D&D 5E Has D&D spoiled you on other RPGs?

[Philip Benz]

We played D&D for ages, but were so disppointed when AD&D came out. "What sellouts!" were the kindest comments flung in TSR's general direction back then.
Fast forward to around 2004 when, after sinking hours into Neverwinter Nights (a DD3 spinoff VRPG) I finally tracked down some players here in central France and we started playing DD3.5, later transitioned to PF1 and then PF2 4 years ago.

For me, PF2 is "the other D&D". I mean, conceptually, it's the same game. It just relies on a different ruleset.

But regardless of which ruleset one uses, Jahydin summarized my feelings precisely: "Without an entertaining DM with an intriguing story, the game itself is terrible."

You can say that about every RPG ever published. It all comes down to the DM and his campaign. Full stop.

 

[payn]

We played D&D for ages, but were so disppointed when AD&D came out. "What sellouts!" were the kindest comments flung in TSR's general direction back then.
Fast forward to around 2004 when, after sinking hours into Neverwinter Nights (a DD3 spinoff VRPG) I finally tracked down some players here in central France and we started playing DD3.5, later transitioned to PF1 and then PF2 4 years ago.

For me, PF2 is "the other D&D". I mean, conceptually, it's the same game. It just relies on a different ruleset.

But regardless of which ruleset one uses, Jahydin summarized my feelings precisely: "Without an entertaining DM with an intriguing story, the game itself is terrible."

You can say that about every RPG ever published. It all comes down to the DM and his campaign. Full stop.

I hear you about entertaining GMs, and imma let you finish, but the producers really ought to make their books encourage this and make it easy.

 

[Philip Benz]

I hear you about entertaining GMs, and imma let you finish, but the producers really ought to make their books encourage this and make it easy.

Regardless of how clever a system you have, if the DM is lackluster, the game isn't going to rise to any noticeable heights. Sure, on the other end you could have a group of players who are so creative and out-of-the-box wonderful that they can carry the dead weight if an uninspiring DM, but at the end of the day, I feel it's the DM who makes or breaks the game.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I hear you about entertaining GMs, and imma let you finish, but the producers really ought to make their books encourage this and make it easy.

And also not grind entertaining DMs to dust by making them be designers.

 

[payn]

And also not grind entertaining DMs to dust by making them be designers.

I dont mind being a designer myself. Time honored tradition with D&D.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I dont mind being a designer myself. Time honored tradition with D&D.

You and I had a choice.

 

[payn]

Regardless of how clever a system you have, if the DM is lackluster, the game isn't going to rise to any noticeable heights. Sure, on the other end you could have a group of players who are so creative and out-of-the-box wonderful that they can carry the dead weight if an uninspiring DM, but at the end of the day, I feel it's the DM who makes or breaks the game.

I agree, but I also think that game companies can make this easier to achieve for folks. A good solid DMG, a game mastery guide, and last but not least, well written adventures.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I do think there's sometimes a certain blase attitude about the difference between a game that gives good support to a GM, and one that doesn't. Yeah, a crap GM is going to be crap and a really good one can make gold out of dross, but I think there's a lot of room in the middle where the quality of the tool you're working with matters considerably.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

One thing a coworker once said that really stuck with me was that "a good employee will do good work regardless. But having a mature process and good documentation will lift everyone up."

I do think there's sometimes a certain blase attitude about the difference between a game that gives good support to a GM, and one that doesn't. Yeah, a crap GM is going to be crap and a really good one can make gold out of dross, but I think there's a lot of room in the middle where the quality of the tool you're working with matters considerably.

 

[Philip Benz]

Payn, Thomas and Ralif all made comments that make me want to talk about my favorite D&D-like ruleset, but this forum isn't the place.

I hear that there is an official playtest for the successor to DD5. I know a lot of folks here have been codifying a rules expansion to DD5, I wonder how much overlap there will be with the next official offering.

To cast another gaze back into the past, after playing the original D&D for years, and being POed about AD&D, our groups in Iowa moved on to Chivalry and Sorcery, and MERP (based on Arms Law). Those were good times, but I wouldn't go back to those games for all the tea in China. I recall longing for folks willing to play Call of Cthulhu, Stormbringer and Ars Magica, but it never happened, and I left the hobby for some 10 years or so. Today, there are still groups playing every one of those old RPGs, more power to 'em. I remain convinced that any game system can be molded into great games by the people running and playing them. I don't look down my nose on any game system, even if I have my personal preference these days.

Maybe a better question would be, what makes a robust game system? I would argue that it is a coherent and comprehensive way to manage skill actions and out-of-combat situations. Sure, combat is important and inevitable in RPGs, but combat is easy. What's hard is how to manage social interactions without devolving into pure DM fiat.