Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8200214" data-attributes="member: 18">It isn't really minimal, no.What you're seeing is evolution. The initial influence of D&D on anime was obviously largely in the 1980s, when directly and indirectly it hit anime extremely and that influence only continued and increased into the 1990s (my namesake, for example - so as I you can guess this is something I know a thing or two about). And then there's the indirect influence - which is JRPGs, all, without exception, inspired directly or indirectly by either TT RPGs, or later, Western CRPGs inspired by TT RPGs.And the way magic and combat tends to work in an awful lot of anime derives from anime that derives from anime that derives from anime that's based on D&D (using anime as a cover-all term to include manga and light novels of course here, sorry).All? No. Absolutely not. A lot of anime is inspired by other stuff - Super Sentai, science-fiction, mythology (esp. Japanese but also other mythology including Western and Indian mythology), or just stories that don't even involve many fantastic elements. Even the mythology stuff often leans on distantly D&D-derived visuals and so on. You're not going to get Berserk if D&D never happened, either, though you would get Fist of the North Star. Studio Ghibli isn't going to be any different. Porco Rosso or whatever isn't going to change. Howl's Flying Castle though? Hmmmm. It might - the basic story would probably be the same, given it's from a British fantasy novel from 1984, but I would be willing to be that, without any TT RPGs or CRPGs, the visual design of the castle and so on would be somewhat different (the movie is from 2004).And again, yes, a lot of is quite different to D&D, even the fantasy stuff - but it's evolved. It wasn't as different 20+ years ago. Some of it was actually literally using D&D terms and so on back then. You have things like stuff that's based on an imaginary MMORPG though - and yeah that's not based on D&D, but if D&D didn't exist, it wouldn't exist - they might still have an MMOFPS, but the look, the style, what's going on in it, it would be very different. Final Fantasy is another example - that was based largely on Dragon Quest - Dragon Quest was based largely on Wizardry and Ultima. Wizardry and Ultima wouldn't exist without D&D. And early FF was pretty to D&D in terms of concepts, but modern FF? No - it barely has any visible relation to D&D.I think what we'd see, fantasy anime would lean more towards Asian mythology tropes and styles. That would be kind of awesome, probably. And there'd likely be even more mythology-derived stuff. Western fantasy stuff might even become popular - I suspect adaptions of Western fantasy novels would be slightly more common. But it would develop differently, and you'd notice.I largely agree with most of your well-thought-out take on this, except for these:Yeah sorry I'm not making myself clear I think.I'm not saying you wouldn't have a character who job was "Assassin" or "Rogue" or whatever. I'm saying that the D&D trope where they're no good in a straight fight and only even equally effective (or still less than) other characters when using tricks and attacking from stealth and so on would just not appear. It's not an archetype you really find in fantasy much. The you want three people who have and would call themselves "Thieves" in fantasy? You Fafhrd, The Grey Mouser, and Conan. Some serious BAD BOYS in combat. Like TROUBLE. None of them have to backstab. None of them have to faff around. They will backstab if it helps. They use to stealth to avoid combat where possible (they'd see it as dumb to do otherwise in most situations). But they're not slouches. They're not corner-hiders. They're not 1/2/3E Rogues. 4E Rogues? Yeah, pretty much. And 5E Rogues aren't nearly as tough in a straight fight as 4E ones, because they rely on sneak attack - these dudes might have sneak attack, but it would harder to get, and they'd be as good in a straight fight as other classes (ignoring serious special abilities - I'm sure Knights would be better at avoiding damage and so on). So I'm saying you wouldn't have this guy who  is bad at fighting, but good at lockpicking. He just wouldn't exist. The PC-type "Thief" in fantasy is as competent a combatant as everyone else, he just has different non-combat skills/abilities. I suspect a "Commando"-type class might actually be the most common class - light armour, nasty fighter, nasty ambusher, good at sneaking, climbing, swimming.Now if you're thinking of Bilbo, but that's not someone a class is going to be modeled on. Indeed, if this comes out in 2021, I absolutely do not believe halflings/hobbits will be in the PHB, despite the LotR movies (which will be pretty old by then). Definitely not if the Hobbit movies came out lol jeez ugh. They might have a short race that's a nod hobbits, but D&D's ones? Nah.If we look at all the assassins in fantasy literature, all the backstabbers, the vast majority of them, absolutely the overwhelming majority of PC-type ones are total bad boys, like serious fighting-men. Not weaksauce types who'd be weak in a straight fight.I think Skald/Bard would be similar - in mythology/mythohistory people are skalds are often extremely skilled warriors (and never less than competent if it comes up) and in fantasy literature sometimes bard types are too. So I suspect they'd be another "competent combatant with some side skills".Loremaster I'm much more skeptical of, because I'm thinking back through pre-D&D fantasy particularly, and fantasy clearly not much influenced by D&D in later eras, and I can't think of a single "loremaster"-type who would be a player-character. They're all people who either enter the narrative, provide knowledge, then leave, or are in a set location, visited, and then the PC-equivalents go away. So I think that's a bit less likely.</blockquote>

Verification