Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 409668" data-attributes="member: 1106">D&amp;D provides a tonne of flavour that acts as a baseline for you to subtract from and then build upon, rather than a flavourless skeleton where you have to build everything from the ground up.The flavour is of several kinds, according to me:1) Rules artifacts (such as hit points and formulaic magic).2) &quot;Default world&quot; assumptions (such as the existence of monsters to slay, dungeons to delve and magic items to loot).3) Specific rulescrunch (such as Fireball, Beholders and Vorpal Swords).4) Strongly defined archetypes (fantasy archetypes such as the classes and races, and custom archetypes such as the concept of &quot;adventurers&quot; and &quot;dungeoneering&quot;).The game can take warping in all of these departments and end up as anything from Athas to Malatra.&nbsp; The archetypes have proved remarkably adaptable to multiple settings (most cultures seem to have a sorceror or priest analogue), and even where there are no dungeons, the basic principle and appeal of combat and looting seems universal.Beyond that, the point where it becomes &quot;not D&amp;D&quot; depends on the individual.&nbsp; I would say that although you and Eric have cited rules artifacts primarily, I wouldn't overemphasise the pure crunch of D&amp;D as being the sole determinant of what the game is.&nbsp; Any old game could have abstract hit points and vancian magic, and still be nothing like D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 409668, member: 1106"] D&D provides a tonne of flavour that acts as a baseline for you to subtract from and then build upon, rather than a flavourless skeleton where you have to build everything from the ground up. The flavour is of several kinds, according to me: 1) Rules artifacts (such as hit points and formulaic magic). 2) "Default world" assumptions (such as the existence of monsters to slay, dungeons to delve and magic items to loot). 3) Specific rulescrunch (such as [i]Fireball[/i], Beholders and [i]Vorpal Swords[/i]). 4) Strongly defined archetypes (fantasy archetypes such as the classes and races, and custom archetypes such as the concept of "adventurers" and "dungeoneering"). The game can take warping in all of these departments and end up as anything from Athas to Malatra. The archetypes have proved remarkably adaptable to multiple settings (most cultures seem to have a sorceror or priest analogue), and even where there are no dungeons, the basic principle and appeal of combat and looting seems universal. Beyond that, the point where it becomes "not D&D" depends on the individual. I would say that although you and Eric have cited rules artifacts primarily, I wouldn't overemphasise the pure crunch of D&D as being the sole determinant of what the game is. Any old game could have abstract hit points and vancian magic, and still be nothing like D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification