Experts on other systems, why aren't they d&d?
- Thread starter Aberzanzorax
- Start date
I basically agree with this.
Asking, "What is D&D?" is asking for a genre definition - like asking "What is fantasy?" or "What is pulp noir?" Genre definitions are notoriously squishy around the edges.
A genre is defined by the presence of various standard tropes, and their use in a specific style. Exactly how many such tropes need to be present to make a thing a recognizable member of the genre is a matter for discussion.
ExploderWizard
Hero
D&D is a party of newb adventurers running for thier lives from cave H in Keep on the Borderlands, leveling up, and returning to kick some ass.
Aberzanzorax
Hero
So, we're getting the "Ship of Theseus" discussion essentially.
Link: Ship of Theseus
For those of you who don't know, basically, that is a philosophical example of identity. If you take a brand new ship, named the "Ship of Theseus" it's pretty clear what the Ship of Theseus is.
But then it gets old and some parts need to be replaced. At first it is one board, then another. Eventually, all of the boards have been replaced. Is it still the ship of Theseus? Most would say yes.
But what if the old boards were still good? They were just replaced proactively, before they started rotting. And there is a pile of the old boards. And someone comes along and builds and exact replica of the Ship of Thesus out of the old boards. Now there are two identical ships. The first one was the one most people agreed was the Ship of Theseus. The second one is in exactly the same shape as the Ship of Thesus and built out of all the same exact materials as the original Ship of Theseus.
So the question becomes: are there now two Ships of Theseus? If not, which one is really the actual Ship of Theseus and which one is a false one? Or, if there are now no Ships of Theseus, at what point did that occur? When 1 board got replaced? When half the boards were replaced? When the last board was replaced?
As this relates to D&D:
In my opinion, 4e has had enough "boards" replaced that it is no longer D&D (for me). I absolutely understand how others could have differing opinions and be equally correct.
Conversely, I consider paizo's Pathfinder to be D&D. I also understand how others would be aghast at this statement, decrying it as blasphemy.
However, given the responses to this thread so far, and the idea of the Ship of Theseus, it also appears that the only "pure" D&D is OD&D. After that, there have been a number of "copiers" or "evolvements" including probably all of the examples I gave in my original post.
To some 4e is D&D. To some, OSRIC is. To some Runequest and Warhammer are. To some, none of these are.
I guess my conclusion at this point (and I'm still flexible/undecided...this is just my current working theory) is that, like the ship, it is a matter of degree. The more something is changed, and the more the original is copied the more blurry its identity becomes.
That said, would it be fair to say that 2nd edition D&D is "more" D&D than 3rd and that 3rd is "more" D&D than 4th?
And if so, would it also be fair to say that OSRIC or Castles and Crusades (or another retroclone) is "more" D&D than either 3rd or 4th?
Link: Ship of Theseus
For those of you who don't know, basically, that is a philosophical example of identity. If you take a brand new ship, named the "Ship of Theseus" it's pretty clear what the Ship of Theseus is.
But then it gets old and some parts need to be replaced. At first it is one board, then another. Eventually, all of the boards have been replaced. Is it still the ship of Theseus? Most would say yes.
But what if the old boards were still good? They were just replaced proactively, before they started rotting. And there is a pile of the old boards. And someone comes along and builds and exact replica of the Ship of Thesus out of the old boards. Now there are two identical ships. The first one was the one most people agreed was the Ship of Theseus. The second one is in exactly the same shape as the Ship of Thesus and built out of all the same exact materials as the original Ship of Theseus.
So the question becomes: are there now two Ships of Theseus? If not, which one is really the actual Ship of Theseus and which one is a false one? Or, if there are now no Ships of Theseus, at what point did that occur? When 1 board got replaced? When half the boards were replaced? When the last board was replaced?
As this relates to D&D:
In my opinion, 4e has had enough "boards" replaced that it is no longer D&D (for me). I absolutely understand how others could have differing opinions and be equally correct.
Conversely, I consider paizo's Pathfinder to be D&D. I also understand how others would be aghast at this statement, decrying it as blasphemy.
However, given the responses to this thread so far, and the idea of the Ship of Theseus, it also appears that the only "pure" D&D is OD&D. After that, there have been a number of "copiers" or "evolvements" including probably all of the examples I gave in my original post.
To some 4e is D&D. To some, OSRIC is. To some Runequest and Warhammer are. To some, none of these are.
I guess my conclusion at this point (and I'm still flexible/undecided...this is just my current working theory) is that, like the ship, it is a matter of degree. The more something is changed, and the more the original is copied the more blurry its identity becomes.
That said, would it be fair to say that 2nd edition D&D is "more" D&D than 3rd and that 3rd is "more" D&D than 4th?
And if so, would it also be fair to say that OSRIC or Castles and Crusades (or another retroclone) is "more" D&D than either 3rd or 4th?
What is D&D?
Baby don't crit me. Don't crit me. No more.
Baby don't crit me. Don't crit me. No more.
Aberzanzorax
Hero
Agreed.
How many tropes is important, as well as which ones. For me, too many of the tropes that were personally important were eliminated. I find those same tropes in different settings and systems though. So in that sense, I think it actually makes other supposedly "non-D&D" settings and systems more "D&D-ish" to me than the official D&D of 4e.
I think that's the hardest part for me to get around. The name, the identity, and the factors that create them all are each individual components. It is the greatest sum that seems to matter in the end, but with each person's persective as to how much value to give each element (e.g. magic missile gets 10 points, but having an alqadim setting gets zero in terms of it being D&D--even though I'm not that in love with magic missile, and I LOVE Alqadim--that's how I'd weight them personally).
So, thinking back on those old threads I hated reading...I guess that when someone said "4e isn't D&D! *" and someone else said "yes, it is!*" they were both right. They were also both leaving off the last part of the sentence that they didn't recognize... "*to me".
ExploderWizard
Hero
Tinker Gnome
Adventurer
Well, to me if it has the name "Dungeons & Dragons" on it, then it is DnD. Even if it is a version that is not to my taste. All versions of the game are DnD.
All of the D20 variants(Like the Wheel of Time RPG) and Pathfinder are DnD offshoots. They are related, but they are not DnD.
I am not sure if I made much sense there.
All of the D20 variants(Like the Wheel of Time RPG) and Pathfinder are DnD offshoots. They are related, but they are not DnD.
I am not sure if I made much sense there.
Aberzanzorax
Hero
Question Galeros:
(please understand I'm using an extreme example for understanding, not for sarcasm)
If WotC sold D&D to me and I released 5th edition, which was the following:
1. It only has Dragons as pcs or monsters/npcs.
2. Each pc creates a dungeon in which to place its hoard.
3. It is player vs player (with some NPC dragons thrown in to spice things up).
4. It is called Dungeons and Dragons.
5. There is no other game called Dungeons and Dragons (apart from the prior editions)
Would my game be Dungeons and Dragons to you?
Edit: this makes me think of the line: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." but want to change it to "The name of a rose on any other flower would still be a rose." And now I'm not sure if I'm making any sense.
(please understand I'm using an extreme example for understanding, not for sarcasm)
If WotC sold D&D to me and I released 5th edition, which was the following:
1. It only has Dragons as pcs or monsters/npcs.
2. Each pc creates a dungeon in which to place its hoard.
3. It is player vs player (with some NPC dragons thrown in to spice things up).
4. It is called Dungeons and Dragons.
5. There is no other game called Dungeons and Dragons (apart from the prior editions)
Would my game be Dungeons and Dragons to you?
Edit: this makes me think of the line: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." but want to change it to "The name of a rose on any other flower would still be a rose." And now I'm not sure if I'm making any sense.
Similar Threads
