How Much of D&D is the Rules?

[Salamandyr]

Used to be 0%, but the way that roleplaying games have proliferated, I'd say that D&D as opposed to "roleplaying" has to be defined at least somewhat by the rules...so let me see, here's how I see how important rules were to each "edition".

0ed...0%
1ed/BECMI...25%
2ed...50%
3ed...70%
3.5ed...80%
4ed...100%

Next...hopefully 50%

 

[Hussar]

I went with the 75% option. After all, if the rules don't matter, why did so many people step up to tell me that 3e and then 4e wasn't really D&D? And, conversely, having had multiple conversations with DM's on these boards who have tome sized packets of house rules, I would say that they aren't really playing D&D anymore, but rather some hybrid game based on whatever ruleset they used as a baseline.

And, for me anyway, sitting down to play Warhammer, or GURPS Fantasy, or some indie fantasy heartbreaker or D&D, I would say the experiences do vary, and how people play when playing those different games vary pretty widely as well. My experiences with GURPS Fantasy and way, way back when, Chivalry and Sorcery were nothing like my D&D experiences, even though the people I was playing with were generally the same.

So, yeah, mechanics matter. As Umbran said above, it's pretty difficult to draw a line as to where mechanics end. The class system informs play to a large degree, for example. I play a paladin differently than a rogue. How much of that is mechanical and how much of that is just me? I don't know, but, my gut says about 70% mechanics.

 

[Li Shenron]

Mostly indipendent.

Some rules made the backbone of D&D experience: class-based system, d20 attacks versus AC, xp and levelling up, saving throws, vancian spellcasting, auto success/failure and critical hits... But even these basic rules have changed across editions. The rest is very temporary.

 

[Warbringer]

How in the hell is this coming in at a weighted response of just 50% when we spend 100% time finding something to argue over "that isn't D&D"?

So which rules define D&D in that 50%

1. Hit points and hit dice
2. AC
3. Classes
4. Vancian wizards
5. d20 to hit
6. Levels...

Ad of course Longswords

 

[steenan]

If we're asking what makes D&D D&D, as opposed to a different fantasy game, it's about 75% rules and 25% monsters for me.

Rules:
Combat focus (over 70% of rules are about combat or mainly useful in combat).
HPs (and that nobody agrees on what they represent) and no lasting injuries.
Rolling d20 for attack and then different dice for damage.
Classes and levels.
Rapid growth in power.
Assumption that PCs nearly always win and that defeat usually ends in death (no "fail forward", no mechanical support for painful but nonlethal consequences).
and some more

Monsters:
Illithids, beholders, gnolls, kobolds, owlbears and color-coded dragons.


In my experience, settings (with a single exception of Planescape) and stories don't really affect the "D&D feel".
They are, in most cases, generic and trivial to translate to other fantasy games with nearly no fluff changes.
The ones that are not generic are really deconstructions - taking D&D rules and exploring what would happen if a world really worked this way. Which is very different from any D&D settings.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I went with the 75% option. After all, if the rules don't matter, why did so many people step up to tell me that 3e and then 4e wasn't really D&D?

Well, partially because of rules, but there are other things (fluff, marketing, etc.). One might just as easily turn it around and ask, if rules do matter, why are so many people willing to continue playing D&D through edition transitions, sometimes even insisting that it hasn't really changed?

And, conversely, having had multiple conversations with DM's on these boards who have tome sized packets of house rules, I would say that they aren't really playing D&D anymore, but rather some hybrid game based on whatever ruleset they used as a baseline.

I'd say anyone who does that is simply playing their D&D with their rules, rather than the mass-produced D&D with standardized rules. Still well within the spirit of the game.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Hard to answer.

D&D is for me a specific type of a RPG--hack and slash, gonzo blender fantasy, adventuring for gold and fame--infused with certain tropes and monsters--dragons, goblins, mindflayers, beholders, etc.--and following some universal rule constructs--d20s are involved in action resolution, level advancement, roll for damage, hit points, pre-described spells with an academic feel.

The details of the mechanics matter a lot less to me for it to be D&D than a lot of other people--it's definitely a factor, but more in the general framework of the rules (race + class + levels) rather than in any details of abilities or exact action resolution.

Dungeon World, for instance, feels solidly D&D to me (as read, I haven't played it) except it's missing that crucial d20. If I'm not rolling a d20 somewhere, it doesn't properly feel like D&D to me.

I really have no idea how to put that into a percentage number.

 

[Grogg of the North]

The rules are only as important as you want them to be. My take on the rules has always been:

"Players want to do something out of the box or no one is sure how to resolve something? Eh, just wing it and worry about it later."

As long as everyone is having fun at the table, don't worry about it too much.

 

[Hussar]

Hard to answer.

D&D is for me a specific type of a RPG--hack and slash, gonzo blender fantasy, adventuring for gold and fame--infused with certain tropes and monsters--dragons, goblins, mindflayers, beholders, etc.--and following some universal rule constructs--d20s are involved in action resolution, level advancement, roll for damage, hit points, pre-described spells with an academic feel.

The details of the mechanics matter a lot less to me for it to be D&D than a lot of other people--it's definitely a factor, but more in the general framework of the rules (race + class + levels) rather than in any details of abilities or exact action resolution.

Dungeon World, for instance, feels solidly D&D to me (as read, I haven't played it) except it's missing that crucial d20. If I'm not rolling a d20 somewhere, it doesn't properly feel like D&D to me.

I really have no idea how to put that into a percentage number.

And I think this is what I was trying to get at. If you scrapped the d20 and went with a 2d6 system, it would dramatically change how the game plays. Remove the class system and most people wouldn't call the game D&D anymore. So on and so forth.

Mechanics matter. They are very important. Playing The Keep on the Borderlands with FATE or Dread would be a very different experience than playing it with any system of D&D. You could have the same group, same GM, same adventure, but change the system and that's a very different experience.

 

[ImperatorK]

Depends.