This. You can send D&D characters into space, but it remains D&D in space.
If I want to have a starship battle the D&D rules don't cover it, but other RPGs do.
It’s a vehicle. With a crew. There literally are rules in 5e for that. Being in space doesn’t need to change them.
if the goal of a given person is to get away from D&D , then this whole discussion isn’t really about that person. Obviously they should play a different game, their goal is to play a different game.
I mean... None of this reads as particularly far outside of D&D’s wheelhouse to me. You’re still fundamentally playing the sort of game D&D is designed to be, and adding some custom mechanics when you feel they’re warranted. That’s... A very different thing than what most people are talking about when they suggest playing a game built for something else specific.
I think you have missed some posts in both this thread and in every other thread where this advice comes up.
Also, I listed the things I’ve done in my Eberron game to show that it’s easy to add new mechanics to D&D 5e and change the theme and tone and play experience of the game.
They’re saying that D&D does those things in a way that is very particular to D&D, and that if you’re looking to do something that isn’t so particular to D&D, it is often better to look elsewhere.
I don’t think this is true. Maybe that is what you mean, but this isn’t what can reasonably be taken away from “well if you want to play a fantasy adventure that is heavily influenced by fairy tales, and Irish folk lore, you should just play XYZ game instead of D&D.” In response to someone asking for recommendations for 3pp supplements for fairy tale adventures in their D&D game.
You say the insanity-death spiral mode is your least favorite part of CoC, but that, far more so than the setting or the particular dice mechanics, is what makes CoC, CoC
Right! But, the ask is almost never “I want to play Call of C’thulu using D&D.” Its “I want to run a campaign or story arc wherein aberations are unknown to the world and the PCs discover their cults and an old book about them and...” and the advice given by a lot of people is “play CoC instead”, even though the whole damn point is that the person wants to use Mythos themes, concepts, etc, in a fantasy adventure game where PCs can fight monsters.
If I was recommending a different game for that, I’d recommend Monster of The Week before I’d recommend CoC.
"Because I don't want to." is a valid personal choice.
Hell yes. In most cases, my reasoning is that I don’t like the play experience of the game in question, but in others it is just, “Well no, I want to play D&D, not learn a new system just because I want this game to be in space.”
D&D is great for having heists, romances, etc as part of a larger campaign where the default activity is going into dungeons, killing things, and hopefully getting treasure.
I mean, no group I know has a play pattern like what you describe in their dnd games.
It's not an ideal tool for a game solely about romance, or heists. And of course it's not a Story Making game - it is not designed* to create dramatically satisfying narratives, it is a 'you are there' game. It's good (IMO) at creating a feeling of immersion in a high fantasy world with the PCs as powerful adventurers/heroes.
I'd definitely strongly disagree with the proposition that "If you want to have X in your game, don't play D&D, play game Y". A big strength of D&D is that you can throw pretty much anything in there! "If you want a game centred on X, don't play D&D, play game Y" is a reasonable proposition. A D&D game with Cthulu elements is a very different thing from playing a Cthulu horror game. Either may be better depending on what you want.
Exactly. If I wanted to specifically play a modern day game that plays out exactly like a lovecraft story, I’d play CoC and there wouldn’t ever be an advice thread about it. CoC isn’t better than D&D at
adding mythos elements to a fantasy adventure game.
*Albeit I certainly have seen dramatically satisfying narratives emerge during long-term play.
Hell yeah. And I’d add that 5e especially is really easy to add mechanics for that stuff if you want to. And for some of us, those mechanics directly get in the way of enjoying the experience and engaging deeply with the experience.
Sure, but I don't see it as a straw man. If you want to run a game with elements of D&D play (like exploring a mega dungeon) plus heist play, which system do you choose to modify? (Also, while it's neither here nor there, I've had people recently try to convince me that D&D is a bespoke game rather than big tent, though I'm not buying it.)
Obviously, if someone's already built the perfect system to support everything you are looking for, then there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. However, in many instances, that simply may not be the case. It's easier (IMO) to hack heist rules into D&D than mega dungeon exploration rules into Blades.
It may be that familiarity plays a role in this, but I generally find D&D easier to hack than most games, even when I'm dealing with a new edition that I haven't yet become familiar with. I expect it has to do with bespoke games having a more tightly focused design that is designed to do its intended gameplay well and isn't meant to be tinkered with too much. Whereas D&D has a long history of being tinkered with.
Exactly all of this.
There's a very good reason for that.
XYZ game is specifically designed with that dynamic in mind, thus, you aren't fighting the system, constantly, to try to fold, spindle or maul your concept into the D&D framework.
Take a common element in many RPG's -lethal combat. Combat, where, if you start into a fight, it's very, very likely that someone is losing a PC. Something akin to Dread, say. Where dying by zombie is much, MUCH more likely than survival. Or, any game with a death spiral, for that matter.
Very easy to do in 5e. There are optional rules for it, and encounter design is easy to change to impact deadliness.
D&D doesn't work that way. D&D characters are expected to be able to fight, again and again and again. No permanent injury, no realistic combat system at all. So, if you want to play an RPG with a realistic combat system, then, well, D&D is probably not the direction to go. HP and AC don't lend themselves to realistic combat systems. Not that that's a bad thing. But, just that it's a limitation of the system.
It’s really not a limitation of the system, though. Lingnering injuries by itself can be used to make combat both more scary and more realistic (most combatants don’t die, irl, they get wounded and have lasting injuries that impact the rest of their life.).
A game we purposely modify the way we want to ... is inherently not playtested. It therefore might be better for our specific desires - or it might struggle when the rubber meets the road in ways that a playtested game is less likely to.
Even if it requires adjustment, it’s likely going to be better at doing what we want than a game that was tightly designed for a related but different gameplay experience.
@doctorbadwolf , I just wanted to chime in and say I agree with your basic premise that D&D 5e is very flexible and easy to add (or subtract) rules from to make a different style of game. I would much rather make slight modifications to a game a know and really enjoy than play another game.
Yep.
Now, because of my experience with D&D I can now see how I might modify other games, but I see less of a point when I can so easily modify D&D to be what I want it to be.
Absolutely. And I have modded other games, like The One Ring and Monster of The Week. But making D&D do Lord of The Rings is easier than making the One Ring do Eberron.
