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

[doctorbadwolf]

So would most folks here say that the reverse is also true?

If my group really digs a specific rules set, but we want to play some classic D&D type games, couldn’t we just hack what we need to have a better game than D&D?

Sure. Lots of systems have D&D style versions already made, even. I’m sure there is a dungeon crawl focused pbta game or three out there, as well as fate, GURPS, and every other game that is made to do multiple genres.

 

[dave2008]

I mean....Stars Without Number would be the clear choice. Someone’s already done all the hackin for you, and you can get it for free.

That was already recommend to me, I am going to give it a look.

 

[jmartkdr2]

So would most folks here say that the reverse is also true?

If my group really digs a specific rules set, but we want to play some classic D&D type games, couldn’t we just hack what we need to have a better game than D&D?

Absolutely.

One example that was floated around above was porting another magic system to 5e. One that I already know is Mage: the Ascension, which is similar to Ars Magica, and I could absolutely port it to 5e if I wanted, but probably wouldn't because the World of Darkness system does heroic adventure pretty well already. In fact, most game do.

 

[MGibster]

I think I've seen the word bespoke used more in the last 24 hours than I have in the previous 45 years.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah, I think that’s ultimately my point. If someone loves D&D that much and the idea of tweaking it to make a sci-fi game doesn’t terrify them but instead gets their creative juices flowing, hey more power to them.

And I agree with your point about advice. If someone is dead set about playing their sci-fi 5E hack, then saying “You really should be playing X” is pretty useless.

But if someone said “what’s a good game for sci-fi?” then I feel like there are a lot of answers I’d offer before I said “Well if you significantly alter D&D it may work”.

I mean....Stars Without Number would be the clear choice. Someone’s already done all the hackin for you, and you can get it for free.

Sure, if they have no system preference, there are many many sci-fi TTRPGs that serve different styles.

But the contention generally is about whether D&D can do sci-fantasy well, or sci-fi if you do an AIME and replace the classes, etc

 

[hawkeyefan]

Sure, if they have no system preference, there are many many sci-fi TTRPGs that serve different styles.

But the contention generally is about whether D&D can do sci-fantasy well, or sci-fi if you do an AIME and replace the classes, etc

It depends on what you want D&D to do, I suppose. I play my fair share of 5E and I don’t mind it, and I think it can indeed be hacked or modded for some different purposes.

But if someone says they want a game that delivers the feelings of the movie “Aliens” there’s no way I wouldn’t suggest the Alien RPG.

It would be easier to learn the Alien RPG than it would be to alter 5E in such a way as to try and do what it does.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It would be easier to learn the Alien RPG than it would be to alter 5E in such a way as to try and do what it does.

That, in turn, depends on what you want from playing Aliens as a table top RPG. I don’t know the system, but my inclination if I didn’t want to buy a new RPG, would be to figure out xenomorphs as a sort of D&D creature with abilities that make it hard to see coming, potentially hurt you when you manage to hurt it, and make it fast and also terrifying (like, port dragonfear), and then explore mechanics that help me do whatever else I want from the experience.

What I wouldn’t do try to model the specific play experience of another game. If I end up doing so, cool, but that is never the goal. The goal is to make my game accomplish the play experience goals of whatever concept is being used.

 

[Aldarc]

There is no particular reason to spend an ounce of energy on trying to disprove the advice, bcause it is advice, not a logical truism. "Oh, well, you told someone they should try another game, and I think you are totally wrong, nobody should ever have to do anything other than hack D&D to their will!" is not a path to a constructive discussion.

It's also generally friendly advice given in good faith, often from people who have been in similar situations, which often gets ignored in threads like this that frame such advice in a negative light.

Yeah, and just like some of D&D's designs have knock-on effects, same goes for Fate. Fate, for example, does narratively interesting combat. If you want a fight that'll give you a war story that reads like a scene from an adventure novel, Fate is great. Fate does not do tactical wargame combat, and trying to graft it on will be a Herculean task - if you were playing Fate, and asked me how to do tactical combat, with tight physical positioning and all, I'd tell you to go play D&D or something.

Similar for the power curve. If you want D&D's zero-to-nigh-godhood, that's not native to Fate. If you want it, play D&D.

I think that War of Ashes (on Fate-SRD) was made for minis combat, but I've never looked into it or played it, though mainly because of the game setting.

There aren’t if the goal for your group is to play the same system they’ve been playing, but low magic.

And it’s not much work to get a copy of Adventures In Middle Earth and use the classes from it. None of them cast any actual spells at all, and magic items are quite rare and fairly low powered.

Works great.

When I suggested that someone should play AiME, Black Hack 2e, or another D&D-based low fantasy hack instead of D&D 5e for their low magic game, it also raised similar accusations as you raised in this thread regarding the "play this instead" advice.

So when is suggesting that a person or group would be better off playing another game NOT hollow advice? What and where are the limits of hacking a given system, whether that's D&D or some other "bespoke game."

That was already recommend to me, I am going to give it a look.

Kevin Crawford also finished his fantasy version about a month or two ago: Worlds Without Number. I believe there is even a free version on DriveThruRPG.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It's also generally friendly advice given in good faith, often from people who have been in similar situations, which often gets ignored in threads like this that frame such advice in a negative light.

I guess this is the underlying problem I have with this thread.

The "play a game designed for it" isn't the TT RPG equivalent of "git gud" or some other piece of dubious "advice" which is really a form of sneering. It's genuine good faith advice from people with experience of multiple systems. I don't often recommend systems, but despite me sometimes needing a clip round the ear, I can't think of a time I've ever recommended a system in a cynical or sneering way, only in a "this will do what you want better" way. Like with the heist example that keeps coming up, historically I've actually recommended not using BitD before because it didn't match overall goals, and D&D is easily adapted to pick up the preparation mechanic (which again, appeared first in D&D anyway).

Kevin Crawford also finished his fantasy version about a month or two ago: Worlds Without Number. I believe there is even a free version on DriveThruRPG.

WWN is completely fantastic. I can't think of many RPGs that fall down in so few places. Whilst the rules could be clearer at times (Kevin, don't put rules in the middle of paragraphs!), it fixes so many holes. Like literally the only places I felt like it genuinely messed up were in making magical healing approach 2E levels of required-ness despite a text box later explaining that you shouldn't let magical healing be required (you did that Kevin mate, when you put in Frailty and made the only good way to remove it be magical healing, which trivializes the entire mechanic), and that it treats the "Heroic" approach from the Deluxe edition as a single block, not modular tools.

 

[Aldarc]

I guess this is the underlying problem I have with this thread.

The "play a game designed for it" isn't the TT RPG equivalent of "git gud" or some other piece of dubious "advice" which is really a form of sneering. It's genuine good faith advice from people with experience of multiple systems.

It's also advice from people who may equally also have plenty of experience hacking D&D and other games/systems. You can hack D&D, as I often do, but IME there will invariably be points where (a) the system fights back against those changes and/or (b) the amount of work required is simply not worth the effort expended and/or (c) playing another game that scratches the same or similar itch is far easier instead.

WWN is completely fantastic. I can't think of many RPGs that fall down in so few places. Whilst the rules could be clearer at times (Kevin, don't put rules in the middle of paragraphs!), it fixes so many holes. Like literally the only places I felt like it genuinely messed up were in making magical healing approach 2E levels of required-ness despite a text box later explaining that you shouldn't let magical healing be required (you did that Kevin mate, when you put in Frailty and made the only good way to remove it be magical healing, which trivializes the entire mechanic), and that it treats the "Heroic" approach from the Deluxe edition as a single block, not modular tools.

I am looking forward to playing it at some point, but I already have a long list of games that both I want to try and my partner wants to play.

I also don't generally have to worry about "familiarity > system" type issues when it comes to things like sign-ups or VTT, because I make it a point to only play with my close friends. Enough trust has been built up between us that it's not exactly difficult to convince them to play other games, much in the same fashion as playing other board games together. In fact, sometimes teaching a new board game sometimes takes longer than teaching a new TTRPG.