D&D General D&D Evolutions You Like and Dislike [+]

[payn]

I dont like the tactical team aspect of D&D, or I should say I dont like it to be required. If the game works with a herd of cats, but is optimal with a team of surgeons, it seems to have hit the sweet spot.

 

[LordBP]

I played D&D 4th edition when it was released in 2008 and then started playing World of Warcraft later than same year. After a few hours of playing WoW, I realized the cool down abilities reminded me of D&D's at-will, per-encounter, and per-day powers. The way D&D 4th edition had those abilities organized didn't seem much different than the abilities tied to numbers on my keyboard. When playing D&D, when using Deft Strike it felt like I was playing WoW and pushing 3 on my keyboard for Slam. And then you had the addition of Strikers (DPS), Defenders (Tanks), Controller, and Leader (healers?). You're honestly telling me this doesn't make you think of an MMORPG?

That D&D 4th edition was inspired by WoW and other MMORPGs seems patently obvious to me. But unlike others, I don't view that as a bad thing. Video games were inspired by D&D and other TTRPGs for decades, so why shouldn't TTRPGs take some inspiration for video games? Probably my favorite part of 4th edition was that it did a good job of making sure every character was useful in every encounter which wasn't always the case in previous editions. In 3rd edition, I remember a fight against a golem where my Wizard was essentially worthless because none of my magic could do anything. I never saw that happen in 4th edition.

Funny thing is that when 3.0 and 3.5 came out, I had pretty much the same take on games like Everquest, Diablo, and Diablo 2.

It felt like they were trying to make D&D more like those games.

 

[mamba]

So....yeah. The official position of WotC is, or at least was, that they have to appease the people who hate the very presence of things, or else they're being exclusionary. They have to avoid offending people who think that Dragonborn being in the PHB at all is offensive.

well, Dragonborn are in the PHB, so not sure what exactly the balance between these two camps that WotC struck is supposed to be…

did they add them but make them suck so no one would want to play one? That would be a disservice to both sides

 

[Reynard]

Funny thing is that when 3.0 and 3.5 came out, I had pretty much the same take on games like Everquest, Diablo, and Diablo 2.

It felt like they were trying to make D&D more like those games.

Since the very beginning of the hobby, D&D and computer/video games have had a recursive relationship. D&D spread on college campuses partly because of the nascent internet, and attempts to recreate the experience on computers followed quickly. Doom and DIablo were both based on creators' D&D games. It should come as no surprise to anyone that they have shared ideas back and forth and have evolved together.

 

[mamba]

But, it should be noted, that is all (that we know definitively). They wanted to capture that audience, full stop. Not emulate MMOs or mirror mechanics or anything else specific like that. Individual notions like AEDU being meant to emulate cool-downs are conjecture.

I mean, if you want to capture an audience you will build something that is similar to what they already like. Not sure how else you would go about it

 

[Reynard]

I mean, if you want to capture an audience you will build something that is similar to what they already like. Not sure how else you would go about it

Probably more accurate to say "appeals to." That will often invoke "similarity" but there must be differences for medium and presentation and so on. But one would be hard pressed to discount what was happening in fantasy aesthetics (including video games, but also paperback covers, animation and film) when every new edition arrived.

 

[billd91]

I'm going to add one evolution that I'm seeing in D&D... for good and bad.

I think we're seeing a shift from practical consequences of choices in favor of narrative or conceptual ones. Take, for example, the change in the Heavy property for weapons in 5e.

Heavy. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use effectively.

Heavy​

You have Disadvantage on attack rolls with a Heavy weapon if it’s a Melee weapon and your Strength score isn’t at least 13 or if it’s a Ranged weapon and your Dexterity score isn’t at least 13.

So, as long as they're strong or dexterous enough, small creatures can use heavy weapons now without penalty. In prior editions, small creatures had Strength penalties and maybe even did a little less damage with weapons, were at a disadvantage in grappling against larger opponents, but maybe also had a positive stealth modifier compared to their larger peers. Being small had practical consequences.
But what does small really mean now? What does it mean to have chosen to play a small character?

 

[mamba]

Probably more accurate to say "appeals to." That will often invoke "similarity" but there must be differences for medium and presentation and so on.

that works too, the necessary differences due to medium is why I wrote similar, not identical

 

[Warpiglet-7]

But a game isn't a story until it is over. RPGs generate stories by virtue of being played, but they aren't "A Story". Stories have beginnings, middles and ends. they have plots and characters, high and low points. None of that is true with RPGs except in retrospect. The story we tell about the game we just played IS the story, generated from the game. Treating an RPG like a "story" with important predestined plot points is a good way to ruin the "game" aspect and impinge on the most important element of RPG play: player agency. RPGs are games where we play to find out what happens.

(Just because the world is a weird place, I will go ahead and specifically say "all this in my opinion" as if it weren't obvious from the start.)

I am trying to figure this out…

Without a predetermined plot, a story is emergent…after play. This is especially true if you consider D&D to be a wargame with additions.

That said, in our current campaign we have had cut points before a new series of challenges emerge. These might be chapters if not stories.

But either way, I am in the camp of us playing a game and then ascribing a plot after the fact unless the dm already predetermines the outcomes.

We can’t write about beating the bad guy if it never happens. Or I don’t know the details until they take place.

 

[CreamCloud0]

well, Dragonborn are in the PHB, so not sure what exactly the balance between these two camps that WotC struck is supposed to be…

did they add them but make them suck so no one would want to play one? That would be a disservice to both sides

i think if they had been more willing to present more distinct themed settings and encourage curation in their guides they maybe could've managed it, like 'these are all suggestions and options! you are in no way obligated to include or leave out any of these things even in pre-written settings'