thedungeondelver
Adventurer
I want to talk about how I globally view D&D, what I think it "is" in the broadest terms and how hopefully D&Dn will cleave to this; I mean, ultimately, if it doesn't it's no skin off my nose. A creation of support for the D&D I do like (AD&D) would be a nice second prize.
A lot of this is TL;DR, and I appreciate that. A lot of questions may remain at the end such as, "Who are you, and why should we care?", and that's OK, too. I'm just a D&D player who would like to have a voice in a new D&D, if that new D&D is to embrace all players of D&D and not just create a new "standard" that alienates and fragments the player-base even further. If that big tent is big because the new D&D plugs in to the old D&D, awesome. If the big tent is big not because of that but because in their wisdom Wizards of the Coast elects to open up 1e support again or at the very least provide PDF support of old volumes, and stops treating AD&D (and original D&D, and 2nd Edition, and so on) like they just didn't happen, then that's cool too.
What is D&D, the hardware. By "hardware" in this instance, I mean what is D&D in terms of hard-coded things, things you can point to on a page and say "that list of classes" or "that table of items" or "that formula" or "that spell description" or "those saving throws".
D&D is six stats - Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Dexterity, Constitution, Charisma. I don't care how you at your table group them together - the brainy stuff, the physical stuff, the cleverness stuff. But those six stats form the core of D&D. I see a lot of talk on what I consider the "fringe" about "let's get rid of those", and yet I can't find a single reason as to why. The reasons for keeping them are plenty:
1 - They're simple and clear. Honestly, the categories they outline are about as to-the-point as you can ask. Simple? Yes. But easily defined, granular enough without becoming fuzzy, but simple enough without being vague.
2 - They're flexible enough to allow for lots of playstyle. I've statted up NPCs who had exceedingly low CHA scores (single lower digits) whom I described as being stunningly good looking - they were just repugnant, vapid, nasty people. "String bean" characters with a high Constitution, but low Strength. It's a neat set of tools you have when you create your character. I like the range to be between 3-18, with exceptional stats breaking through to 19 or 20. I don't mind the idea of increasing stats, at least some stats. But I like the range to be close to what it "used to be" so that high numbers mean something again, so that they're a thing to get excited about again.
3 - They're part of the D&D identity. (You'll see that refrain a bit, I'm afraid, but it's entirely valid and I'm not apologizing for going to it.)
D&D is Armor Class. Now, whether you count it up or down, "AC" has always had a sort of mystique about it in D&D. "A -2 (or 22) armor class? Man, you must be very lucky or you found some awesome loot!" Irrespective of how, AC in D&D is about avoiding hits, whether through wearing plate mail, or just being plain lucky (or...in the case of AC10 (which ain't good either way) being unlucky).
D&D is Hit Points. Tied closely to Armor Class, a large part of the D&D identity is the Hit Point. Some systems have "stun" and "wound" and combinations of types of damage (I'm looking at you, Hero System), but Hit Points are D&D's key pane (or pain, given the discussion that's gone on about them over the years). No, D&D's hit point system isn't perfect. Perhaps it could be refined to include levels of injury (and I apologize if 4e does this and I don't know about it). Gary Gygax stated that hit points are a measure of luck, stamina, and other factors, and that a high-level fighter couldn't expect to survive four or five solid sword-thrusts; that it was a combination of small cuts, bruises, exhaustion and just plain running out of luck that were included in "damage" over the course of the one-minute round. However you slice it (no pun intended), though Hit Points are important because, again...product identity.
D&D is Saving Throws. I never cared for 3e's oblique saving throws. Consider the hurled fireball. Is a creature who saves against it saving against Reflex (ducking down, rolling to smother the flames as quickly as they envelop), Willpower (the spell is but a mind-trick, an utterance of formulae that only have power to those who let it have power!), or Fortitude (mere flames! a hurled torch multiplied over a few times, I can tough this out!)? Saving throws (irrespective of how you "do" them) are a key part of D&D because they define out those events that can happen that characters cannot fully avoid, yet through dint of cleverness, quickness, wisdom, grace, personal fortitude, faith or inherent racial toughness can ride out. There was a story about Fafhrd & the Grey Mouser finding themselves arrayed against everyone they'd angered in Lankhmar - a wizard threw a death spell at Mouser and he whipped a copper wire around, grounding himself and sending the blast back onto the heads of the casters adepts! Save v. Death! Saving Throws need to stay.
D&D is classes. On the subject of these two thieves, D&D has always had delineated classes - people who took their professions out to win the day, or at least some treasure. Holy Clerics who perhaps accompanied an army or had been admonished by their church to go forth in to the dark places of the world and bring evil (or good!) to heel. Fighters, freed from the levies, ready to win more gold than a mere army salary could provide. Sneak-thieves, assassins, doughty rangers, clever illusionists, sly mages, asectic monks, the list goes on. What you call yourself defines your role, in D&D. Even if you consider yourself a troubadour with no set calling, at the end of the day you're winning by dint of sword, spell or trechary, and what we call these things is as important as the name "DUNGEONS & DRAGONS".
D&D is Experience Points. Xp are the metric to progress. They're the pinball score, the stock dividend for your character. I can't think of a person who doesn't begin a D&D character and look at the "pyramid" of Xp to be earned and thinks "man...when I get 525,000 Xp and can...[cast earth-shattering spells, move unseen in broad daylight, bring down a giant one-handed] it's going to be so cool!" Even I, at the age of [REDACTED], still enjoy that climb. Sure it hits plateaus from time to time. But that's why you keep adventuring in Dungeons, looking for the occasional Dragon to slay, eh?
D&D is Magic. Mighty world-bridging words of power that'll grab the attention of a god, monster-blasting spells, utility spells to do simple things like fetch a pail of water...half of the fun of the PLAYERS HANDBOOK is going down through it like a Sears Wishbook of "when I can cast that...whoa, look out"! You know it to be true! But care has to be taken - selecting the right spells can mean the difference between winning the day or just irritating the monsters into hitting the fighters even harder (or worse, irritating the fighters into hitting you, the cleric, harder because you thought a dungeon called "The Snake Pit" would require more slow poison than cure light wounds spells)! Vancian magic has its place in D&D. The logic of spells whose energy is stored in the mind, like a capacitor, and unleashed with a word of power and must be replenished with rest and study makes perfect sense for me. Likewise for clerical spells - the boon of a God isn't given lightly. Prayer, thanks and reflection before moving onward with another casting. So corallary to D&D's need for spellcasting is the need for at least the option of "Vance" magic.
D&D is Magic Items. Like perusing the spell list, looking at magic items and imagining a character decked out in plate mail +5 and swinging a magic broadsword or a mage gingerly pushing a sphere of annihilation along, a thief using a ring of invisibility, on and on, magic items are KEY to D&D. Yes, it does get a little "mudane" when you find the 4th or 5th "+1 ring of protection"...but hopefully a good DM won't hew so close to the letter of the rules that such things become commonplace. I heard, back years ago, so many complaints about how characters become "christmas trees" festooned with magic items...but ultimately it is the responsibilty of the DM to manage those things. The DM giveth, and the DM taketh away. But if the game takes away +2 Flaming Swords and crossbows of speed and boots of striding and springing, where's the fun?
D&D is Alignment. It's a good in-game "compass". It defines the root of "who's castle are we storming today", oftentimes. It causes a pretty lively in-game debate sometimes! But ultimately, it helps shape the cosmology. A lawful good being - that says something about its character, and gives the DM and players a framework to place their worldview on. Likewise the other eight alignments.
...
Assuming this gets any interest, I'll talk a bit about what I think as the "soul" of D&D in another post. Trust me, it's not gonna be all ranty. This wasn't, was it?
Last edited:
