been saying the entire time?!

I don't recall fighting you on that point.

 

[Scribe]

Then what counts as mundane human limits obviously needs to be adjusted. That's the take-away here for me.

Exactly.

 

[Hussar]

My problem is hegemonic simulationism. Simulationism that must have all its boxes ticked, all the t's crossed and all the i's dotted, that demands first and foremost placement, rather than being one goal among many, pursued when it is not unreasonable to do so, but accepting that there are times when it is unreasonable to do so.

See, the thing that grinds my gears is how what you call hegemonic simulation is so unevenly applied. Someone will go on and on and on about how we MUST adhere to simulation but, when it's pointed out the fifteen thousand ways they've compromised simulation already, that's just brushed off and ignored.

It's why I have so much respect for OSR gamers. They've decided what they like and stuck to it. Fantastic. All props to them. But, then you've got the players who are staying in the latest version of D&D sphere who are insisting that their version of D&D is the one true vision of the game all the while pretending that it's anything other than them trying to force their preferences on everyone else.

I mean, there are dozens of simulation RPG's out there. Many of them were created as a reaction to the lack of simulation in D&D. GURPS is a perfect example of this but there are many, many more. I just don't understand how people can look at D&D and claim that simulation is any sort of priority in the mechanics.

 

[pemerton]

I mean, there are dozens of simulation RPG's out there. Many of them were created as a reaction to the lack of simulation in D&D. GURPS is a perfect example of this but there are many, many more. I just don't understand how people can look at D&D and claim that simulation is any sort of priority in the mechanics.

As someone who has GMed thousands of hours of Rolemaster, and who more recently has GMed and played RPGs with more-or-less simulationist PC build rules (Burning Wheel, Classic Traveller, even Prince Valiant and Torchbearer 2e), I find the idea of D&D (any version) as a "sim" game pretty ridiculous.

 

[Hussar]

As someone who has GMed thousands of hours of Rolemaster, and who more recently has GMed and played RPGs with more-or-less simulationist PC build rules (Burning Wheel, Classic Traveller, even Prince Valiant and Torchbearer 2e), I find the idea of D&D (any version) as a "sim" game pretty ridiculous.

I mean, sure, 3e D&D borrowed a lot from Rolemaster, but, nowhere near enough to qualify as a sim game. It wasn't until all the 4e kerfuffle that D&D EVER got described as sim based.