D&D General If D&D were created today, what would it look like?

[Ralif Redhammer]

I think so. I still find it charming. Plus, they're short episodes, and easy to commit to (or to, you know, mainline them like popcorn if that's a person's preference). Which reminds me, I need to get to watching the new releases.

Not to entirely derail the thread, but as someone who hasn't seen Adventure Time, is it still worth watching?

Another question to ponder is what events would've lead to D&D not happening in 1974. In the grand scheme of things, a delay of some 50 years isn't that big of a deal, but it still has repercussions. One could imagine a world without the Ace/Lancer Conan paperbacks, or where wargames never really took off and remained niche and if Arneson and Gygax never connected. Or if videogame technology advanced faster and sooner, people might have been drawn to that instead and we'd be talking about the classic NES game, Dungeons & Dragons..

 

[Vaalingrade]

If it were invented today, D&D would be a ripoff of whatever other fantasy wargame made the leap to playing as individual characters.

This was not an impossible evolution of gaming. It was, in fact, inevitable.

This difference would be whatever took its place likely would not have the same unique blend of Vance, Moorcook and Anderson that D&D shackled and brainboxed to Tolkien. It would be other fantasy works that would have had their concepts adapted to gameplay.

Later groups would still have ruined it by adding Lovecraft though. That too was inevitable.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm trying to envision a world where the TRPG genre doesn't exist but everything else is basically the same. It ain't easy, but... say TRPGs were never invented, but their descendants (CRPGs, MMOs, CCGs, etc.) somehow arose from other origins and developed along similar lines to the real world; and also that the fantasy genre got a boost from another source to replace the one D&D gave it.

This is how I would approach the initial question.

• No Vancian casting: "Who's Vance?"
• No Cleric, but likely a cloth-based Priest class focusing on support
• Likely playable Orcs and/or Goblins in core
• No Halflings. A small race? Sure, but likely not something so obviously a derivative of Tolkien. Outside of D&D and fantasy heartbreakers, halflings (or similar ilk apart from gnomes) really show up.
• No Alignment
• No Six Attributes: I don't think this would be the set designers would come up with
• I highly doubt that we would get classes with awkward names like the "magic-user" and "fighting man."
• Possibly less dungeon-delving action and more character-driven play
• I'm not sure if Game of Thrones would be that much of an influence given how the last season soured its legacy and killed a lot popularity

 

[jmartkdr2]

A lot of people are noting that without DnD we would not have gotten a lot of the early computer rpgs that were so foundational to that medium, but I think there's another source that might have led to a similar idea: Choose-your-own-adventure books. Choose Your Own Adventure - Wikipedia

The first book in the genre was written in 1970 (and came out in 1976), so it's likely to have happened without DnD (there's no mention of rpg's in the origin story). And this genre has the same big advantage as turn-based rpgs had in early video game development: it's very easy to code.

(Also, they would have taken off in Japan for much the same reason: it takes a lot less memory to store text as kanji than it does using the Latin alphabet, for the same amount of words.)

If a well-written one had appeared early in the systems, a lot of imitators would have followed, since even a very novice coder could expect to finish a product. And as people iterated on the idea, it probably wouldn't be long before people make the decision trees a little more complex - they might randomize certain outcomes, add inventory which changes available choices, and so on (cf the Lone Wolf series of gamebooks). They might even switch to minigames as deciders if you succeed or fail at a task.

And, of course, visuals. Pictures (at least) for every 'page', maybe animations as tech improves.

This could lead to something very similar to the crpgs we got in the 80's, (but a bit more story-game-focused) with further progress from there. The biggest differences would be: it's unlikely that turn-based combat would be the go-to for resolving conflicts with other characters, and the focus on progression (ie leveling up) would be a lot softer, making that concept a lot less pervasive than it is real video games. But someone would have realized people like it when their character gets stronger, so that would have come eventually.

 

[Bedrockgames]

This is a hard one because D&D influenced so many things that now, would be a source of inspiration if D&D were to be invented.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Interesting. I remember as a kid every once in awhile GI Joe, Marvel or what have you would come with a record or cassette which usually got broken or lost sooner than later. Surprised to hear D&D didnt reach Japan until 1985, but sounds like Sword World is going strong still.

Apparently the most popular RPG in Japan is actually Call of Cthulhu, which I found surprising.

Horror RPG Call of Cthulhu is bigger than D&D in Japan

The classic RPG has seen its popularity explode in the last decade thanks to web series and anime.

www.dicebreaker.com

 

[Faolyn]

If there are no alignments in AUD&D, then that would be massive change to the standard D&D cosmology: if there are outer planes, they'd be a lot different than there are now. Doubly so if they didn't have the current style of gods. There might be realms of the dead, or each god/pantheon might have their own domain--or it might be that gods can sometimes be found on the "Prime" as a matter of course. But there wouldn't be the Great Wheel.

I think that they might get rid of the stats and make the whole thing skill-based. Which means that Basic AUD&D could suffer from extreme skill bloat.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If it were invented today, D&D would be a ripoff of whatever other fantasy wargame made the leap to playing as individual characters.

This was not an impossible evolution of gaming. It was, in fact, inevitable.

This difference would be whatever took its place likely would not have the same unique blend of Vance, Moorcook and Anderson that D&D shackled and brainboxed to Tolkien. It would be other fantasy works that would have had their concepts adapted to gameplay.

Later groups would still have ruined it by adding Lovecraft though. That too was inevitable.

I agree that it's inevitable that fantasy wargames would have made the leap to individual characters (as scales went down and model sizes went up).

But that's not all D&D is. It's not just like, tactical, you also have the actual role-playing element. And that's definitely not inevitable. Nor is the idea of it being, as we'd say now, "PvE". It's very likely that most/all of the "individual character" wargames (which would probably have a name), would be primarily PvP, and not feature role-playing any more than the average game of Warhammer 40K does.

There'd be no roleplaying, no real exploration, no downtime, none of the "living in the world" that RPGs have. Just extremely complicated rules allowing two or more characters to get into a fight with each other.

Sure, someone would create a "horde mode" where you fight a bunch of monsters that are arriving, but even that's not remotely the same thing.

So I think you're really overestimating the inevitability. Without specific people wanting specific things, the RP element, the living in the world, just doesn't happen. I'm assuming those people basically exist for the 2020 version.

Also re: Lovecraft, I think we might actually have been past Lovecraft by this point. Harry Potter would almost certainly be ruining things to some extent though.

 

[Tonguez]

I agree that it's inevitable that fantasy wargames would have made the leap to individual characters (as scales went down and model sizes went up).

But that's not all D&D is. It's not just like, tactical, you also have the actual role-playing element. And that's definitely not inevitable. Nor is the idea of it being, as we'd say now, "PvE". It's very likely that most/all of the "individual character" wargames (which would probably have a name), would be primarily PvP, and not feature role-playing any more than the average game of Warhammer 40K does.

There'd be no roleplaying, no real exploration, no downtime, none of the "living in the world" that RPGs have. Just extremely complicated rules allowing two or more characters to get into a fight with each other.

Sure, someone would create a "horde mode" where you fight a bunch of monsters that are arriving, but even that's not remotely the same thing.

So I think you're really overestimating the inevitability. Without specific people wanting specific things, the RP element, the living in the world, just doesn't happen. I'm assuming those people basically exist for the 2020 version.

Also re: Lovecraft, I think we might actually have been past Lovecraft by this point. Harry Potter would almost certainly be ruining things to some extent though.

Even inside wargaming there are skirmish focussed games that focus on Plot-based serials and Field Objectives (eg locate the Mcguffin) and have a system for Character progression. Those rules could easily develop into full RPGs

 

[Vaalingrade]

I agree that it's inevitable that fantasy wargames would have made the leap to individual characters (as scales went down and model sizes went up).

But that's not all D&D is. It's not just like, tactical, you also have the actual role-playing element. And that's definitely not inevitable. Nor is the idea of it being, as we'd say now, "PvE". It's very likely that most/all of the "individual character" wargames (which would probably have a name), would be primarily PvP, and not feature role-playing any more than the average game of Warhammer 40K does.

There'd be no roleplaying, no real exploration, no downtime, none of the "living in the world" that RPGs have. Just extremely complicated rules allowing two or more characters to get into a fight with each other.

You think? Because I feel like the moment units become single characters, the roleplaying seed would be planted. Because look at kids playing with Barbies and GI Joes? Sometimes the toy is their friend, but often, they start telling stories with the toy as a character. That's the long and short of what we do to a given intensity of the actual storytelling.

I feel like that's the natural result of individualized minis play. If you look at RTS games with 'heroes' you see the same behavior outside of competitive play.