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

[pemerton]

I do want to acknowledge that sanity is a thing in cosmic horror; however, as I have fairly recently read Call of Cthulhu (a year+ ago) and At the Mountains of Madness (yesterday) I want to point out that narrator / protagonist in both stories does not suffer any madness (other characters do). And that is the role I see the PCs, the protagonist of the story. They investigate and fight (futilely) the horrors, but are rarely driven insane by them.

I just reread At the Mountains of Madness yesterday and Call of Cthulhu a year+ or so ago. The narrator/protagonist in those stories is disturbed by the events and what they uncover, but they are not noticeably worse off than from where they began.

I think this isn't obvious.

Here is the second paragraph of The Call of Cthulhu:

Theosophists have guessed at the awesome grandeur of the cosmic cycle wherein our world and human race form transient incidents. They have hinted at strange survivals in terms which would freeze the blood if not masked by a bland optimism. But it is not from them that there came the single glimpse of forbidden eons which chills me when I think of it and maddens me when I dream of it. That glimpse, like all dread glimpses of truth, flashed out from an accidental piecing together of separated things—in this case an old newspaper item and the notes of a dead professor. I hope that no one else will accomplish this piecing out; certainly, if I live, I shall never knowingly supply a link in so hideous a chain. I think that the professor, too intended to keep silent regarding the part he knew, and that he would have destroyed his notes had not sudden death seized him.​

And here is the second-last paragraph:

That was the document I read, and now I have placed it in the tin box beside the bas-relief and the papers of Professor Angell. With it shall go this record of mine—this test of my own sanity, wherein is pieced together that which I hope may never be pieced together again. I have looked upon all that the universe has to hold of horror, and even the skies of spring and the flowers of summer must ever afterward be poison to me. But I do not think my life will be long. As my uncle went, as poor Johansen went, so I shall go. I know too much, and the cult still lives.​

This is someone who is noticeably worse off, in my view.

These paragraphs are from the closing pages of At the Mountains of Madness:

If the sculptured maps and pictures in that prehuman city had told truly, these cryptic violet mountains could not be much less than three hundred miles away; yet none the less sharply did their dim elfin essence appear above that remote and snowy rim, like the serrated edge of a monstrous alien planet about to rise into unaccustomed heavens. Their height, then, must have been tremendous beyond all comparison—carrying them up into tenuous atmospheric strata peopled only by such gaseous wraiths as rash flyers have barely lived to whisper of after unexplainable falls. Looking at them, I thought nervously of certain sculptured hints of what the great bygone river had washed down into the city from their accursed slopes—and wondered how much sense and how much folly had lain in the fears of those Old Ones who carved them so reticently. I recalled how their northerly end must come near the coast at Queen Mary Land, where even at that moment Sir Douglas Mawson's expedition was doubtless working less than a thousand miles away; and hoped that no evil fate would give Sir Douglas and his men a glimpse of what might lie beyond the protecting coastal range. Such thoughts formed a measure of my overwrought condition at the time—and Danforth seemed to be even worse. . . .

Danforth, released from his piloting and keyed up to a dangerous nervous pitch, could not keep quiet. I felt him turning and wriggling about as he looked back at the terrible receding city, ahead at the cave-riddled, cube-barnacled peaks, sidewise at the bleak sea of snowy, rampart-strewn foothills, and upward at the seething, grotesquely clouded sky. It was then, just as I was trying to steer safely through the pass, that his mad shrieking brought us so close to disaster by shattering my tight hold on myself and causing me to fumble helplessly with the controls for a moment. A second afterward my resolution triumphed and we made the crossing safely—yet I am afraid that Danforth will never be the same again.

I have said that Danforth refused to tell me what final horror made him scream out so insanely—a horror which, I feel sadly sure, is mainly responsible for his present breakdown. We had snatches of shouted conversation above the wind's piping and the engine's buzzing as we reached the safe side of the range and swooped slowly down toward the camp, but that had mostly to do with the pledges of secrecy we had made as we prepared to leave the nightmare city. Certain things, we had agreed, were not for people to know and discuss lightly—and I would not speak of them now but for the need of heading off that Starkweather-Moore Expedition, and others, at any cost. It is absolutely necessary, for the peace and safety of mankind, that some of earth's dark, dead corners and unplumbed depths be let alone; lest sleeping abnormalities wake to resurgent life, and blasphemously surviving nightmares squirm and splash out of their black lairs to newer and wider conquests.​

While it is Danforth and not the narrator who goes mad, the narrator is clearly disturbed. And seems to think that he is worse off for his knowledge, which he shares only to head off the new expedition.

There is a consistent theme of being "damaged" by knowledge that reveals some horrible truth about human history and culture and its relationship to the universe as it really is.

 

[Ovinomancer]

No there's one in the 5e rules set as well... since you do loose sanity whenever you suffer from a long-term or indefinite madness... the problem is @Ovinomancer isn't actually using/discussing the rules for sanity.

Sigh, because Sanity is an optional rule you can use if you've chosen to use the optional Madness rules. It does nothing without Madness. I spoke to how Madness is bad, and you keep saying, "but Sanity," as if it actually addresses anything I said except for saving throws.

 

[Imaro]

Sigh, because Sanity is an optional rule you can use if you've chosen to use the optional Madness rules. It does nothing without Madness. I spoke to how Madness is bad, and you keep saying, "but Sanity," as if it actually addresses anything I said except for saving throws.

I already addressed this and you seem intent on ignoring the change that using Sanity rules brings (which addressed your issue as stated about ability scores and advantages vs. madness). If you still don't comprehend that we can end the discussion because it won't go anywhere.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yes, I’m actually aware of the Forged In The Dark extrapolation that is being used to make other games. So far as I know, most of them don’t change the mechanics much, and run fairly similarly. Not only that, most people agree that Blades in The Dark is a distinct game, and Forged in The Dark isn’t the same game, but rather a vehicle to create games that use the same design principles and mechanical processes as Blades, but create a different type of story.

So when you talk about how flexible D&D is, are you talking about the mechanics or the fictional setting?

There are several Forged in the Dark games that have significantly altered the mechanics. Not the core mechanic of rolling a dice pool, and with tiers of success, but all the other mechanics that are in place in the game, and how they interact with one another.

But yes, Blades in the Dark presents the setting of Doskvol and the Forged in the Dark rules system. It does both.

I have trouble believing you don’t see the difference.

I mean, you restated what I said and then told me I don't know the difference.

The “setting” of D&D is only specific in terms of the default setting used to explain how to play. It is the world equivalent of using Iconics to explain character creation.

The majority of setting examples you give here are all pretty similar, with some minor differences which mostly seem cosmological. The Space one is the only one that actually seems to be something other than pretty standard fantasy stuff, but even that is something we've seen plenty of (Spelljammer, Starfinder, etc.). However, you then offer a Dresden Files type urban environment and claim that's a D&D setting? No. No it's not, and I think this is probably one of the challenging parts of this conversation.

You're saying any game where you use the D&D rules is a D&D setting. But any game where you use the FitD rules (or any other system, I suppose) is NOT a Blades setting. It's a bit of a double standard.

Especially given that when I look at the different FitD rules, I see more significant difference from setting to setting than what core races are available to PCs, or how the cosmology of the setting is structured. Those are cosmetic differences.

They’re all D&D settings.

Okay, then all the Forged in the Dark settings are "Blades settings".

 

[prabe]

There is a consistent theme of being "damaged" by knowledge that reveals some horrible truth about human history and culture and its relationship to the universe as it really is.

Very much this. One of the recurring themes in Lovecraft (and those who wrote alongside him, and those who followed him) is that knowledge is--or can be--dangerous. While there are problems that can be solved with knowledge, that knowledge rarely if ever fails to damage the knower. It's arguably the theme Call of Cthulhu (the game) captures well.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There's an important difference between offering options and telling the group "do whatever you want! have fun!" and leaving them stranded. 5E does the latter, actually designed games do the former.

I largely agree with the characterisation of 5E, here, particularly because the options offered in the DMG are profoundly half-arsed and pretty badly-designed (everything from Inspiration to page 242).

However, what games offer real options and support them? PtbA games like BitD, for example, in my experience, generally do not offer options, or offer a very narrow selection of them (Legacy: Life in the Ruins comes to mind). This is an honest question, btw, not trying to "catch you out", I'm just struggling to think of them. FATE, I guess, but like, despite massively backing FATE on KS and stuff I've never found their genre emulation stuff terribly satisfying or convincing (YMMV). Maybe Savage Worlds? Many of the criticisms made of D&D also apply to it, but it has Bennies which are fundamental to the gameplay, and it has a pretty large toolkit of specialized books (of unfortunately varied quality, but that's a different discussion).

I think an awful lot of "actually designed" RPGs (which I agree D&D kind of isn't - 4E was the closest it got) don't really offer options. They definitely don't leave you stranded, but they tend to be narrower and more directed.

Well, yes, the fact that one D&D campaign is nothing like another even if both groups follow the rules closely is a very strong evidence.

Again though, is that not true of a lot of games? Including a lot of "actually designed" ones?

Some games will be similar between tables because the RPG in question is narrowly designed and focused - many, perhaps most PtbA games, where the group is actually following the rules are likely to run on somewhat similar tracks. Likewise Spire/Heart.

But with something like FATE, or SWADE, or SR or even various editions of Star Wars, you're likely going to need a lot more information to get a handle on how the game will actually be played. Or do you mean something different?

 

[pemerton]

what games offer real options and support them? PtbA games like BitD, for example, in my experience, generally do not offer options, or offer a very narrow selection of them

Apocalypse World has detailed advice on custom moves of all sorts. And as per the blog post that @Campbell posted not far upthread, the system will support these in a very stable fashion.

 

[dave2008]

Again, madness and sanity optional rules didn't make your campaign horror. You did.

I haven't played a lot of games, but that was the same impression I had of CoC. The game didn't make it horror, the players and I (the GM) did.

Honestly, I can't think of how a TTRP can do horror through mechanics only. You really need group buy in. I mean, if my character dies or goes insane or looses a leg, so what. It is a piece of paper. You always need significant group buy-in to make horror work, not rules.

 

[dave2008]

Sigh, because Sanity is an optional rule you can use if you've chosen to use the optional Madness rules. It does nothing without Madness. I spoke to how Madness is bad, and you keep saying, "but Sanity," as if it actually addresses anything I said except for saving throws.

That is not entirely true. Madness is actually an optional rule for Sanity. It says failing a Sanity check could result in contracting a Madness. It is not a required system for the Sanity stat. However, it doesn't really give you anything else to go on either IRRC. Regardless, you are not required to use Madness with Sanity by RAW.

 

[Imaro]

That is not entirely true. Madness is actually an optional rule for Sanity. It says failing a Sanity check could result in contracting a Madness. It is not a required system for the Sanity stat. However, it doesn't really give you anything else to go on either IRRC. Regardless, you are not required to use Madness with Sanity by RAW.

I think at this point it just becomes a Sanity point loss system. Truth at this point I'm seeing a alot of broad, preference statements about the madness rules (I don't like this particular madness result) which is cool but nothing that seems wrong with the actual mechanics of it.