Is D&D a setting or a toolbox?

[Ahnehnois]

So, instead of taking the blinkers off and exploring the hundreds of other games already out there, you are going to try to haul D&D out of where it's at into being your personal idea of a "better" game of pretend?

Well, I have, and will continue to, explore other games on occasion. But since I do not have infinite money, time, and players, yes I will be trying to use D&D as a general-purpose roleplaying game.

 

[sheadunne]

Yes there are. And (virtually) no one cares. Even the small set of rpgers that don't play D&D probably entered the hobby through it. Don't get me wrong, it would be great if some of those other rgs mattered. Competition would improve the market. But they don't at the moment. At the moment the market is setting-D&D, toolbox-D&D with the serial number filed off, and everything else.

Nearly half the gamers I know entered the gaming hobby through WOD and not D&D. White Wolf changed the entry point to the hobby back in the 90s. Now I'm seeing people enter the hobby and bypass D&D completely through other gaming systems like Cortex+ and Savage Worlds (among others). It's about 50/50 whether I can find enough players to play any version of D&D (or PF), as opposed to other gaming systems. D&D is the new Microsoft. Sure they were big once and everyone remembers the name (and might have a few relics laying around), but fewer and fewer people are interacting with it on a daily basis. That's been my experience.

 

[Ahnehnois]

[MENTION=27570]sheadunne[/MENTION]
Clearly your experience and mine are pretty different, which is fair enough. Like I said, I'd be happy if I saw other rpgs being played, I just don't.

And, for my part, I still have a windows PC for my computing, and a 3e library for my gaming, partially because they're familiar and partially because exploring other options is time- and cost-prohibitive.

 

[sheadunne]

[MENTION=27570]sheadunne[/MENTION]
Clearly your experience and mine are pretty different, which is fair enough. Like I said, I'd be happy if I saw other rpgs being played, I just don't.

And, for my part, I still have a windows PC for my computing, and a 3e library for my gaming, partially because they're familiar and partially because exploring other options is time- and cost-prohibitive.

I agree. There are way too many games to play them all. Gotta play the games you can get others to play as well.

 

[gamerprinter]

D&D has always been a toolbox for me. Even though I've played since 1977, and even ran some published adventures, aside from the setting those adventures were set, at no time have I ever used Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Ravenloft or any published setting. In every case, even the adventures were plugged into homebrew settings only. Even when I played Ravenloft, other than Barovia, all the domains were custom built ones. I know that many fans of D&D relied on the settings provided - I am not one of them.

The only setting I do use now is the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG) by Rite Pubilshing, but then that setting is really just my own homebrew, published.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Levels, when defined as points along the continuum of experience gained from specific actions makes a worse toolbox than other systems. The system may offer a rich variation of characters, but they come with strong implicit assumptions -- like a newborn doesn't have the magical might to rip a town away to another dimension because it didn't appreciate its birthing spank.

Well, you could have the newborn start at higher level, or have that ability be potentially possible at level 1 (maybe doable in M&M? I'm not an expert).

Levels when defined as a measure of ability either natural or gained from experience (like the newer Tunnels and Trolls where your level is defined by the total of your characteristic points -- so a lucky player starts off with a 2nd level character and xp is spent directly on abilities including characteristics) open the variation up.

Ah, okay, I see what you were saying. I'd just assume the newborn was level-adjusted or the equivalent. But, if that's not possible, then you're correct, that definitely puts more restraints on the toolbox.

Non-leveled games like Hero make the better toolboxes because there are fewer assumptions about how power is gained, what that gain must look like, what pre-requisites are necessary to achieve any milestone, etc.

I guess this depends on how you gain XP in the level-based system. There's no reason to tie it to fighting, for example (my RPG doesn't). But yes, I think I agree that non-level-based games are a little more free than level-based games. I just don't think it's a big difference, in the grand scheme of things. I think the main thing confining a game would be class, not level. Thanks for the insight, though. As always, play what you like

M&m was only ever vaguely level based and then only as a guideline. In second edition m&m 's level mechanic was purely a campaign power limit mechanic and hardly anything resembling d&d and third appears to de-emphasize the level further as a mechanic and to keep the power level in the style that the gm wants to run his game, like teen heroes etc. Not a good comparison to use even with the first edition rules. I ran the crap out of first edition and back. Can build a character in about ten minutes and even on the fly when pressed.

M&M 2e is, essentially, a level-based system, in my eyes, in that attack, damage, defense, skill ranks, and the like are capped by your level. Yes, there are many more things that aren't, but at each PL increase you get more points to spend, and your cap goes up by 1. That's just about the definition of level-based to me, even though it's so freeform in so many other ways.

Regardless, it's a really fun system, and I routinely run the bad guys / good guys on the fly, with no prep, because I know that if I took the time, the system would let me build it. Why write it all up when I know it's there, somewhere, deep down in the system, and that'd just waste my time? It's a very freeing experience, and it's a very nice system. As always, play what you like

 

[SkidAce]

Well, I have, and will continue to, explore other games on occasion. But since I do not have infinite money, time, and players, yes I will be trying to use D&D as a general-purpose roleplaying game.

Me too. Its worked since the 80's. (must spread exp around etc.)

 

[teitan]

M&M 2e is, essentially, a level-based system, in my eyes, in that attack, damage, defense, skill ranks, and the like are capped by your level. Yes, there are many more things that aren't, but at each PL increase you get more points to spend, and your cap goes up by 1. That's just about the definition of level-based to me, even though it's so freeform in so many other ways.

Regardless, it's a really fun system, and I routinely run the bad guys / good guys on the fly, with no prep, because I know that if I took the time, the system would let me build it. Why write it all up when I know it's there, somewhere, deep down in the system, and that'd just waste my time? It's a very freeing experience, and it's a very nice system. As always, play what you like

Except it doesn't work like that in 2eMNM, you can spend xp at any time and the gm decided when he wants to raise the power level. Power levels are more like the classifications of mutants in marvel comics than levels in d&d. 1eMnM, yeah power levels were tied to xp in that every 15 points your power level went up by 1 whether you spent the points or not but in no edition of MnM did you get your pp at a level up. You could always spend the points as you got them. The power level caps were there to measure relative power like d&d but could easily be dispensed and forgotten. There wasn't an emphasis on it at all. In 1e though, throw a group of pl10 characters at say Kalak and you see the main function of power levels... crazy awesome fights with a definite that. My players wound up having to sacrifice a character to push Kalak through a portal to the center of the Sun... I let that guy rebuild his character at 12 power level as a reward. The atomic brain was even scarier.

 

[Evenglare]

Power levels are more like the classifications of mutants in marvel comics than levels in d&d.

That's a really good way of looking at it.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Except it doesn't work like that in 2eMNM, you can spend xp at any time and the gm decided when he wants to raise the power level.

Well, that's true, but that's not really a comment on how PL caps you. Sure, the GM can raise it at will, but so what? You're capped until he does, which means that it's essentially a level capping your power in a good number of areas (attack bonus, damage, defense, skill ranks, etc.).

Power levels are more like the classifications of mutants in marvel comics than levels in d&d. 1eMnM, yeah power levels were tied to xp in that every 15 points your power level went up by 1 whether you spent the points or not but in no edition of MnM did you get your pp at a level up. You could always spend the points as you got them. The power level caps were there to measure relative power like d&d but could easily be dispensed and forgotten.

Yes, they could be removed, but they do exist, and they do cap your power. I don't think this is a bad thing; my RPG works the same way. But, in reality, the PL basically exists to cap your power, much like levels do.

There wasn't an emphasis on it at all. In 1e though, throw a group of pl10 characters at say Kalak and you see the main function of power levels... crazy awesome fights with a definite that. My players wound up having to sacrifice a character to push Kalak through a portal to the center of the Sun... I let that guy rebuild his character at 12 power level as a reward. The atomic brain was even scarier.

I have no idea what any of this means, really, as I didn't play 1e, and I don't really read comics or anything, and haven't bought any supplements... but it sounds cool. I'm glad that regardless of what we think, we both have fun with the system As always, play what you like