D&D 5E D&D compared to Bespoke Genre TTRPGs

[Ovinomancer]

Eh I'm going to assume you're not really looking for discussion around this or suggestions on how it might have been used better in your game. That's cool ill no longer really engage with you about this since we both have our experiences and opinions and I don't see them changing.

To be fair, it's not like you've offered more that a vague suggestion as to how this works. I'm curious, what do SAN ability checks do?

 

[Imaro]

To be fair, it's not like you've offered more that a vague suggestion as to how this works. I'm curious, what do SAN ability checks do?

To be fair I answered this earlier... I used sanity with madness. Thus a successful check means no madness or reduced level of madness... failed means madness check or increased level of madness.

 

[Ovinomancer]

To be fair I answered this earlier... I used sanity with madness. Thus a successful check means no madness or reduced level of madness... failed means madness check or increased level of madness.

I'm sorry, I thought you just said that @Hussar wasn't looking for a discussion. I'm actually asking what you think SAN ability checks look like, and how they interact with proficiencies, like INT proficiencies. I mean, this was your point to begin with, right that SAN operates like any ability? I'm asking, because I don't see it terribly well and it appeared you had a handle on it.

What do SAN ability checks look like, why would they be called for. And, as this is about SAN independently (I've been told it's independently) so references to the Madness optional rules should be off the table. How that works is well established.

 

[Imaro]

I'm sorry, I thought you just said that @Hussar wasn't looking for a discussion. I'm actually asking what you think SAN ability checks look like, and how they interact with proficiencies, like INT proficiencies. I mean, this was your point to begin with, right that SAN operates like any ability? I'm asking, because I don't see it terribly well and it appeared you had a handle on it.

What do SAN ability checks look like, why would they be called for. And, as this is about SAN independently (I've been told it's independently) so references to the Madness optional rules should be off the table. How that works is well established.

No... madness are part of the sanity rules if one chooses to call for checks (I've consistently stated thats how I've used sanity). But you know what lets get something straight before we continue...don't ask me how I use something and then stipulate what my answer can of cant be...IMO that means you're more interested in winning or scoring points than in discussion...and if that is the case then this is as pointless as the first time I said we should disengage from discussion.

 

[Ovinomancer]

No... madness are part of the sanity rules if one chooses to call for checks (I've consistently stated thats how I've used sanity). But you know what lets get something straight before we continue...don't ask me how I use something and then stipulate what my answer can of cant be...IMO that means you're more interested in winning or scoring points than in discussion...

The claim was that Sanity can be used for ability checks. You said that @Hussar was not looking for discussion when he stated he didn't see how that works with INT skills. I thought you had some input on this topic, but it appears that you don't, that the only use you have for Sanity is exactly as I put it upthread -- it's an optional replacement for the WIS/CHA saving throws in the Madness rules. I mean, I just said that was already established and didn't need to be covered again as the ask was about how you could use SAN ability checks like other ability checks. I'm sorry you seem to take offense to this line of discussion, but I'm confused why you would take offense to @Hussar's statement about INT skills and SAN ability checks when you had no dog in that fight. I guess it wasn't you that said the Sanity rules are independent of the Madness rules and could be used in other ways. My bad, it's a busy thread, but I'm glad that we're on the same page re: Sanity is just an optional rule to the optional rules for Madness -- it doesn't do anything on it's own.

If that's not your position, then I, again, ask for clarification and explanation as to how you can use it outside the Madness rules.

EDIT: no, it was you that suggested pairing it with a skill upthread. How do you think that would work, since you've suggested it?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

My point was the villain is often killable in horror, like Dracula, and Jason, and Freddy. Or the xenomorph in Alien, or Annie in Misery or the Kothoga in Relic, or Bruce in Jaws or many , many more.

I was not trying to be nitpicky. I think the premise that horror is predictaed on an unkillable villain is false. I just used Dracula as an example because not only was he killed, but he is hunted down and killed.

Sure, sometimes, in the end. And yet usually there's that LAST scene where some doubt is cast on the demise. But that is an attraction of most sub-genre of horror is that the badness IS overcome in the end. Jaws is killed, Dracula slain, etc. OTOH COSMIC horror has unkillable bad guys (you may kill minions and such). There's a lot of variety. Still, any threat worth its salt isn't just killed easily, certainly not wiped out by getting into a melee with it, which is pretty classic D&D.

 

[Hussar]

Eh I'm going to assume you're not really looking for discussion around this or suggestions on how it might have been used better in your game. That's cool ill no longer really engage with you about this since we both have our experiences and opinions and I don't see them changing.

Sorry, was going for levity here.

So, how do you pair a Sanity check with an Int skill? I don't recall ever seeing any advice in that direction, but, it has been a while.

-----

And, just a point of clarity here. I'll only speak for myself, but, the issue has never, ever been claims that D&D CAN'T do something. That's obviously false on its face. I'm arguing against the idea that such changes are "simple" (a much repeated claim) and "easy" (also much repeated).

I mean, look at the changes @dave2008 has made to achieve Cosmic HOrror. Strip out virtually all the classes. Strip out virtually all the spells and spell effects (at least all the player facing ones). Limit levels to 6. Add in a AC as DR system (no mean feat in and of itself. That's a huge issue right there that's been debated all over the place for years). Add in lingering wounds and change the healing system. Adjust encounters because now your PC's can never pick up anyone in combat who drops below 0 HP. ((Frankly, I'm not really sure how this group managed to get past 2nd or 3rd level with these changes)).

Now, none of that is simple. Does anyone here think that someone without years of gaming experience and game design experience could do after reading the DMG? Does anyone here actually think that that's simple?

If you do think those changes are simple, that would go a VERY long way to explaining why we're talking past each other.

 

[loverdrive]

I don't know if assuming they will be bad is the answer either honestly. It seems like some people just bump really hard up against the types of constraints that games like BitD or Agon impose... I think for some (whether right or wrong) it feels like it's limiting creativity and freedom.

I don't think that giving the GM constraints equals "assuming them being bad". Codified Agenda, Principles and Moves achieve several important goals:
1) Synchronise expectations -- RPGs are by their nature collaborative, after all, and it's much easier when everyone understands how the game works, and what story we're here to create.
2) Ensure consistency -- so watching John Wick or playing Dead Space in a week between sessions won't derail your game completely
3) Help in the hard battle against the blank sheet
4) And, yeah, help to create the experience the system was designed for

Yeah, you may want something else, different from what a specific PbtA, or FitD, or Paragon game gives you, and then... Then you hack it. You design a system, with constraints and mechanics that work for the thing you want to achieve.

 

[Aldarc]

Contrast this with Trail of Cthulhu, which does ALL of these things far far better. Its resolution mechanics are geared specifically to failing the game in a forward direction and upping the tension, and it handles mythos material and the mental effects of exposure, etc. just as well as CoC does. It is a 1000% better game. That is, it is a pretty solid 21st Century RPG design! This is really my ultimate position on this whole topic, is just that 5e is ESSENTIALLY a 1975 vintage design, with a few superficial add ons and tweaks. in the last 46 years a HUGE amount has been learned in terms of techniques to use in RPG design. Current game designs are simply a LOT stronger and deliver better play, more reliably, with less fuss. This is to be expected. Its fine to say you prefer your '57 Chevy, but trying to claim it is better than a Tesla Model S because you can run with glass packs and a 455cu in hemi head V8 if you want is missing the point entirely, the Tesla will still dust you every single time on the street, without fail.

Admittedly though, both CoC and ToC have "pulp" modes that involve brave heroes fighting against creatures of the mythos. But the emphasis for both of these are on pulp heroes dealing with mythos creatures rather than on existentialist cosmic horror and dread. It's more what we would expect from Conan, Doc Savage, or Indiana Jones in these scenarios. The daring heroism of these pulp action heroes generally overwrites cosmic horror as the priority of play. I think that D&D could effectively do something closer to "pulp action" with the Cthulhu mythos but I think it's important to recognize how this is adjacent to cosmic horror.

 

[Hussar]

@Imaro, just to be clear here. No, I'm not looking for a way to make Madness and Sanity rules work in D&D. I tried. The mechanics in the DMG did not work for me. Like, at all. The players, as I said, absolutely hated them and, well, that's largely that.

In fact, that's largely my take away from all of this. People keep going on about how easy it is to change 5e. That has really not been my experience, either as a player or as a DM. Every time I've either played or run D&D, and tried to move away from baseline, it has largely resulted in failure. I've now talked about running infiltration scenarios, low magic and horror. I've DONE the last two of those and participated in the first under three different DM's. It's never worked.

So, you're right, in a sense, @Imaro, that I'm not really looking for ways to make this work in D&D. D&D, AFAIC, is such a tightly bound system that I simply wouldn't try any of these ever again in a D&D game. There are so many knock on effects to any changes that it is not worth the effort to try to pound the square D&D peg into round holes. It's simply a recipe for disappointment, in my experience.

Which is why telling me that it's somehow wrong or mistaken to tell people that running these things in D&D is a waste of time just flies straight up my nose. I WISH someone, years ago, had just pulled me aside and told me that when 5e came out, it would be best to stick to bog standard D&D tropes and concepts. It would have saved me a LOT of frustration and a ton of time and effort.

See, the funny thing is, my current campaign is pretty much that. Bog standard D&D. Couple of minor class alterations, but, nothing that particularly comes to mind. And it's been a riot. Totally fun. Fun for the players and fun for me to run. So, telling me "Oh, it's easy to change 5e" is the absolutely worst advice you can give. Because in my experience 5e is anything but easy to modify. It's really, really HARD to modify outside of a couple of areas. New monster? Ok, that's no problem. New class? Maybe a bit of work, but, so long as you keep to the math, and don't mind some rough edges, probably not a problem. Drift genre and try to add major mechanical changes like a Sanity/Madness mechanic? Don't bother. It's a waste of time unless you have players who are REALLY into drifting D&D into different directions.

Otherwise, just play a different bloody game. It's far easier and, again, in my experience, your success rate will be much higher.