D&D General How has D&D changed over the decades?

[Remathilis]

D&D has become increasingly not medieval. Not that it was ever was historically accurate, but it has increasingly looked more and more like a Late Rennisance or even later. Firearms, rapiers, and far more technological advances. Enlightened government and economics. Dress that is far more modern than anything. Knights and kings and jesters are all MIA.

It's not necessarily a bad thing: I like Eberron and Ravenloft which are very not medieval, but the core game has really stopped feeling like the middle ages.

 

[LordEntrails]

How as the genre changed?

To me, the biggest change has been the expected 'relationship' between the DM and the players. OD&D started out really as a players vs the challenge setup by the DM. Now the game has evolved into a more, players create an adventure story in the setting provided by the DM.

This change is reflected in many many ways. Such as the awareness of railroading, save or die, player agency, etc.

Despite my comments to my players on a frequent basis that "perhaps tonight is when I finally get a TPK", that's not been the objective or even desirable in a long time. (Don't get me wrong, character death is real in our games, its just no longer an expected occurrence.) Last night the players took the adventure on a path I never expected, all because they drew inferences and conclusions I never thought of. No idea where the story will go now, but it's there story to tell (not mine). And I'm happy with that.

 

[payn]

Using movies (Not D&D brand specific but in feel)

Early D&D was like Red Sonja, Beastmaster, Conan, and especially, Conan the Destroyer.

Middle D&D more like Willow, lord of the rings, Dragonheart

Current D&D is like Your Highness, Wheel of Time, Game of Thrones, Anime stuff (im not familiar with)

Future D&D new hasbro movie and franchise?

My experience is that the power level and scope has slowly risen over the decades. Early on was a bunch of nobodies in a sword and sorcery gritty and dangerous world. That expanded into knights of the realm and more detailed settings and longer expectations of PC lives. Now is a drive to push the power level of each individual PC up, more tactical and frequent combats, detailed and intricate campaign arcs and stories.

 

[Minigiant]

D&D began to reabsorb the genre and media that broke off from it and changed.

What fantasy was changed and when the fans of new fantasy came to D&D, D&D had to change with match the different audience.

Less medieval. Less European. PCs were not typical of their race and class. More definition of higher levels. More exploration of the parts talked about but not visited or discussed.

Or in simple terms. The PCs and special monsters used to be exceptions to the normal world . Now what was exception is the norm. PCs are now exceptions to the exceptions. Before there were 10 paladins. Now there are 10 factions of 1,000 paladins, each with their own oaths.

 

[Yaarel]

In terms of setting, there seems to be a difference.

The 1e diehards that I played with, who taught me how to play D&D, value the DM (and the players) creating their own living setting from scratch, from diverse inspirations, including 4d hypercube math.

It seems to me, that original 1e ethic to create ones own universe whose only limitation is ones imagination, drifted in later editions to entire communities conforming to an "official" setting, with its "factual" cosmological assumptions.

 

[Yora]

I've recently been thinking about how contemporary D&D presentation really does nothing for me. It's still fantasy, but I don't really see any medieval elements in it anymore. I hate to use the term videogamey, as it's brushing over the great potential and achievements of videogames as a medium. But when I think of current D&D, I am getting images of the Playstation Final Fantasy games, DotA, or Kingdoms of Amalur. Garrish colors and lots of sparkles and laser beams.

 

[RuinousPowers]

2e was very alignment restrictive. Evil characters were highly discouraged, and the sourcebooks were filled with comments about "here's an evil class/race/item but it's for NPCs only". There was also a LOT of metaplot and assumptions of use in every product.

3e was much more of a toolbox, where it encouraged you to make things more your own.

 

[GuyBoy]

For me, the nature of Dungeons has changed. Early on, it was no accident that the word Dungeon was first in the game's title, but that seems to have receded somewhat, or at least changed considerably.
Campaigns were based around a multi-level dungeon with varying degrees of logical ecology (or not) and, in better games, one or more local settlements which allowed roleplay and some form of buy-in. These sometimes expanded to wilderness adventures, which were often more perilous. Worlds were usually homebrew.
"Dungeons" continue to exist but tend to be much smaller and thematic within a campaign.

Which is better? I loved every aspect of OD&D/1E as a teenager, and I love every aspect of 5E as a grandad. It's the Game.

 

[Ovinomancer]

To post this again, I think there's some useful thinking that addresses the OP:

Six Cultures of Play

A blog about roleplaying games and theory focused on Mythras, Dungeons and Dragons, and OSR games.

retiredadventurer.blogspot.com

 

[HammerMan]

I’m not talking rules or mechanics. I mean in terms of theme, tone, and aesthetic.

To you, what are the main ways D&D has evolved it’s tone, theme, genre, and aesthetics since you first started playing?

[Note — keep any rants about how you hate inclusivity or diversity out of this thread; not interesting in the slightest].

okay so flavor and theme and tone are hard to pin down... D&D has always been a set of legos that you could build your own theme flavor and tone with.

At it's base it hasn't changed. For 50 years it has been the game of make believe with loose rules that allowed us to get together and tell stories. It grew from a wargame to what it is now... but just cause the core is the same doesn't mean I can't see growth...

1e-3e is a game about wizards. its a game about powerful spellcasters and the parties that form around them (Gandalf is the easiest example but I am sure people can name dozens)

However I feel (IMO) that 3e moved from a list of sub systems that barely fit together (2e) and made a Combat Engine that then bolted on social and exploration subsystems to it. They paid lip service to being a corporative game, but it seemed to feel (IMO) to be more of a race or a VS challenge. 3e did not invent Min Maxing, or Optimizations... but it plus the internet brought it to new heights

4e leveled the playing field and made it a true everyone mattered equally, and I feel (IMO) it was the best at meeting the promise of D&D feeling like it (IMO) and giving weight to the mechanics of everyone.

5e tried to step back and move forward (and kind of tied itself in notes trying). Learning from all 9ish versions before it but still working off the d20 system.

my problem is (and it is something that lately feels like it is addressed more) is that it is a TTRPG that is basically a Combat Engine that then bolted on social and exploration subsystems to it. instead of (IMO) what it should be 3 equal engines with a link.

I will say every year I feel there is MORE toward RP Social Challenges and the like and LESS focus on the combat... every edition, every mid edition even every few months of splats.

Strixhaven and Wild Beyond the Witchlight both are evidence (IMO) that they are leaning into that more and more.