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

[Steampunkette]

I didn’t say it did, I said it’s completely optional.

So, from my perspective, you’ve exactly reversed what is happening, here.

It’s supposed to “barely be there”. That’s the point. It isn’t weak if it’s doing what it was built to do, which is provide only the rules needed to resolve actions/tasks, and otherwise get out of the way. Because the preference of enough playtest players was exactly that, we wanted very concrete combat rules because balance matters more in combat, and very loose rules with as much room as possible for interpretation for social scenes.

No. That's not what's happening, here.

I've made a statement, that D&D has only a vestigial quantity of Exploration Pillar and Social Pillar mechanics, compared to other games which have significantly more. This statement is a statement of fact. Many of the "Bespoke TTRPGs" that are referenced in this thread, and in the threads/posts you complain about have a significantly more comprehensive structure for those pillars of play. This is not a debatable fact.

You have decided to instead debate on subjectivity, that D&D has "All that is Needed".

You're now trying to explain -why- it's more important and "Better" to have a less robust setup for those two aspects of gameplay which is really not the purpose of my pointing it out.

It feels like you're trying to "Defend" D&D from this statement of fact. That other systems having more focus on different aspects would make it "Less Than" them, unless you were to explain that it is at least equal, or superior, for having so little focus on those systems. Rather than just -different-.

And I am super confused as to -why-.

That you prefer D&D's "Rules Light" method, or that the playtesters for 4e and 5e preferred it, has no impact on the fact that other games have more robust systems.

I think the problem is that you've taken "Weak" or "Vestigial" as a value judgement rather than a statement of relative fullness.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I completely agree here. If I'm running D&D and I want to have an adventure revolving around a mystery then it doesn't help for someone to suggest switching to Gumshoe. I don't know if I've seen anyone make such a suggestion though but if they did it'd be silly.

I’ve seen it a lot. In nearly every thread I’ve seen someone ask for such advice.

Of course it can do horror. I don't think it does horror particularly well but Ravenloft is one of my favorite settings and I have fun with it. But according to the blurb on the back of the 5th edition PHD, D&D is a game where you battle monsters while searching for legendary treasures and all the while you "gain experience and power as you trek across uncharted lands with your companions." That doesn't sound like a horror game to me.

Sure, but 5e doesn’t actually do that much to reinforce the assumed play style, which I’m 99% sure is intentional, because they know D&D players vary widely on preferred playstyle.

D&D horror takes a little work and creativity, but IMO it isn’t hard work, and a lot of it could have been done for DMs in a better DMG.

In theory there are all sorts of horrifying creatures in D&D. Illithids for example. But most players don't come to D&D with the same mindset they do when approaching Alien or Call of Cthulhu. A Mind Flayer really isn't any scarier than a vampire, a roper, or a flesh golem. D&D is a heroic game where characters engage in heroic actions.

Perhaps part of the disconnect is experience with players? IME, if I have players who are on board with the theme of the campaign, they sit down with a mindset appropriate to that theme.

I pretty much stopped bothering with lighting effects in D&D given that most of my party members always have dark vision. It just isn't worth the additional headache of keeping track.

Unless a specific campaign or adventure really calls for worrying about light, I do the same. If I want to have the PCs hunted through a magitech facility by a magebred abomination, I’ll keep track of light, however. If someone uses the warlock or gloom stalker ranger to be Riddick in Pitch Black, cool! They’ll be the one person who doesn’t have disad on perception when the room goes dark. That isn’t gonna kill the mood, and can be used to heighten it by contrast.

 

[Imaro]

No. That's not what's happening, here.

I've made a statement, that D&D has only a vestigial quantity of Exploration Pillar and Social Pillar mechanics, compared to other games which have significantly more. This statement is a statement of fact. Many of the "Bespoke TTRPGs" that are referenced in this thread, and in the threads/posts you complain about have a significantly more comprehensive structure for those pillars of play. This is not a debatable fact.

That's not fact. You've shown they have significantly more structured process for handling Exploration... that doesn't in turn mean more or better mechanics.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No. That's not what's happening, here.

I've made a statement, that D&D has only a vestigial quantity of Exploration Pillar and Social Pillar mechanics, compared to other games which have significantly more. This statement is a statement of fact. Many of the "Bespoke TTRPGs" that are referenced in this thread, and in the threads/posts you complain about have a significantly more comprehensive structure for those pillars of play. This is not a debatable fact.

You have decided to instead debate on subjectivity, that D&D has "All that is Needed".

You're now trying to explain -why- it's more important and "Better" to have a less robust setup for those two aspects of gameplay which is really not the purpose of my pointing it out.

It feels like you're trying to "Defend" D&D from this statement of fact. That other systems having more focus on different aspects would make it "Less Than" them, unless you were to explain that it is at least equal, or superior, for having so little focus on those systems. Rather than just -different-.

And I am super confused as to -why-.

That you prefer D&D's "Rules Light" method, or that the playtesters for 4e and 5e preferred it, has no impact on the fact that other games have more robust systems.

I think the problem is that you've taken "Weak" or "Vestigial" as a value judgement rather than a statement of relative fullness.

Weak is inherently a value judgement. This is the first post I’ve seen you use “vestigial”.

I challenged your claim that the rules are “weak”, and you decided to argue with me as if I had instead challenged the idea that 5e keeps social interaction, and to a lesser extent exploration, light and open to interpretation.

 

[Imaro]

Of course it can do horror. I don't think it does horror particularly well but Ravenloft is one of my favorite settings and I have fun with it. But according to the blurb on the back of the 5th edition PHD, D&D is a game where you battle monsters while searching for legendary treasures and all the while you "gain experience and power as you trek across uncharted lands with your companions." That doesn't sound like a horror game to me.

Two points...

1. Any game where the GM is given rule zero can very easily, regardless of player character power or level be a horror game.
2. By this logic Exalted would do bad as a horror game and yet there is strong support for horror and horrific things in the world of Exalted even with the PC's playing Wuxia Demi-Gods

 

[Steampunkette]

That's not fact. You've shown they have significantly more structured process for handling Exploration... that doesn't in turn mean more or better mechanics.

I feel, at this point, that you cannot be arguing in good faith.

D&D has absolutely minimal mechanics with no cohesive structure toward travel or social pillars, both you and DoctorBadWolf have acknowledged this and lauded it as a good thing. In your case even to the point of being directly insulting.

But even LevelUp, which takes D&D's mechanics and restructures them with the addition of only a handful of rules, has more gameplay mechanics related to travel and the exploration pillar by -definition-. Similarly, -any- game which has a structure for the Social or Exploration pillars is going to have more mechanics than D&D because D&D has -very little-.

And at -no- point have I made mention "Better" mechanics or implied other games were "Better" than D&D as a value judgement.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I’ve explicitly said otherwise about a dozen times, and talked about playing and enjoying other specific games.

Yes but in the hypothetical example of someone telling you to play another game, your justification has been that you want to run your D&D campaign. That’s what I’m addressing here.

It is very odd how it seams people don't read your posts and makes claims that you said something you didn't.

So for the heist example, DBW said “why would I want to switch games to Blades in the Dark to run a heist when after the heist we’ll move on to some other genre”. He’s made similar statements throughout the thread.

The argument seems to be “I’m gonna play D&D and I’m gonna incorporate some other genres as needed, so don’t tell me to play another game suited for that genre”.

Okay. I’m not sure what the point is? You have worded this like it’s a big deal or something. Context isn’t telling me why.

Not a big deal, just that the Aliens game would be a much better choice to play an Aliens game.

As I said earlier, there is a difference between playing a horror game and playing D&D with a horror vibe. Clearly you want the latter. Anyone who wants the former should look for a specific game to get what they want.

 

[Steampunkette]

Weak is inherently a value judgement. This is the first post I’ve seen you use “vestigial”.

I challenged your claim that the rules are “weak”, and you decided to argue with me as if I had instead challenged the idea that 5e keeps social interaction, and to a lesser extent exploration, light and open to interpretation.

I disagree that weak is a value judgement by definition. Weak does not mean "Bad". It just means Weak.

Weak Intellectual Property laws are good for the advancement of culture, for example, as the Public Domain is a wonderful thing. A weak board in a staircase is bad.

That, then, is the core of our miscommunication.

 

[Imaro]

I feel, at this point, that you cannot be arguing in good faith.

The feeling is mutual.

D&D has absolutely minimal mechanics with no cohesive structure toward travel or social pillars, both you and DoctorBadWolf have acknowledged this and lauded it as a good thing. In your case even to the point of being directly insulting.

I never said they were minimal... and if you believe I did please show me where. I conceded they were not structured in a specific process, which I understand you prefer but I posted a list of mechanics in D&D all related to exploration which was pretty comprehensive... I then asked you what you felt was missing... well besides a process what is?

But even LevelUp, which takes D&D's mechanics and restructures them with the addition of only a handful of rules, has more gameplay mechanics related to travel and the exploration pillar by -definition-. Similarly, -any- game which has a structure for the Social or Exploration pillars is going to have more mechanics than D&D because D&D has -very little-.

Structure does not in turn mean more mechanics... you get that right? My structured process could be flip a coin every 8 miles traveled, heads combat encounter and tails no encounter... its s structured process but it has minimal mechanics.

 

[Krachek]

DnD has an explicit and detailed rules for chase,
but have never seen it in play, I understand better now, that when in need,
just to take a look and remind all these chase rules, the chase thrill is gone, like in the song.
So sadly more rules don’t equal better game experience.