Disdain for new fantasy

[DonTadow]

Think of an "updated" version of Monopoly that changed all the properties, utilities and tokens.

Some people will like the new, different version -- case in point, all the College-opoly versions.

But some people enjoy the history and experience of playing Monopoly with the classically defined elements. I would daresay that most people enjoy this, as the (almost) original version of Monopoly is still sold and bought more often than any of the "updated" official or clone versions.

D&D has always been inclusive of new ideas in fantasy (even when those "new" ideas come from people inspired by older editions of D&D!), but I think we are now reaching a breaking point between personal preferences.

Starting with 3.0, the grumbling began about the anime and video game influences on the game. With 4.0, it seems that even more of those elements will become core for the game.



Personally, I don't mind new fantasy. However, I think new fantasy needs its own RPG. I prefer my D&D with classic tone and fluff.

I"m curious as to what do you define the differences between anime and dungeons and dragons.

Isn't fantasy just fantasy? Hasn't d and d action always been as over the top as it is in anime fantasy. The naming of spells, living weapons, legendary quests,

 

[Moon-Lancer]

when I dm, If i can make the players feel the same things I felt when watching record of Lodoss war (ova) when i was 16, (especially the first adventure in that subterranean city) then I have done something right (and incredibly awesome) as a dm.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I'm considering starting up a game heavily influenced by Berserk (probably Iron Heroes, though). If I can find the time for it, I think it'll be an amazing game.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have been playing rpgs since 1978 or there abouts and there have always been people complainging that no-one really roleplays anymore and it is all degenerating in to mindless hack 'n' Slash. It is just that WoW has given a focus for this.

As for the anime bashing, well it is a handy label to toss about, and there are anime shows that are very much not D&D, but that in its self means very little. There are people that are convinced that D&D should be various things, Medieval European Courtly romance, swords and sorcerery, Toklinesque high fantasy and so forth and they feel obliged to make disparaging remarks about anything that takes it further from what they think is the true and proper path.

It is all meaningless nonsense. At the end of the day a good D&D campaign is not obtained by mindless application of rules but be a judicious excerise in imagination between the DM and the players.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I have been playing rpgs since 1978 or there abouts and there have always been people complainging that no-one really roleplays anymore and it is all degenerating in to mindless hack 'n' Slash.

Man, you should have been playing back in '77. You missed some good times back then. We'd crank up the Bay City Rollers and roleplay ALL NIGHT LONG.

 

[Piratecat]

For another example: I also don't want Matrix or Crouch Tiger Hidden Dragon stlye cinematics (which are also typical of some anime) as a part of my game. I love them as a part of the movies, and the Matrix trilogy is one of my favorites. But I don't want them in my game. Again, bad for me, but not wrong.

I feel this way about steampunk and gunpowder in my D&D. some superb settings have them (Iron Kingdoms), but it violates my mental set for "acceptable anachronisms" in a way that's hard to describe. Spelljammer was the same way, totally trashing my suspension of disbelief.

I like the cinematic combat of high-magic, high-lvl D&D. But I understand how some people wouldn't.

 

[Hairfoot]

When I describe D&D as "anime", I'm generally referring to:

Quasi-furry half-something template races
Ridiculous, over-sized weapons (like the spiked chain)
Super-heroic characters, able to leap buildings and throw boulders around

I've always preferred the default D&D PC to be an Indiana Jones. In 3E they became X-men, and "anime" describes a character of similar abilities.

My complaint is that gamers should be able to scale a game up to that type of theme, but I dislike a system that makes it the standard.

 

[Fifth Element]

I've always preferred the default D&D PC to be an Indiana Jones. In 3E they became X-men, and "anime" describes a character of similar abilities.

This works if you mean a fighter or rogue to a be a "default D&D PC". Methinks mages and clerics routinely do things that Indy could not. Throw fireballs around, for instance. Or heal wounds with a word and a touch (Indy needed the Holy Grail for that).

My complaint is that gamers should be able to scale a game up to that type of theme, but I dislike a system that makes it the standard.

Well, just scale it down then. If a low-powered standard can up scaled up, then a high-powered standard can be scaled down.

 

[Von Ether]

My complaint is that gamers should be able to scale a game up to that type of theme, but I dislike a system that makes it the standard.

Here comes the rub, as far as my style goes. I'd rather have a "higher standard" (as in octane rating) and then scale back if I want a more realistic game than try to add on bits later. Some GMs are the polar opposite.

The deal breaker though, is that many player who want access to those banned abilites will always harp as if they are being denied their birthright when a GM scales back like that. You have to not a care when you say "no."

 

[Hairfoot]

Well, just scale it down then. If a low-powered standard can up scaled up, then a high-powered standard can be scaled down.

I disagree. When a system (such as 3E) presumes fast levelling, a high saturation of magic items, and piles of gold at every level, it's difficult to tone that down and still remain consistent with all the rules, as well as materials like modules and third-party publications. Add to that the expectation of many players that they will be playing at the level prescribed by the core rules, and you usually get power creep.

As a chef would say, you can always add salt to a dish, but it's almost impossible to take it out.