D&D 5E Characters are not their statistics and abilities

[shoak1]

There are RPGs that don't give rise to balance issues in the same way that D&D does, because of (i) differences in mechanics, and/or (ii) differences in expected goals of play.

Here are three: HeroQuest revised, Marvel Heroic RP, and Burning Wheel.

The first two of these do not share D&D's granular, list-based approach to PC construction, nor its corresponding granular approach to action resolution. They have basically no tactical play (though MHRP does have dice pool optimisation, every character builds pools in the same way). Hence issues like whether greatswords are balanced against battle axes, whether ranged or melee is a superior strategy, etc, just don't come up.

BW is closer to D&D in build and resolution mechanics, but it has different goal of play - roughly speaking, confronting challenges rather than overcoming challenges) - and also far more of those challenges are generated on the back of player-introduced rather than GM-introduced content than typical approaches to D&D. Hence, again, these recurring issues of mechanical balance for D&D tend not to arise.

That's not to say that these games can't have players who dominate the table to a greater degree than others. But that tends to be a function of their ability to influence what fiction it is that is the focus of play, than the sorts of mechanical balance issues that @shoak1 is concerned with.

Agaain I think because many of you don't consider D and D's varied past and present, you keep (probably inadvertantly) pigeon-holing D and D into being just an RPG. It's latest incarnation is indeed very RPGish, but D and D is much more than a mere RPG, no matter how much 5e enthusiasts try to define it as such. There are literally tens of thousands of individual 1'' grid based D and D products. Countless splat power books for power gamers through the years. So framing all these arguments around what an rpg is/should be/isnt/cant be/etc is at the very least dismissive and at worst insulting to many of us that have been around for the long haul.

In other words, perhaps you could have said "There are games that are RPG/miniatures/leveling games that don't give rise to..."

 

[jasper]

...are believable differences between the Longsword and the Scimitar in game which could be learned by a PC in game...shidaku
......Interesting question arising: to what extent do PCs know everything that is in the PHB? Seems to me that they should reasonably be expected know everything relating to their own class and background and, in the case of spellcasters....BoldItalic
Friends, roaming country people are you tired of being a NPC. Tired of murder hobos beating you up, taking your stuff. You too can be a PC. Just send 2 copper pieces to Attn WoTC PhB Care of Forgotten Realms Business Society. You to can get your Player handbook and start your career as murder hobo.
Offer not valid in other game worlds. Wotc is not responsible of homebrew, strange rule nerfs, and the gawd DM being a pill.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Agaain I think because many of you don't consider D and D's varied past and present, you keep (probably inadvertantly) pigeon-holing D and D into being just an RPG. It's latest incarnation is indeed very RPGish, but D and D is much more than a mere RPG, no matter how much 5e enthusiasts try to define it as such. There are literally tens of thousands of individual 1'' grid based D and D products. Countless splat power books for power gamers through the years. So framing all these arguments around what an rpg is/should be/isnt/cant be/etc is at the very least dismissive and at worst insulting to many of us that have been around for the long haul.

In other words, perhaps you could have said "There are games that are RPG/miniatures/leveling games that don't give rise to..."

Just because I have the option to put a roof rack and trailer hitch on my car doesn't mean the car was designed to haul things. I'll even go one further, and the edition of D&D that tried to make it more into what you're implying (battlemap grids) was pretty bad for the game, from a business standpoint. And I'll even go one further, and point out how it's ironic you'd make this statement because it's you who doesn't consider D&D's past, because for the first 36 years of it's existence, it didn't try to sell itself as a miniatures or powergaming game. Minis were always just an optional thing you could use until 4e came around and pretty much made them de facto necessary. So 4 years out of 42 years of history isn't exactly what I'd consider enough of a time frame to change what D&D is about as a game. It seems more like an experiment they tried, and quickly went back to core. And the powergaming style has always been treated like an afterthought, even in core 3e. Put out some material because there's a niche group who likes that, but it was never meant to be representative of the game as a whole. Again, the roof rack/trailer hitch analogy for a car.

 

[shoak1]

Just because I have the option to put a roof rack and trailer hitch on my car doesn't mean the car was designed to haul things. I'll even go one further, and the edition of D&D that tried to make it more into what you're implying (battlemap grids) was pretty bad for the game, from a business standpoint. And I'll even go one further, and point out how it's ironic you'd make this statement because it's you who doesn't consider D&D's past, because for the first 36 years of it's existence, it didn't try to sell itself as a miniatures or powergaming game. Minis were always just an optional thing you could use until 4e came around and pretty much made them de facto necessary. So 4 years out of 42 years of history isn't exactly what I'd consider enough of a time frame to change what D&D is about as a game. It seems more like an experiment they tried, and quickly went back to core. And the powergaming style has always been treated like an afterthought, even in core 3e. Put out some material because there's a niche group who likes that, but it was never meant to be representative of the game as a whole. Again, the roof rack/trailer hitch analogy for a car.

Look at 3.5 adventures where every battle encounter was named (E1, E2, etc) and included as a 1-3 page insert and painstakingly drawn out on a grid and every object that could be interacted w/had stats about how it affected combat - and where the miniatures were shown in their starting positions.... Look at the original d and d brown books and 1e books and see how everything was expressed as inches because it was a miniatures/rpg hybrid game .

And yes, the power gaming version was just 1 edition among 7, but it existed for 10% of D and D's history - and plenty of people (although not a majority) liked it, or at least liked elements of it.

These editions existed and created devoted fans that still play the game today.

It seems like w/the current 5e rpg victory, that all of this D and D history is being rewritten by the victors - and I don't mean necessarily deliberately by suppression, but rather inadvertently through exclusion and dismissal. I think that just like tolerance and diversity is the catch-word in today's society at large, that many of you guys should perhaps take that to heart and start being a little more aware of the value of keeping these diverse play styles together (i.e multi-cultural) rather than keeping such a narrow focus (i.e.cultural centricism) when talking about OUR game.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You're confusing gaming aids with part of the core game. Also, sci-fi has been part of D&D since 1e, but you'd be hard pressed convincing anyone that D&D is a sci-fi game. If there's anyone rewriting history, it's you. You're the one acting like 90% of the game's history needs to be pushed aside for the 10%. That, or you're ignorant on how AD&D was actually played. I.e., just because things were measured in inches, doesn't mean we all played AD&D with minis and used rulers. I never saw a single group over 35 years who played AD&D with minis outside of using them for general rough locations and marching orders for the vast majority of game play. They most certainly were the exception rather than an assumed part of core gameplay. Gaming aids, like I said.

 

[iserith]

I still play and enjoy D&D 4e where we "powergame" as much as possible. Nobody showed up and took our books away when the new edition came out. And for reasons that escape me, the game still works even after D&D 5e hit the shelves.

So if you prefer D&D 3.Xe or D&D 4e because they lend themselves to your style of play and you still have your books, why not just play those games? That's what pemerton does by all accounts - plays D&D 4e and Burning Wheel. He'll tell you all about it.

 

[shoak1]

I still play and enjoy D&D 4e where we "powergame" as much as possible. Nobody showed up and took our books away when the new edition came out. And for reasons that escape me, the game still works even after D&D 5e hit the shelves.

So if you prefer D&D 3.Xe or D&D 4e and still have your books, why not just play those games? That's what pemerton does by all accounts - plays D&D 4e and Burning Wheel. He'll tell you all about it.

Classic cultural uniformity dogma - assimilate or move away (or live separate and distinct). Not exactly warm and fuzzy or inclusive.

 

[iserith]

Classic cultural uniformity dogma - assimilate or move away (or live separate and distinct). Not exactly warm and fuzzy or inclusive.

You know we're talking about a game, right? One that has several versions that appeal to different people's tastes? You can just choose the one that suits you best. Perhaps I lack empathy, but I have a hard time feeling bad for someone who already has what he or she needs.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Corwin]

Not exactly warm and fuzzy or inclusive.

I take it you didn't think it was good advice, to tell some 2e fans who expressed a dislike of 3e when it came out, that it was okay to keep playing their preferred edition...