Honestly, if WoTC didn't create it would 4e be D&D?

[Delta]

We're talking about some pretty big changes, after all. No more THAC0. No more racial level limits. No more restrictions on what races can play what classes. Humans gaining the ability to multiclass just like other races. The elimination of old saving throws (Rod, Staff, or Wand, etc) in lieu of Fort, Ref, Will. Skill Points. Feats. And so on.

Some of us call those very small changes indeed. For example, it completely mystifies me why some people call THACO a big change.

Is "roll d20 and get at least 10" any different than "roll d20+5 and get at least 15"? Mathematically and probabilistically, they're absolutely the same thing.

I had "attack bonus" notation scribbled in the margins of my 1E DMG a decade before 3E. At no point did I think I was playing a different game.

Compared to wiping out hit dice, attack progression, spell system, classes and race that have been constant (and often literally copy-and-pasted) throughout OD&D, 1E, 2E, and 3E, the new edition doesn't remotely look like the same mechanical game system.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

By the majority? Probably not. By me? Most definitely.

Just like I say that Game of Thrones D20 is better than core 3.5.

Just like I say that True20 is better than core 3.5.

Just like I say that M&M is better than core 3.5.

Just like... well, you get the picture. There are a lot of better games out there, in my opinion, many of them based on the OGL, but heavily modified.

D&D is not strongly linked with good rules (though being the most successful game helps in trying to get good game designers.)
The rules are the work of the designers and developers creating each edition, and quality is not implied by D&D. Unless someone says AD&D stopped being D&D once D&D 3E came around and improved the quality of the rules framework.

D&D is not only the mechanics. If it was, OD&D and D&D 3E cannot be D&D.
D&D is not only the game world. If it was, then Forgotten Realms, Fading Suns and Al Quadim could not be all D&D.

 

[Clavis]

To the average person, playing a RPG is "playing D&D". People buy it because of its name. I've said it before, WOTC could have introduced a new race of intelligent dinner plates in the PHB and the book would still sell. They could have simply re-packaged any of the pre-3rd edition rules, and the sales would be the same. The fact that 4th Edition's sales have been so good do early just proves my point. All of those sales cannot be from people who already played the game and made an informed decision. They can only be as a result of the incredibly strong branding of the D&D name.

Perhaps I'm too cynical, but I suspect that there are a lot of people who love the 4th Edition rules simply because they are the current rules of the game branded D&D. As soon as 5th Edition comes out, those same people will trash 4th Edition for its glaring and obvious problems. Just like they've done with 3rd Edition. Remember, 3rd edition was once trumpeted on these boards as the end-all-be-all of D&D by many of the same people who are now the most rabid 4th Edition fans.

 

[Imaro]

I'm going to have to agree with those who claim it would not. IMHO, D&D has always been behind the curve when it comes to mechanics and innovation. Things lauded as revolutionary for D&D are usually things that have been done in other systems way before they were finally incorporated into D&D. I mean skill systems have been around almost as long as D&D, yet when 3e introduces a skill system it's great leaps and bounds. Minions are something tons of games have been doing, yet it's a milestone and revolutionary change for D&D.

Maybe I'm jaded from having been exposed to numerous systems, but I don't think 4e is a great game compared to what is out there. I think it's a fun game that forms the basis (mostly) of what most casual roleplayers have come to associate with fantasy roleplaying games, but I wouldn't call it great. I think it's early establishment in the genre, name recognition because of this and brand loyalty are it's biggest draws. If 4e had any other name but D&D on it, I think it would have been heralded as a fun, tactical roleplaying game that uses the d20 system and draws inspiration from alot of things already on the d20 market but not revolutionary in the slightest.

 

[SmilingPiePlate]

What makes DnD DnD?

Honest question.

Most of my immediate gaming circle has pretty soundly rejected the new edition on the basis that "It's not DnD." They then name a few changes that make the game not DnD. Lack of Vancian magic, particular classes not in the core book, alignment changing, and various other things.

I'm sympathetic to that point of view, I guess. But just because a trope is 30 years old doesn't make it good game design. While they hold things like Vancian magic, the fighter/wizard power curve switcharoo, alignment, and the like as features, I view a lot of DnD's sacred cows as drawbacks and flaws. To me, a lot of the things that cause some older gamers to scoff at 4e and declare it "not DnD" are the things that most interest me about the system.

I got into DnD in 3e, played it for a bit, and then moved on to other systems that better delivered the kind of RPG I wanted to play. If it hadn't been for this particular group of people who run some kickass games, I probably would not have started playing DnD again at all. The games they run are fun, and they stick to DnD so that's what I play with them, but I don't really like 3.x that much.

So I'm not sure if I fit into the OP, because there is a good chance I wouldn't have cared about 4e at all had my games with this group not kept DnD on my radar enough to learn about 4e and decide that it sounds more like my kind of game than 3e does.

 

[Najo]

I think the OP is partially right. Brand loyalty is what is getting 4e noticed and talked about. But, I don't think it is just the brand loyalty that is making people except it.

The current edition is evolved from the previous versions of the game. In each edition, they are streamlining rules by keeping what is working and removing what is getting in the way of how the designers see the player's and DM's experience. The key word here is evolved. The game designers are making decisions that they feel improve the game.

4e has many of the previous qualities of 3.5, 3.0, 2nd + skills & powers, 2nd, AD&D, D&D etc. Alot of the official monsters and feel is there. The game uses D20's in the same way previous versions (mostly) did. The classes are there and feel like their previous edition versions. You still have the six attriblutes with a bonus. You still have hit points based on constitution. Saving throws are now defenses, but they work better than they did in any previous version. Alot of the lore of the game is still in there, twisted around and made more acccesible for the DM and players (at least the way I see it). So, all of those elements that make D&D are still very spot on.

Then, you take the other elements. WOTC's support of the game with supplements and modules. The quality level of the products. The building onto the official lore. The promised return of the campaign settings each year and supported through the online Dragon and Dungeon magazines. All of these things honestly make this version of D&D closer to 2nd edition then 3.x ever was.

I think that brand loyalty is part of the picture. But so is official support and use of D&D's IP, the track recorded of consistent quality and the amount of releases WOTC can produce to support D&D's fan base and marketing network WOTC has to keep player's connected and informed about those products adds up to alot more reasons for sticking with 4e than just it's brand name. All of those things are D&D, and the reason D&D didn't die when TSR messed it up and WOTC ressurected it.

 

[Mercule]

Would 3E be Dungeons & Dragons if it didn't have the name on the cover? I find this argument somewhat bemusing, as the people who make the claim say it as if 3E is D&D while 4E isn't. Because it eliminated some sacred cows? 3E eliminated a ton of sacred cows, too. Why aren't those sacred cows considered defining characteristics of what D&D is, while the sacred cows which 4E chucked are? Who gets to decide which cows are truly sacred?

We're talking about some pretty big changes, after all. No more THAC0. No more racial level limits. No more restrictions on what races can play what classes. Humans gaining the ability to multiclass just like other races. The elimination of old saving throws (Rod, Staff, or Wand, etc) in lieu of Fort, Ref, Will. Skill Points. Feats. And so on.

So 4E isn't D&D because it's different from 3E? Well, is 3E D&D?

This. When 3e came out, I wasn't exactly sure it was D&D. Sometimes, I'm still not sure.

Other than the lack of true "Vancian" slots for casters, 4e seems to be as much D&D as 3e was. In some ways, it's more D&D than 3e was, what with more rigid archetype choice at 1st level, simplified stat blocks for monsters, and a rule set that focuses almost exclusively on combat.

IMO, 4e is the fix to 1e/2e that 3e should have been. Most of my complaints about the game have been related to hating spell slots and wanting a few tricks to customize your character and grant additional choices in combat.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Hm? if Dungeons & Dragons was not on the cover, yet it still looked and felt as good as it does in play. I would have definately bought a copy. I would probably shelf my 3.5 stuff for a while and give this new game a good run, based soley on the fact that it's a realy good game.

However, one key factor kicks in for me. NEW MATERIAL. If someone else made 4E D&D, and made the support promices that wizards is making, (And came through with them) I would be impressed for sure.

Add on to this the fact that wizards now has stopped supporting 3.x in any way. In this theoretical idea wizards would still be supporting 3.5 so in the end I would stick with 3.5 based on loyalty and support, but still play the new game for fun!

Seeing as how it IS D&D, it has the support, and 3.5 no longer does, I'm done with 3.5 however will keep the books for flavour and reference.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

Well, I probably wouldn't be aware of it if it wasn't called D&D.

But I wasn't playing 3e anymore so if I met 4e under another name, I'd be playing it and think 'This is what D&D should be! This is so much fun.'

 

[thatdarnedbob]

It wouldn't have been D&D because D&D is determined by the label on the cover. Similarly, 3rd edition would not have been D&D if it were not published by the current rights holder for the D&D trademark, and neither would 2nd edition, or AD&D for that matter.