D&D General I'm a Creep, I'm a Powergamer: How Power Creep Inevitably Destroys Editions


log in or register to remove this ad

I don’t see 5e as a game but an underlying engine. D&D, Tales of the Valiant, and A5e are actual games. No one sits with just the 5.1 SRD or the A5e SRD and plays.

D&D, ToV, and A5e are all built on 5e.
Yes, we are in agreement. My hypothesis is that WotC wants to occlude this reality because it is very much in their interest for the term "5e" (or 5.5e, or 5e2024, etc.) to be meaningless to consumers, so that the only thing that matters to consumers is the term "D&D." Which they own and can control. Which is why they steadfastly refuse to comment on what this upcoming rules revision should be called other than "D&D" or "the 2024 D&D update."

In other words, they want to basically make the engine synonymous with their particular game. So that, for example, the words "5e compatible" no longer have much currency.

I further speculate that this strategy was essentially laid out by them in their original announcement of OneD&D, and is why they have recently expanded DnDBeyond to include selected 3PP.
 

You have provided no proof otherwise, and I would want some if we're discussing the general D&D sphere.
It seems self evident to me that it was not the 4e ruleset that caused the lack of power creep. I have no idea how one ruleset would enforce this over any other. Are you saying it probably was due to the 4e ruleset? How would one ruleset even accomplish something like this?

If you have no mechanism that you suspect is responsible for this, then I am not sure why you need a counter example to rule it out... I suspect what 'helped' 4e is that it only lasted for 4 or 5 years.
 


As mainly a player...

Yes, yes I very much do like Power Creep. Or to be more exacts, that I find Power Creep an acceptable costs so that the corebook/initial design mistakes can be fixed and just generally more new stuff.

And if it causes death of an edition? Haven't you people heard of moving on?
 

It seems self evident to me that it was not the 4e ruleset that caused the lack of power creep.

I think I recall that the person who raised the example noted that it was the choices of what to publish as supplements was the core factor, and not the system itself. They tended to publish entirely new archetypes, rather than build on existing ones, basically.

So, 4e didn't experience it much, but could have.
 

As mainly a player...

Yes, yes I very much do like Power Creep. Or to be more exacts, that I find Power Creep an acceptable costs so that the corebook/initial design mistakes can be fixed and just generally more new stuff.

And if it causes death of an edition? Haven't you people heard of moving on?
That's the thing though. I want to just go on and play a character. If builds and power creep are a thing and the table is talking about how to build the biggest DPS build, I kind of have to care about it. I could deal with power creep better if it wasn't part of the build process. I've found for a guy that started tabletop with 5th edition, I prefer White Box: FMAG, B/X Derivatives, and Dungeon Crawl Classics precisely because they do so well at keeping away from Power Creep and Builds.

Builds are their own type of power creep as the munchkins work out what best way to combine options given to them to the best DPS. The referee has to up the encounters to counter the power creep there, and as I have to care about it because suddenly my unoptimized character is barely participating in the fights.

EDIT: On specifically why I chose FMAG is that as a player who started 9 years ago, I like certain things such as:
Ascending AC
To-hit bonuses, turn undead, and thief tables placed with the characters and not relegated back a few pages for the DM to reference. I strongly believe that the player should be able to know the math in a game and not just be told to roll a d20 and the DM would decide.
 

I think I recall that the person who raised the example noted that it was the choices of what to publish as supplements was the core factor, and not the system itself. They tended to publish entirely new archetypes, rather than build on existing ones, basically.

So, 4e didn't experience it much, but could have.
I completely agree, it is up to the designers to enforce that discipline. The rules cannot enforce anything upon the designers, that is obviously impossible.

Once you acknowledge that the rules cannot force the designers to do anything, it seems completely obvious that it is not the ruleset itself that is responsible for power creep or the lack thereof. Any power creep is due to designer discipline, and independent of the actual rules.
 

As mainly a player...

Yes, yes I very much do like Power Creep. Or to be more exacts, that I find Power Creep an acceptable costs so that the corebook/initial design mistakes can be fixed and just generally more new stuff.
fixing things and introducing new options does not necessarily require power creep. Power creep simply frequently is introduced by it due to lack of discipline by the designers

And if it causes death of an edition? Haven't you people heard of moving on?
I can move on when I feel like it, it does not take the death of the edition by power creep to get me there. Likewise I can just ignore the powercreep supplements and keep on playing after the edition’s death.

Ignoring the power creep supplements has been second nature for me since the 80s. I always instinctively rejected them. My rule of thumb is to get at most one supplement in addition to the core, so Xanathar for 5e but not Tasha, so far this has been working well
 

Ignoring the power creep supplements has been second nature for me since the 80s. I always instinctively rejected them.

Okay, I have to ask since you mentioned that date.

Unearthed Arcana?

As I always say, there were two good things about that book.

First, the polearms! Appendix T. Or, as Derek said upon seeing it, "Wait, my Cleric can't use a lucern hammer.*

Second, that they used such a terrible binding that the pages fell out before most people could read and use it.


*As a side note, I've always wondered why Gygax dropped the e. It's named for Lucerne, in Switzerland.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top