Is D&D a setting or a toolbox?

[teitan]

Sure but even the classes have baked in world assumptions. Reskining monsters is no big deal. You want orcs to be togos and purple, awesome. He classes themselves and how they function though is purely a d&d ism and as archetypes they work as d&d archetypes.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Agreed but all used the default assumptions of the d&d setting, including those listed by Greg K. It's been shown repeatedly that d&d is a poor toolkit for generic fantasy. Rifts is a heavily modified ad&d first edition but also a wholly different game because it requires such heavy modifications. Palladium Fantasy on the other hand, it's d&d with an extrapolated skill system based on the thief skill system.

It is true that in 2e they tried the toolkit approach to the system but it largely largely failed as a toolkit or generic system.

Criticism of GURPS in this regard, as a gritty system not able to pull of everything is not really a good criticism as other toolkit games like Hero and M&M, games intended towards a much higher power scale can easily emulate any genre of play. More so with Hero than M&M definitely but more indicative of modern tool box design even if hero is almost as old as d&d.

Yeah, I don't follow you. D&D is of course intended to be a FANTASY RPG, but within that its no less flexible (certainly not in recent incarnations) than any other system. AD&D with its small list of very specific classes was less so, but having done plenty of hacking in my day I find 4e to be pretty toolbox. So far I ran a heroic save the world high fantasy, a pirates campaign, a lower fantasy dragon-hunting campaign, knights and damsels, and now we're doing a town adventure sort of thing with undead. While D&D has many trappings that go with its stock kitchen-sink low-fantasy its easy enough to reflavor/rewrite a few items and creatures.

As for Hero and M&M, I have no idea what you mean. The higher power scale doesn't increase flexibility, in fact I'd say the opposite is more true, games with shallow power curves tend to fit more things with less work, although they can be pretty limiting in the long run. M&M is quite a slick game with its solid reflavoring and attributes, but at best it is only slightly more maleable than 4e, and most because its more explicit about it.

I don't think RIFTS or Palladium demonstrates much. Back in the old days we had a 'D&D' campaign that spanned WWI, the Wild West, the post-apocalyptic future, the Cold War, etc as well as the Underdark, space travel, etc etc etc. The 1e rules with whatever we felt like grafting on from other games worked fine for it. I think 4e would work even better for that, and 3e probably also would have been easier to hack on than 1e, but 1e worked fine. D&D really demands few assumptions about setting or genre IMHO. I think that's one reason it is successful, its flexible ENOUGH, which means usually its pretty attractive since people know the rules and have the books etc.

 

[Iosue]

I guess, but people also can't agree on what constitutes "a setting".

Calling D&D a "framework" is perhaps more accurate. Is D&D a framework or an app?

Going by that I'd call D&D a framework on a similar level as Ruby on Rails/Django (and d20 = vanilla Ruby/Python).

OD&D is programming language and a list of batch programs.
AD&D is like a Unix system, run by referring to man pages. Clunky but powerful and highly hackable.
D&D is like a Linux system with a tutorial. Cleaned-up, shallower learning curve, and highly hackable.
Retro-clones are like Linux distros. Cleaner presentation, nice pre-configured GUI, but still highly hackable.
2nd Edition is Windows 3.x. New glossy presentation over essentially a hackable command line interface; disliked by many for being vulgar and unaesthetic, and yet extremely popular.
4e is like a Mac OS. Extremely user-friendly interface and high performance, with high configurability of certain parameters. Hacking is possiblity, but not really a feature -- you need to know the system to do it right, and it voids your warranty. But really, if you're using this system it's because you like the high configurability and aren't really interested in hacking.


I'm not so familiar with 3.x, but just based on what I've read... Even newer, glossier presentation, strongly imitates the competition, has high configurability and a certain degree of hackability, is extremely popular and yet hated by many for being buggier than hell. Windows 98?

Setting heavy games like WEG Star Wars or Ghostbusters would be like game cartridges: plug and play. (Yes, I know I'm showing my age with "game cartridges".)
Now what would GURPS be...?

 

[billd91]

[MENTION=3400]billd91[/MENTION], I'm probably going to lose all geek cred here but, I've never played Mass Effect. Would Jedi work in that setting? Is a SW game still SW without any jedi?

Without Jedi? Yes, a SW game could still be SW without Jedi, as long as you're still in the SW universe. As far as Mass Effect goes, there are some characters that are biotics - characters with some psionic potential, often cybernetically enhanced to make use of them. A subset of Jedi powers works pretty well to cover most biotic abilities.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

OD&D is programming language and a list of batch programs.
AD&D is like a Unix system, run by referring to man pages. Clunky but powerful and highly hackable.
D&D is like a Linux system with a tutorial. Cleaned-up, shallower learning curve, and highly hackable.
Retro-clones are like Linux distros. Cleaner presentation, nice pre-configured GUI, but still highly hackable.
2nd Edition is Windows 3.x. New glossy presentation over essentially a hackable command line interface; disliked by many for being vulgar and unaesthetic, and yet extremely popular.
4e is like a Mac OS. Extremely user-friendly interface and high performance, with high configurability of certain parameters. Hacking is possiblity, but not really a feature -- you need to know the system to do it right, and it voids your warranty. But really, if you're using this system it's because you like the high configurability and aren't really interested in hacking.


I'm not so familiar with 3.x, but just based on what I've read... Even newer, glossier presentation, strongly imitates the competition, has high configurability and a certain degree of hackability, is extremely popular and yet hated by many for being buggier than hell. Windows 98?

Setting heavy games like WEG Star Wars or Ghostbusters would be like game cartridges: plug and play. (Yes, I know I'm showing my age with "game cartridges".)
Now what would GURPS be...?

I really don't know why people have this insistence on believing that 4e isn't super hackable. I've seen slasher horror, Star Wars, and a Science Fantasy game all done using 4e with NO MODIFICATIONS TO THE RULES AT ALL, nothing but reflavoring. For instance there's this little gem out there http://dungeonsmaster.com/2012/07/star-wars-pre-gens-for-dd-encounters/ which is a very sweet demonstration of the sheer flexibility of the system.

Beyond that 4e doesn't break easily. It is a VERY transparent system, far more so than previous editions, so you can pretty tell right off what your homebrew stuff is going to do. At worst you're no worse off than in any other edition. Actually I didn't find AD&D easy to hack at all. You could do it of course, but the results were HIGHLY variable and it has far more assumptions built into it about healing, character advancement, etc than 4e does.

 

[Nagol]

Yeah, I don't follow you. D&D is of course intended to be a FANTASY RPG, but within that its no less flexible (certainly not in recent incarnations) than any other system. AD&D with its small list of very specific classes was less so, but having done plenty of hacking in my day I find 4e to be pretty toolbox. So far I ran a heroic save the world high fantasy, a pirates campaign, a lower fantasy dragon-hunting campaign, knights and damsels, and now we're doing a town adventure sort of thing with undead. While D&D has many trappings that go with its stock kitchen-sink low-fantasy its easy enough to reflavor/rewrite a few items and creatures.

All versions of D&D are much less flexible than any version of the Hero System. If I were to say "All magic requires a minimum 15 minute ritual", "Magic consumes the vital energies of all life in a small radius around the caster", or "Magic only works on Tuesday during the day unless there is a full moon obscured by clouds and it is Wednesday morning after you've been dealt two jacks from a deck of cards" Hero supports the framework and the restrictions affect the value of the magical effects. It is entirely possible to completely replicate the D&D magic system and almost any other magic system describable in game terms inside the Hero toolbox and if an open kitchen-sink experience is desired, each character can pick and choose their own set of advantages and restrictions for how his magic works.

All that is required is front-loaded work of defining how everything works and how those things are expressed in games terms. Want a magic system that follows the laws of contagion or sympathy? Want a system where Drenai mental abilities dominate? Want a system where magic consumes and is powered by silver? Want a system where magical effects are entirely non-physical and can only affect the spiritual plane?

Each version of D&D does its version of magic well. None do other versions of magic well without substantial game rewrites (like Arcana Unearthed) or whole-cloth additions like Incarnum.

Now look at the character design flexibility offered, D&D classes restrict characters to archetypes or some previously selected set of archetypes (later multi-classing). Hero characters grow more organically and may broaden abilities rather than go for increasing strength if desired. The choices generally lie in the player's hands within the campaign constraints detailed by the GM. If a magic-user type wants to be one of the best in the realm with a rapier, it can be done at a cost to his magical might. If a priest of Hermes wants to pick locks and bypass traps like a pro, it can be done.

That flexibility comes with a large time cost for the GM and a smaller time cost for each player. It also comes with a reduction on common understanding. It's easier to say "I'm running AD&D; here's the starting locale and house rules in use" than "I'm running a Hero system fantasy campaign. Here is how each system of magic works; here is how the society is constructed; here is the expected role for the PCs; here is the starting point budget, locale, and house rules". The players face a much smaller selection set. It is easier for the players to say "Cool, I'm going to play a human Fighter; I'll get some dice" than "Cool, I'm going to play a human with these stats, perks, skills, talents, magical abilities, and disadvantages."

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

All versions of D&D are much less flexible than any version of the Hero System. If I were to say "All magic requires a minimum 15 minute ritual", "Magic consumes the vital energies of all life in a small radius around the caster", or "Magic only works on Tuesday during the day unless there is a full moon obscured by clouds and it is Wednesday morning after you've been dealt two jacks from a deck of cards" Hero supports the framework and the restrictions affect the value of the magical effects. It is entirely possible to completely replicate the D&D magic system and almost any other magic system describable in game terms inside the Hero toolbox and if an open kitchen-sink experience is desired, each character can pick and choose their own set of advantages and restrictions for how his magic works.

All that is required is front-loaded work of defining how everything works and how those things are expressed in games terms. Want a magic system that follows the laws of contagion or sympathy? Want a system where Drenai mental abilities dominate? Want a system where magic consumes and is powered by silver? Want a system where magical effects are entirely non-physical and can only affect the spiritual plane?

Each version of D&D does its version of magic well. None do other versions of magic well without substantial game rewrites (like Arcana Unearthed) or whole-cloth additions like Incarnum.

Now look at the character design flexibility offered, D&D classes restrict characters to archetypes or some previously selected set of archetypes (later multi-classing). Hero characters grow more organically and may broaden abilities rather than go for increasing strength if desired. The choices generally lie in the player's hands within the campaign constraints detailed by the GM. If a magic-user type wants to be one of the best in the realm with a rapier, it can be done at a cost to his magical might. If a priest of Hermes wants to pick locks and bypass traps like a pro, it can be done.

That flexibility comes with a large time cost for the GM and a smaller time cost for each player. It also comes with a reduction on common understanding. It's easier to say "I'm running AD&D; here's the starting locale and house rules in use" than "I'm running a Hero system fantasy campaign. Here is how each system of magic works; here is how the society is constructed; here is the expected role for the PCs; here is the starting point budget, locale, and house rules". The players face a much smaller selection set. It is easier for the players to say "Cool, I'm going to play a human Fighter; I'll get some dice" than "Cool, I'm going to play a human with these stats, perks, skills, talents, magical abilities, and disadvantages."

I'm familiar with the system. It isn't any easier to have some sort of restriction like "Magic only on Wednesdays" in Hero than it would be in D&D. In Hero you'd have to try to invent a point cost for that, which is EXACTLY the same as wondering how you'd make your wizards useful on Thurs-Wed in a D&D game with the same restriction. Hero system is not bad, it lets you create a variety of superhero-like characters pretty efficiently. OTOH its a min/maxing bonanza. Its very hard to make balanced characters, and by balanced I mean "can function together in the same order of magnitude of power". Its a fun game, and yes, like most classless systems if you gauge things by "I can make this EXACT character from this book using this system" then its somewhat better than 4e or 3e usually (though if you are at all clever 3e and 4e are not that hard to do it in). OTOH its not really any easier to make up specific settings and play with a specific genre/tone of game. Games like Hero system are pretty good for 'set piece' type setups where the PCs are playing specific literary characters or you just want a short scenario with pregens. Its also fine if you have players that are not munchkins and are all very much on the same page. Otherwise what you get is all over the map and casual or new players will enter and you'll get all sorts of weird results as they mess with the system.

I certainly don't think Hero System is particularly LESS flexible. OTOH recent editions of D&D are not that far behind. I'd also say that there are more modern games than Hero system that are probably more interesting IMHO. Its a bit dated nowadays with its point system and lack of RP support mechanics.

 

[Greg K]

Iron Heroes was a d20 game and like Arcana Unearthed, using the rules in d&d was not really suggested or encouraged. I tried using AU' s casting rules in a 3e game and it made casters broken but the system worked much better when it was self contained as an AU game

Iron Heroes was its own game. However, I specified the Book of Iron Might which is a supplement for D&D from the same publisher. It focused on martial combat and allowing martial characters do cool stuff. I found the maneuver system in that supplement much better than the one in Tome of Battle. Plus, it did not add new classes.

And again, I did not say Arcana Unearthed which is also from the same publisher as Iron Heroes and the Book of Iron Might. I specified Unearthed Arcana which was an official 3e D&D supplement of optional rules

The core doesn't really support modification beyond that core aside from suggestions, scant few, especially in 3e and 4e. Yes variant rules supplements exist but the core brand, aside from the UA supplement supplement and the HR, but the core d&d brand didn't go outside those assumptions and using it as a toolkit involved heavy kit bashing of the game as written with little advice supported.

Let's see the suggestion and variants

3e PHB
Tailoring the character (creating class variants): Discusses tailoring the Fighter into an ex-bodyguard for a Thieve's Guild (a revised version appears in 3e Unearthed Arcana)

3e DMG Variants: 33 rules variants plus advice on tailoring races, advice on creating new classes and tailoring new ones, firearms and asian weapons for those gms that want to introduce them


I. Chapter 2: Characters- Race
The section on races discusses altering existing races and creating environmental subraces (the latter is fleshed out in Unearthed Arcana)

1. Variant: Monster as Race

II. Chapter 2: Characters- Classes
The section discusses creating classes and tailoring existing classes. In addition to the variant rules listed below, it discusses turning the ranger into an undead stalker with sneak attack vs. undead and paladin smite evil vs. undead only. (A few class variant examples appear in early 3e supplements, but it does not really get truly supported with plenty of examples until Unearthed Arcana and later supplements)

2. Variant: Spell List Variant Spellcasters (covers tailoring divine spell lists to deity, arcane lists to schools, and lists for other variant spellcasting classes). They even provide a Witch variant as an example.

3. Variant: Multi-classing at 1st level (covers apprentice level characters and 0/0 level multiclassing at first level).


III.Chapter 2- Characters- Leveling
4 Variant: Learning Skills and Feats (learning skills and feats requires Trainers, training time, and training cost. Also, increasing existing skills requires a proper environment and opportunity to have practiced and applied the skill)
5. Variant: Learning new spells: wizards finding spells, sorcerers learning from patrons, bards studying with other bards
6. Variant: researching spells (creating new spells)
7. variant: gaining class abilities (requires a trainer of the same class and training time or the character has to spend twice as much time on his or her own self training)
8. variant: general down time
9. variant: fixed hit dice

IV. Chapter 3: Running the Game- Combat Variants
10. Variant: Surprise Round
11. Variant: Roll initiative each round
12. Variant: Automatic Hits and Misses
13. Variant: Defense Roll
14. Variant: Instant Kill
15. Variant: Softer Criticals
16. Variant: Critical Misses (Fumbles)
17. Variant: Firing into a crowd
18. Variant: Clobbered (taking half of current hit points from a single results in character taking a partial action on next turn)
19. Variant: Death from Massive Damage Based on size
20. Variant: Damage to Specific Areas

V. Chapter 3: Running the Game - Monster Ability Variants
21. Variant: Separate Ability Loss (each 2 points of ability damage, the character takes a -1 penalty to ability related rolls
Non Magical Psionics Variant.
22. Variant: Non-magical Psionics
23. Variant: Characters with Scent

VI. Chapter 3: Running the Game - Skill and Ability Check
24. Variant: Skills with Different Abilities
25. Variant: Critical Success or Failure

VIII. Chapter 3: Running the Game- Saving Throws
26. Variant: Saves with Different Ability Scores

IX. Chapter 3: Running the Game- Adjudicating Magic
27 Variant: Spell Roll (Save DC = d20 roll + spell level+ caster modifier)
28. Variant: Power Components (alternative to spells casting XP)
29. Variant: Summoning Individual Monsters (affects Summon Monster and Summon Nature's Ally spells)

X. Chapter 5: Campaigns
30. Variant: Upkeep (characters are charged a monthly fee based upon their lifestyle)

Not a variant, but there is sidebar suggesting cool ways to break the rules and tailor the chararcters to your own setting

XI. Chapter 6: World Building
Not a variant, but suggestions on building a different world talks about Asian Weapons, Firearms, and Futuristic Weapons. With sample weapons.
Also, the section on Differing Magic, briefly discusses changing the level of magic to either low magic or high magic

XII. Chapter 7: Rewards
31. Variant: Faster of Slower Experience (controlling the speed of leveling)
32. Variant: Free Form Experience (instead of calculating XP, hand out recommended XP based on encounter toughness
33. Variant: Story Awards: Non Combat encounters, Mission Goals, Rolepalying Wards, Story Awards

 

[Hussar]

For those who think 4e isn't capable of a wide range of games, I'd point at the top of the board here where we've got Zeitgeist, a steampunk-ish high fantasy campaign, next to Santiago, a " multi-part adventure path set in a future western-style sci-fi universe for the Pathfinder RPG and D&D 4th Edition."

That's a pretty big difference right there.

 

[MichaelSomething]

For those who think 4e isn't capable of a wide range of games, I'd point at the top of the board here where we've got Zeitgeist, a steampunk-ish high fantasy campaign, next to Santiago, a " multi-part adventure path set in a future western-style sci-fi universe for the Pathfinder RPG and D&D 4th Edition."

That's a pretty big difference right there.

But can you run a 4E campaign based on the "Desperate Hosewifes" show? If not, then it's no toolbox in my eyes!