How Important is Magic to Dungeons and Dragons? - Third Edition vs Fourth Edition

[Ariosto]

Also, and this might be my own naivete speaking since I've only played two and a half editions of D&D, has D&D ever been grounded in reality, at all? It seems to me it hasn't.

My post on page 30 concerning the view of RuneQuest as "more realistic" than Dungeons & Dragons notes some of the elaborations in supplements to the original set. Note that where they treat matters that have real-world referents, such as combat, the aim consistently is to model those -- not to erect complex barriers between the game and common sense.

More significant, though, is the effect of fewer rules than have become par for the course in recent versions. There was neither a generic "page 42" system nor such a host of specific rules governing non-magical activities. Nor, for that matter, were magical effects so rigidly defined in board-game terms.

As a consequence, reality was often the only common grounding.

Moreover, that rules-lightness reflected a fundamental principle that was stated pretty explicitly: The referee is the final arbiter in all cases. Theoretically, one might say that the principle still applies to 4E. As a practical matter, the inertial mass of rules makes that less tenable.

It would be a simple matter to make an old-style D&D game as devoid of verisimilitude as 4E. It would be much more difficult to restore some sense of realism to 4E without negating most of the value in having the voluminous rule books in the first place. I reckon it would probably be less work to design a whole new game from scratch!

 

[Mad Mac]

It would be a simple matter to make OD&D (or even AD&D) as devoid of verisimilitude as 4E. It would be much more difficult to restore some sense of realism to 4E without negating most of the value in having the voluminous rule books in the first place. I reckon it would probably be less work to design a whole new game from scratch!

As someone who did play older editions, I'm having an awfully hard time using realism and D&D in the same sentance.

I mean, lots of pole arms trivia, yes, but realism, not so much.

 

[Ariosto]

Well, that was your choice as to how to play it -- an excellent freedom, in my opinion! There was no binding set of rules imposing realism upon you any more than surrealism. The difference with 4E is that it is actively anti-realistic.

 

[RefinedBean]

I reckon it would probably be less work to design a whole new game from scratch!

You can say that again!

Still though, with the whole verisimilitude thing...verisimilitude is subjective, right? So until we can find an objective way of measuring it, saying that 4E (or ANY system) is devoid of the v-word can only be a matter of opinion.

I think it's a strength of the D&D brand that it has so many different editions under its belt, and each edition can provide either the exact same experience, or a completely different one. I mainly play 4E, but there are a few things that I'd go back to 3E for.

 

[Mallus]

The difference with 4E is that it is actively anti-realistic.

Near the beginning of the 1e PHB (the edition I started with, BTW), EGG described D&D as 'swords and sorcery'. That is, he described in terms of a literary sub-genre. You may consider 4e anti-realistic, but it sure seems to produce an experience consistent with a swords and sorcery story when my group plays it (albeit surreal and metafictional one, but S&S-like nonetheless).

 

[Kask]

The difference with 4E is that it is actively anti-realistic.

That's where the "board game" feel comes from.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Note that where they treat matters that have real-world referents, such as combat, the aim consistently is to model those -- not to erect complex barriers between the game and common sense.

One of the aims. In its core concepts - classes, levels, hit points - D&D has always heavily favoured playability over realism.

"Of the two approaches to hobby games today, one is best defined as the realism-simulation school and the other as the game school. AD&D is assuredly an adherent of the latter school. It does not stress any realism... It does little to attempt to simulate anything either." - Gary Gygax 1e AD&D DMG page 9

 

[Doug McCrae]

And sometimes D&D is just plain bizarre. Wtf was the deal with alignment languages?

 

[Doug McCrae]

That's where the "board game" feel comes from.

Eh, hit points and armor class have kind of a civil war era naval wargame feel don't you think?

 

[rounser]

It does little to attempt to simulate anything either.

And now we don't even have much of that "little attempt". I see you trying to imply something along the lines of "it was always this abstract", but no, it wasn't.