Do you have a "litmus test" setting for generic rule sets?

[Reynard]

I miss DL Classic.

Like all great 90s games, it really embraced world building. Those rules were often more complex than they needed to be, but they also had a lot of charm. The math was usually wonky, too. My favorite was Earthdawn.

 

[Fenris-77]

I think that example rather proves their point, people have used 3E and 5E for just about every genre and Setting.

What people have used it for and what its designed for are two different things. Intentional design is a break point here. GURPS is designed to be universal while an example like FitD has been used pretty universally but wasn't designed or presented to do that job. Most base mechanics can be used universally with a certain amount of redesign but that doesn't make them universal by design.

 

[pemerton]

I think that example rather proves their point, people have used 3E and 5E for just about every genre and Setting.

So 5e D&D is a generic RPG rule set?

But BitD isn't?

I'm not sure what the basis is for the ostensible contrast.

 

[Reynard]

So 5e D&D is a generic RPG rule set?

But BitD isn't?

I'm not sure what the basis is for the ostensible contrast.

I think BitD has a significantly more narrow and opinionated design than 5E. I don't think 5E is a generic game, though, just that on the continuum it is more generic than BitD.

 

[pemerton]

I think BitD has a significantly more narrow and opinionated design than 5E. I don't think 5E is a generic game, though, just that on the continuum it is more generic than BitD.

5e has a rather generic way of assigning mediaeval/fantasy skills to a PC; and then a lot of very detailed rules for assigning primarily combat abilities to PCs that are mediaeval/fantasy abilities.

And has a fairly tight combat resolution system, provided that the combat is a melee or skirmish lasting up to a minute or so.

I think it's pretty opinionated! I mean, just as one example, change your combat from fantasy melee to (say) galleys with catapults and rams, and the ranges and durations for combat spells will stop working smoothly. (Eg Command - Approach is obviously designed in the context of close-quarters melee combat. In ship-to-ship combat, or even chariot-to-chariot combat, the 60 feet range and the 1 round duration won't work very well.)

But anyway, I don't mean to derail your thread too far. So unless you're interested in keeping this going, I'll do my best to let it drop!

 

[Reynard]

5e has a rather generic way of assigning mediaeval/fantasy skills to a PC; and then a lot of very detailed rules for assigning primarily combat abilities to PCs that are mediaeval/fantasy abilities.

And has a fairly tight combat resolution system, provided that the combat is a melee or skirmish lasting up to a minute or so.

I think it's pretty opinionated! I mean, just as one example, change your combat from fantasy melee to (say) galleys with catapults and rams, and the ranges and durations for combat spells will stop working smoothly. (Eg Command - Approach is obviously designed in the context of close-quarters melee combat. In ship-to-ship combat, or even chariot-to-chariot combat, the 60 feet range and the 1 round duration won't work very well.)

But anyway, I don't mean to derail your thread too far. So unless you're interested in keeping this going, I'll do my best to let it drop!

I don't disagree overall (although I think people make too much of 5E being melee focused and "not working" with ranged or guns, but anyway). I just think it is pretty obvious that D&D specifices less about how it is supposed to be played and what that play looks like than BitD. I mean, the intent of BitD's design is to get you to a specific kind of play, rather than having to fight the system to get there.