D&D 5E Is 5e really that different?

[LordEntrails]

You're right, I forgot about that, 5e feels a bit like "easy mode" for hard core players

This always amuses me. There are so many dials to turn, 5E is just like every other edition, as hard or easy as the DM wants.

Sure, 5E starter adventures are less deadly than OD&D, but to me, that's more because "they" are trying to train people to be better DMs than how I was taught by the OD&D modules.

 

[Charlaquin]

So with that logic you would call Gurps, Warhammer, Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu and Vampire "Dungeons & Dragons" lol

Dungeons and Dragons is a brand name, which these other games do not have. Though I think a lot of Pathfinder fans would argue that it should still be counted as D&D.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Dungeons and Dragons is a brand name, which these other games do not have. Though I think a lot of Pathfinder fans would argue that it should still be counted as D&D.

Agreed, but there may be some merit to explore this further. Its not a difficult stretch to say a lot of RPGs are derived from, or at least based on the D&D model. Ergo, they could all be "D&D" or "D&D-like"?

 

[FrogReaver]

I am gonna be mean and say that I think 5e mostly upsets people who aren't finding a group to play it.

Not enough time spent playing -> too much time spent thinking about it -> crafting analysis in a vacuum -> venting about issues that must certainly make it unplayable -> look I just figured out why I am not playing!

I think that happens alot.

As an example: I didn't like alot of the directions diablo 3 took. And I think early on they made some huge mistakes. But even after some of those were rectified it took me years to try it - mostly because on paper it wasn't what I had expected and there was a real anger for the designers not paying attention to the community about those aspects. I finally tried it and it's a really solid and fun game. Many of my complaints from before playing it weren't nearly as important in practice as it seemed. Some things I thought I really disliked, I think now were actually improvements.

 

[Charlaquin]

Agreed, but there may be some merit to explore this further. Its not a difficult stretch to say a lot of RPGs are derived from, or at least based on the D&D model. Ergo, they could all be "D&D" or "D&D-like"?

Oh, sure. Frankly, if someone told me they had a regular “D&D game” and when asked what edition they said “Shadowrun,” I wouldn’t bat an eyelash. It’s like how some folks call all soft drinks “coke” or all facial tissue “kleenex.”

 

[FrogReaver]

It seems that the WOTC 5e fanboys took over this thread. WOTC is not pro league, its noob friendly entry to roleplaying games.

It never amazes me the hoops people jump through to make an analogy into a jumping off point for something totally unrelated.

This discussion comparing WOTC to a pro league was in context about the quality of their products compared to the quality of products from DMSguild. Nothing more.

 

[Helldritch]

Dungeons and Dragons is a brand name, which these other games do not have. Though I think a lot of Pathfinder fans would argue that it should still be counted as D&D.

Unfortunately, it is not. It is a Clone and a good damn one. But it is still not the "real" brand name. We are in a world where the brand is as powerful as it can get. For many, ttrpg is D&D period. Nothing else will do. Especially for the new comers, this holds very true. Some 3pp are way better than some of the official stuff, but a lot of 3pp are just not able to compete with WotC in the mind of majority of the players.

 

[LordEntrails]

It never amazes me the hoops people jump through to ...

nods
But hopefully he lives up to his word and doesn't come back to this thread. I'm a grumpy old grognard, but even I was getting cranky with his veiled attempts at gatekeeping.

 

[Shardstone]

I notice most of your examples are settings. I think settings are one area that's harder to outright screw up. So I can go with them being on average better than class content designed to fit into an existing 5e game.

It's also possible I just have higher standards than you.

I don't think it has as much to do with 'experience' as the kind of content we are looking for and our individual standards of how good it ought to be.

I don't think its a matter of standards or of the differences in game content we are looking for.

Those are setting books, but with those setting books there are rules expansions and genre expansions easily harvested for your game. Alongside those settings are adventure locations that you can drop into your world, NPCs you can use, and so on. And each of those publishers also has non-setting content designed for people who really don't want to be bothered with the rest of the setting stuff.

Let's not try to hide behind possibilities like "I think you like bad material" or "Your material could never be relevant to me."

 

[LordEntrails]

Unfortunately, it is not. It is a Clone and a good damn one. But it is still not the "real" brand name. We are in a world where the brand is as powerful as it can get. For many, ttrpg is D&D period. Nothing else will do. Especially for the new comers, this holds very true. Some 3pp are way better than some of the official stuff, but a lot of 3pp are just not able to compete with WotC in the mind of majority of the players.

Beta max vs VHS, Zune vs iPad. Happens all the time. Also doesn't mean that the 'winning product isn't a great product. Or perhaps the right product for the majority.