D&D 5E How freely can a setting mess with core D&D mechanics?

[Tony Vargas]

Yes, you can homebrew entire systems - but at some point you're not actually playing D&D.

Sure, as soon as it stops sucking, or starts feeling like its sometime after 1989, for instance...

... but seriously, D&D at it's most authentic & genuine was also D&D at it's most varied from DM to DM, that's something 5e reaches for with its maxims of DM Empowerment, Rulings not Rules and being a starting point for us to make our best games.

The core resolution mechanic - roll a d20, add a number, and compare it to a target number - is what makes it D&D.

That's literally d20, an OK open-source core system with a 20 year history, less than half that of D&D, of which it is, well, derivative. Ok, from which it was derived.

For the 26 years previous to d20, D&D used multiple resolution systems. Not just d20 to a DC and d20 under a target, you had d6 checks, several d% mechanics, and just whatever arbitrary dice (or other) mechanics the DM or author of a module came up with.

 

[Zardnaar]

As long as it makes sense go wild as long as it's using the core mechanics whatever they may be.
If you rewrite the races, classes, way magic works etc so be it. 6 attributes, class based a few other bits and pieces need to be there IMHO.

 

[Li Shenron]

Have you ever played in a setting where the rules of reality weren't quite the same as the default of D&D (or of whatever ruleset you were playing)?

That is pretty much the reason for playing a planar adventure.

 

[RangerWickett]

Sure, but if you opened up the Eberron setting book, and one chapter said, "In Eberron, when you die, you respawn at the nearest Dragonmarked guildhouse," would that be a bridge too far for your interest in playing the game?

I'm trying to figure out how many gamers want 'standard' D&D and how many are up for trying weird gonzo s***.

 

[Azzy]

Sure, but if you opened up the Eberron setting book, and one chapter said, "In Eberron, when you die, you respawn at the nearest Dragonmarked guildhouse," would that be a bridge too far for your interest in playing the game?

That would work if you want to do the "people from reality trapped in an MMO" trope, and be very appropriate and fun.

 

[dave2008]

Imho D&D must have classes, at least 6 ability scores and must be bogged down with too much magic, other than that change whatever you like

I disagree with the bold part, we play a very low magic version of D&D and it feels like D&D to us.

 

[R_J_K75]

I'm trying to figure out how many gamers want 'standard' D&D and how many are up for trying weird gonzo s***.

As far as 5E goes Id be willing to run or play any setting as long as the change to the core mechanics of the phb, dmg and mm were minimal at best. Once those change drastically, Im not sure at this point Id be willing to learn a whole new sub-set of mechanics on top of the 3 core books. As much as I liked alot of the 2e settings like Darksun, Planescape & Spelljammer, there was a bit of a learning curve to them.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sure, but if you opened up the Eberron setting book, and one chapter said, "In Eberron, when you die, you respawn at the nearest Dragonmarked guildhouse," would that be a bridge too far for your interest in playing the game?

I'm trying to figure out how many gamers want 'standard' D&D and how many are up for trying weird gonzo s***.

That would be fine if there was a decent in game explaination.

If that guildhouse had the method of creating clones for example.

Not really my cup of tea but could work.

 

[Tonguez]

I disagree with the bold part, we play a very low magic version of D&D and it feels like D&D to us.

Yeah that bit was a little tongue in cheek, or maybe on the nose, depending on how you see it

 

[Ath-kethin]

If there's one thing I've learned from similar discusions on Twitter, it's that many people have an extremely narrow view of what D&D can possibly be, and get really worked up when you suggest D&D can be anything else. Even when the core books specifically encourage tinkering, and there are a myriad of off-the-wall settings (such as Spelljammer, Masque of the Red Death, and Hollow World, among others) published in official books that clearly say "D&D" at the top. Or the argument that homebrew content "isn't" D&D, when D&D has literally relied upon it for decades, and WotC (and before that, TSR) published literally reams of it.

To me one of the advantages of D&D is that you can do anything with it. I've run games set in Ysgard. I've run space-fantasy games. I've run games based off of Star Wars, where we adapted the ranger class to be Jedi knights. I've run intense court-intrigue games that almost never had combat. I've played in horror games where the players were twisting in their seats due to the suspense. These are all situations many will argue are "not possible" in D&D and then argue that they are "not D&D" when they work.

For me, tinker away. Add to it, subtract from it. Blow it all up. 50 years of development has left few stones unturned, and a remarkably resilient concept that can take whatever you throw at it.