Has D&D become too...D&Dish?

[Hussar]

I think that you guys take a lot for granted about D&D's implied setting (everyone does, to the point of throwing tomatoes at it whilst ignoring all the work it does for them), and are into metagaming that I don't dig...but hey, bad wrong fun and all that.

Now this I am completely confused about.

Campaign design is 100% metagaming. There is no game before the campaign. Unless you have some method to organically grow a campaign from a seed where the campaign designs itself (something that would be extremely cool) there is no other way to design. The very act of designing is metagaming, pure and simple.

Also, how is exploring the effects of mechanical aspects on a system wrong? Even as a thought experiment? To me, you can certainly handwave the obvious fallacies of genre - the popularity of various pseudo-medieval settings shows that - but, it is equally fine to actually take a look at what happens when you collapse those fallacies.

Once again, just because it isn't to taste doesn't make it bad. I don't like the idea of campaign settings that ignore certain things, but, that's just my taste. I certainly don't conflate that with any sort of objective value judgement.

 

[rounser]

Once again, just because it isn't to taste doesn't make it bad.

I think you misinterpreted my meaning on the bad wrong fun reference; it was "whatever floats your boat", not the opposite.

 

[Hussar]

Thinking about this a bit.

Looking back at older settings - Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance and the like, it would seem that Rounser's approach to campaign creation has been the rule. Of the older settings, only Mystara really took the existence of magic to heart, as well as Planescape and perhaps Spelljammer.

It has only been in the last few years that ensuring that the fluff matches the physics of the world as described by the mechanics. Ptolus, Eberron, and the low magic worlds like Thieve's World and Conan have all begun to really wed fluff to crunch.

Really, I think this is simply a maturation process in the genre. Twenty five years ago, we watched Star Wars and thought it was great. A few years ago, we had new Star Wars and it was generally panned. Why? Because consumers are an awful lot more particular now. We've had a steady diet of fantasy, good and bad, for the past few decades and we are much better armed to make discriminating choices.

Compair Narnia to Harry Potter for a second. In Narnia, the children enter a fantasy realm, but are always held separate from the magic. Things are given to them, but, they never see how it works. Harry Potter, OTOH, is right in the thick of things and is shown exactly how things work to the point where he can recreate it on his own. This is a serious shift in the genre away from Gandalf where magic is unknowable, to, well, magic as science - repeatable and predictable to some degree.

And, I don't think this is a bad thing. We've ignored the fallacies of the genre for decades, IMNSHO, it's time to roll up our sleeves and really make a functioning fantasy world.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Nice try, but Superman can't share his powers even if he wanted to. Letting people who have the money for them have access to magic items or having cities with magic streetlights does not a superman make.

If you assume the RAW, there is no way to allow people to create those street lamps without allowing them a whole host of other powers. "I ignore the thought experiment" is not an answer to the thought experiment.

Also, Superman can share his powers. He has done so recently in All Star Superman.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Actually you were talking about how, with technology now, we could use it to end all sorts of things and asked me to explain the difference. I never said these things would all happen for free. I said it was POSSIBLE to do X Y and Z with magic, which requires less actual work than the planning and actual labor of the modern world.

No I know that the reason everything isn't cured with magic or whatever is that people have their own agendas. However, all technology is not horded for the future. Telephones, cars, computers etc were all developed and produced and changed society as we know it. WHy couldn't the same happen with magic technology?

Obviously if you don't like that kind of thing you're not going to do it, but I think a lot of people read that Dragon article I mentioned and thought it was cool or already had ideas of that.

Having those ideas is fine; the idea that those ideas are somehow harder to poke holes in than worlds that do not use those ideas is not. IMHO, the "technology" involved in D&D is not the spells per se, but the casters, and you have no way to control them once they are created. If our telephones only did what they wanted to do when they thought it served their interests best, I think we'd have fewer telephones.

In other words, this is a change in style, not a "maturation".

RC

 

[rounser]

Really, I think this is simply a maturation process in the genre.

Whereas I think it's the game disappearing up it's own behind.

When this occurs in other realms such as music and literature, it seems to be a harbinger of decline - the genre eating it's own tail.

 

[shilsen]

Whereas I think it's the game disappearing up it's own behind.

When this occurs in other realms such as music and literature, it seems to be a harbinger of decline - the genre eating it's own tail.

Then it's a good thing that a lot of the aspects which make gaming are completely opposed to those of music and literature, isn't it?

 

[Tiew]

Thinking about this a bit.
Compair Narnia to Harry Potter for a second. In Narnia, the children enter a fantasy realm, but are always held separate from the magic. Things are given to them, but, they never see how it works. Harry Potter, OTOH, is right in the thick of things and is shown exactly how things work to the point where he can recreate it on his own. This is a serious shift in the genre away from Gandalf where magic is unknowable, to, well, magic as science - repeatable and predictable to some degree.

And, I don't think this is a bad thing. We've ignored the fallacies of the genre for decades, IMNSHO, it's time to roll up our sleeves and really make a functioning fantasy world.

I read the Chronicles of Narnia about 10 times when I was a kid, so take this with a grain of salt. While I love Harry Potter, I think it tends to fall appart compared to Narnia. I think Rowling just makes up whatever she thinks will be fun. While she does reconcile it and fit it together some it isn't very rigorous. With Harry Potter I have to remind myself not to ask too many questions while I'm reading it. With Narnia there is nothing to question since the magic is usually not controlled by humans.

A better comparision might be Jack Vance or Fred Saberhagen to Lewis and Tolkien. The thing I like about Vance and Saberhagen is they rigorously define the rules of magic in their worlds and then work out stories sticking to them. While I really enjoy this because I like it when stories "make sense" I also have to observe that these authors are not as popular. I think the less scientific styles of fantasy might fill some sort of of human need to wonder at things we don't understand. The more scientific are probably better models for games. I like both kinds of fantasy worlds for different reasons, but I definitely wouldn't say that Narnia or LotR style fantasy is somehow inferior.

 

[Hussar]

With Harry Potter I have to remind myself not to ask too many questions while I'm reading it. With Narnia there is nothing to question since the magic is usually not controlled by humans.

And that's precisely my point. DnD magic IS controlled by humans. Quite literally. It always has been as well. The players and the DM have always been able to control magic in the game.

To me it breaks suspension of disbelief to think that the PC's are THAT different from the mindset of NPC's. Yes, a 12th level wizard is going to think differently than a 1st level commoner. I do realize that, so please, no pedantry. However, I find it difficult to believe that a 12th level PC wizard has a vastly different approach to the world than a 12th level NPC wizard.

If you assume the RAW, there is no way to allow people to create those street lamps without allowing them a whole host of other powers. "I ignore the thought experiment" is not an answer to the thought experiment.

Also, Superman can share his powers. He has done so recently in All Star Superman.

But, there is a way to allow people to create the streetlamps and not over run the world. It's called the demographics system in the DMG. By those rules, about 95% of the population is NPC classes. Most of the rest are not true spell casters (I'm not counting rangers and paladins as spell casters) and the vast majority of all of them are 1-3rd level.

Again, assuming a fairly standard population distribution, you don't have to worry about wizards running amok charming people. There simply aren't enough of them to have such a huge impact with such short duration spells. However, the existence of permanent duration, low level spells should have an impact on the setting.

Or, to put it in a real world perspective. We allow people the capability to kill thousands every day. It's called military training. A single loaded F-18 could do massive damage to a city should the pilot choose to do so. Yet, we frequently allow such people to fly loaded airplanes within our own national airspace on training missions. And that's just a single example.

And, yes, I see it as a maturation to examine a genre rather than simply sweeping it under the carpet. At the beginning of DnD we had illogical dungeons with no ecology. The Keep on the Borderland, as much as I love this module, makes about as much sense as a rubber hammer. Groups of humanoids living together in peace and harmony despite the fact that they are all chaotic and hate each other. Thus, later adventures included nods towards an ecology (certainly not a truly realistic one, but a nod nonetheless), and a nod towards actually thinking about why these various creatures live together.

Compare KotB with Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil and its vast store rooms and the like. Or even the Slave Lords modules where it is explained why the Aspis are living where they are.

 

[rounser]

Then it's a good thing that a lot of the aspects which make gaming are completely opposed to those of music and literature, isn't it?

There are big differences between music and literature too, but a genre that starts eating itself is still one disappearing up it's own behind. D&D isn't an exception.