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

[Paul Farquhar]

There's a big difference between being screwed by the system and asking for it.

The system is designed to channel players into role playing certain stereotypes. And the system generally rewards violence.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Of course it’s silly, it’s a summation of an astonishingly silly argument. It manages to be less silly, surprisingly, than you reply to it, which is so absurd as to be impossible to even meaningfully engage with.

Okay. The OP is just silliness and can be safely ignored. No discussion is necessary at all, because it's silly. Discussion done.

Or.. is it only you that has this power?

 

[loverdrive]

It's not an appeal to popularity, my point is one that you agreed above - most games take a D&D-ish approach. Hence a lot of the criticism of D&D specifically even though the the issue is a broad/general one with systems taking that general approach feels a little misguided. I guess maybe it's a point more important to me than others? Like, I see two general issues in this thread:

1) Issues largely specific to D&D which make it ill-suited to integrating or emulating genre stuff.

2) Issues broadly applicable to all DM-centric RPGs that make them ill-suited to emulating specific genre stuff

Maybe I'm the only one who cares lol. But I think it's relevant because a lot of people dismissively saying "D&D doesn't support heists and is bad at them!" would start feeling real uncomfortable if they had to say the same about Shadowrun or Cyberpunk, even though they have nigh-identical issues.

I don't know anything about Shadowrun (other than the Meat Salsa Rule, which a friend of mine tried to explain to me with a helium voice), but Cyberpunk, while being pretty bad at Ocean's 11 style heists (and it kinda doesn't encourage these -- cyberpunk as a genre, after all, is about people who are in way over their head), at least, doesn't have a problem with HP bloat -- if someone spots you, you put a bullet from a silenced pistol between their eyes, and then desperately try to find a way to dispose of a body. In D&D, no one except Assassin rogue can reliably get rid of a guard.

Also, I don't think that Cyberpunk fanboys who for some reason think that it can handle everything (if we include an option of houserulling it beyond recognition) are as vocal as D&D fanboys.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Off the top of my head (and this as a huge 4e fan):
1: Less ludicrous level scaling. Proficiency bonus is far more practical than +1/2 per level
2: Fewer fiddly modifiers to remember, with most being rolled into Advantage so it plays more cleanly
3: Spells and presentation people find more inspiring
4: Non-combat cantrips for classes other than the wizard
5: Better "incidental combat" that actually feels as if it means something
6: I don't need precise AEDU balance and 4e has people with fewer dailies but no one with more. Having an "all dailies + cantrips" wizard would be worthwhile
7: The Artificer class is much more interesting
8: The Sorcerer's metamagic is another playstyle option; I'd like to see if it could be adapted
9: The Druid's shapeshifting just feels better than a system where shapeshifting doesn't change your stats at all
10: The Battlemaster Fighter subclass mechanics are clean - it could do with a port.

And yes, literally half that list was "these class options are good".

Right, I am not sure if you were responding to a post where I was talking about why I would NOT use 5e as the base of my own game, or the one where I was stating that it does do a number of things well. So I agree with at least some of your list, though it is of course somewhat subjective. Battlemaster is not bad, though I still think that the game has room for a 'Warlord' that is a more rounded expression of that. I never thought it was worth wrecking the resource balance of the game to break A/E/D/U. I mean, there are actually ways to work it WITHIN the A/E/D/U structure, like making all the Encounter powers 'power ups' (IE like meta-magic type things). Then you'd do some at-will thing, and apply one of these power ups to it. This was done in Essentials, but in a way that broke the resource framework, poor design. 5e takes a sledgehammer to the resource framework, and the game suffers for it in obvious ways.

You like BA, but the weird thing about BA is, it doesn't really HELP, but it can hurt! I mean, no 1st level PC is ever ACTUALLY going to be called upon, as a planned part of an adventure, to attempt a bunch of high DC checks. It just doesn't make sense, unless maybe you're playing some sort of weird one-off where failure is part of the point... So, what does BA actually do, and what makes it 'more practical'? It DOES make it impossible to present "the challenge that absolutely must achieve 20th level to attempt" and makes even mid-to-high-level PCs often feel like schmucks. That's not a terrible thing, it is just a thing that creates a somewhat different type of game. Neither BA nor 4e's more aggressive scaling is 'better', they are just different.

Likewise, some things like 'incidental combat', it is all just a matter of what you want to play. I'm not interested in playing out fights that are a foregone conclusion in detail. I mean, it just isn't interesting. I think D&D has just maintained this tradition where every detail must be played out because the paradigm is the puzzle/deathtrap dungeon, and even the smallest move can have totally lethal consequences. The players must be kept in the dark about what they cannot see, and thus every situation is played out mechanically the same way lest some metagame thinking leak in, or someone realize that there must be a trap here because we're playing out this trivial guard fight scene. Even 5e, IMHO, moved on from that long ago, and if you DO play that way, then sure 5e's approach is probably best. Otherwise, either game can elide things, but 4e has a bit easier time with that. Make your consequential encounters more interesting and it all works out fine, right?

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm no 5E fan but I'm still shocked that the Inspiration mechanic is as bad as it is. For a high-fantasy game with mythic/LotR trappings to not give you lots of ways to push or repeat rolls seems like a pretty damning oversight.

In some design circles you can get some odd resistance to metacurrancy that's actually worth anything. The Hero System only really had one for an edition or two, its optional, and not very strong, and that's for a system that's best known for use with superheroes, one of the genres its most justifiable for.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I would completely agree.

5E is a weird game when closely analyzed. It has some forward-looking and modern elements, and some ancient ones, but once you get outside the core of the PHB, i.e. the races/classes/skills/combat etc., it gets more and more sketchy and half-arsed-seeming, like they nailed down the core and then just rushed to add in other systems with very little consideration. Much of the DMG seems deeply half-arsed, and the optional rules are especially poorly-considered, and seem like something someone dashed off (at least in terms of thinking them through, I'm sure the actual layout, editing, etc. took ages) in a serious hurry.

From what I know of its evolution, I'd suggest this is what happens when you try to make a game to appeal to a wide range of people who have conflicting desires.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Right, I am not sure if you were responding to a post where I was talking about why I would NOT use 5e as the base of my own game, or the one where I was stating that it does do a number of things well. So I agree with at least some of your list, though it is of course somewhat subjective. Battlemaster is not bad, though I still think that the game has room for a 'Warlord' that is a more rounded expression of that.

Battlemaster isn't and has never in my eyes been a warlord replacement. What it is is more of a slayer replacement; the battlemaster dice is a simple fun and visceral way of working in encounter powers that don't do that much other than DPR on a class based on basic attacks for people who don't like faffing with power cards.

You like BA, but the weird thing about BA is, it doesn't really HELP, but it can hurt!

The point about BA vs the 4e scaling is that the 4e scaling is at least in my opinion too severe - but 5e is too gentle. I'd like somewhere between the two, especially regarding attack rolls. B.A. I see as an overcorrection. +4 over the full 20 levels and not affecting AC or untrained skills is too little, +15 over the full 30 levels before other modifiers to much.

Oh, and the other thing. 4e had far too many feats.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Am I wrong in assuming there may have been moderation action in this thread? Because a couple people's posts seem to have exceedingly unclear referents here...

 

[Grendel_Khan]

I still remember a Cyberpunk 2020 heist that went real loud, despite extensive planning and scouting, a Netrunner locking down the security, and so on, because the damned Solo who was meant to be covering the loading dock escape route decided that instead of staying hidden (which he was), he was going to shoot a guard who was just standing around oblivious, with a massive gun with a several-foot plasma muzzle-flash. Also "because he was bored".

Thus we went from "probably not having to kill anyone" to like 20 bodies hitting the floor and barely escaping alive. Thanks buddy!

(Of course now in D&D he's often the lead guy behind extremely elaborate non-violent heist strategies.)

Maybe this is the biggest challenge with heists and the real thing BitD is there to fight - boredom leading to stupidity!

I think the boredom factor is very real and serious, both in terms of setting up the heist beforehand (see every full session of prep before starting the actual shadowrun in Shadowrun) and making it run smoothly. This is why I'm drawn to some of the mechanics in BitD, like using flashbacks to retcon elements of the heist prep in-the-moment. Any system that uses meta-currency can adopt that mechanic without any real work.

Endless planning is fun for some groups, but if it's not fun for even one person, one time, it becomes a huge drag (in my experience) and leads to moments like that random assassination you described. And sure, the reason the movie Heat is a movie is because it kicks off with a crew member killing someone for no reason. That's the catalyst for the whole story. But a bored PC throwing an inexplicable tantrum rarely leads to that sort of interesting narrative sequence, in part because RPG etiquette sort of gets in the way of the rest of the party doing what they should--immediately murdering Mr. I-Was-Bored (or trying to). So if someone does something dumb everyone basically has to shrug it off, and that's rarely good for the story.

 

[billd91]

The system is designed to channel players into role playing certain stereotypes. And the system generally rewards violence.

I have little sympathy for players who are this dumb and/or impatient and can't let other players have spotlight time without begrudging it by starting unnecessary trouble because "the game made me do it".