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

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah. Four fairly often, five sometimes. One is actually most common in practice.

Wow. That’s surprising. I mean, 6-8 can be tough outside of a dungeon or similar location, but to never hit that number is kind of nuts.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Wow. That’s surprising. I mean, 6-8 can be tough outside of a dungeon or similar location, but to never hit that number is kind of nuts.

Well, it helps that I have no interest in pushing for it, and neither do my players. Very few places are logical sites for constant, grinding combat as you say, and my players usually get tired of it.

 

[Reynard]

Really? You’ve never had 6 to 8 encounters in an adventuring day in 12 years of play?

That’s pretty crazy.

No it's not. It's a theoretical model that has never met actually play.

 

[hawkeyefan]

No it's not. It's a theoretical model that has never met actually play.

It has in my experience. Not always, by any means, but often enough for “never” to be surprising to hear from others.

 

[pemerton]

The original point being made, which you questioned, was not that D&D 5e is generic, but that it could be made generic, with some work.

What RPG do you have in mind that this is not true of?

 

[SableWyvern]

What RPG do you have in mind that this is not true of?

None? I've already stated at least once, possibly twice, in this thread, that I treat all RPGs as toolkits, and have maintained that position throughout. In any event, this is also a question that is a distraction from what I'm actually addressing.

@TwoSix stated:

Any resolution system could be made generic if you're willing to do the work peeling off all the embedded setting conceits.

You seemed to disagree, and seem to be suggesting it's not possible for D&D stating that:

Hmm.

I'm not sure the D&D combat resolution system can easily be made generic. The whole stop-motion, one attack per N seconds to deplete X hit points, approach is clearly best for melee and hand-to-hand duels. It's wonkier for archery - what actually happens when an arrow "hits" a character and knocks of some hit points? And wonkier still for gunfire.

In 1977, for instance, Traveller opted for simultaneous resolution and no escalating hit points.

I note that @TwoSix never actual said it was easy, just that it could be done, so there is already some strawmanning here, as you what you are arguing against isn't quite the same as what @TwoSix actually said. In any event, "easy" is relative. Was making Star Wars d20 or Stars Without Number easy? How about in comparison to making GURPS or Savage Worlds? Is making any good game typically easy? Why does it matter?

You then referenced the fact that Traveller chose a different path forward, which feels like a complete non-sequitur to me. Given the context, there seems to be an implication that since Traveller did this, the d20 mechanics can't be made generic, but I have no clue how you get from here to there.

Parmandur then commented that, despite the fact that the core d20 combat mechanics might not seem ideal for modern fire combat, they've still be used for it, which seems to prove the original point.

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

You then asked @Parmandur:

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

So you're now asking @Parmandur to defend a point they didn't make. As I initially pointed out, they said it can be made generic, not that it is generic. I'm starting to realise it's probably not goal post shifting, so much as it it's subtle strawmanning that's going on.

And then, finally, when I suggest you're shifting goal posts, you ask me to provide you the names of RPGs that can't be made generic, as if I've been arguing such a thing exists. As I have not been making that argument this, again, appears to be a strawman.

 

[Fenris-77]

No it's not. It's a theoretical model that has never met actually play.

Theoretical it might be, but the game is designed around X encounters per day, and that model does fail almost immediately in almost every case.