D&D 5E Is Neil Gaiman Wrong?

[Snarf Zagyg]

Side argument. @Flamestrike is right to assert that default 5e D&D is a game of superheroic characters fighting dragons at the upper levels. You're right to assert that default 5E D&D doesn't define D&D; "D&D" is a broad term with lots of latitude. Other editions of D&D are still D&D, houseruled D&D is still D&D. RAW 5e D&D shouldn't be viewed as the Animal Farm definition of D&D ("All D&Ds are equal, but....").

But I don't even agree with that (the part that I bolded).

What even is "default" D&D now?* If you play through the APs, then ... there is definitely some variation! And when I look at what "the kids" are playing, then the amount of variation grows exponentially.

I think the idea of "mythic hero" going on to beat up on dragons and gods is closer to an older idea of a Monty Haul style campaign than it is to what a lot of younger people do; which is more social, wuxia/anime, and has a lot of influences that go far beyond superheroes and beating up on dragons.

It's what you make of it; and superheores beating up on dragons is a very cribbed vision of the game. It can be, and is, so much more than that.

But yeah, I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers by claiming a single definition of D&D and saying anyone else who plays a different way is just holding the d20 wrong ...
And you will know my name is Snarf Zagyg when I lay my vengeance upon thee.



*Then there is that whole side-issue that, in play, most people don't even bother once they get much past the "sweet spot."

 

[CleverNickName]

To each his own, but any edition of D&D once you got past 9-10th level you were way past Aragorn fighting orcs

Reminds me of that thread from a while back, titled "Gandalf was a 5th level wizard."

 

[Reynard]

Reminds me of that thread from a while back, titled "Gandalf was a 5th level wizard."

Gandalf was CLEARLY a high level paladin.

 

[Maxperson]

FUN! I love a challenge. Let's see. I'm wrong, am I? RAW.

Okay, so if someone is playing intrigue or mystery or horror (DMG 38) then they are "simply wrong."

If they are playing with madness and sanity (DMG 252, 265) they are "simply wrong."

If you play with intelligent monsters that use skirmish, missile, and hit & run tactics then you are "simply wrong."

If your monsters focus fire on the players and will kill players that are down (instead of allowing whac-a-mole) then you are "simply wrong."

If you use slow, milestone leveling then you are "simply wrong."

If you combine slow natural healing and gritty realism (DMG 267) then you are simply wrong.

...or, if you play with injuries (DMG 272) or massive damage (273).


All of this before getting into house rules (some campaigns remove cantrips, or have rules for speed and spellcasting).

Yes, I guess I am simply wrong for not playing 5e in the way that you demand. I will give you your money back; I suggest you lodge a formal complaint with Crawford.

So optional rules are OPTIONAL rules, not really the game as written. They're basically official house rules. As I said before, read the DMG page 37 for what the game as written assumes about PCs. You can play your way for sure, but your way is not the way the game was designed to be played at its core.

 

[Oofta]

I just had a 15th level TPK. That wouldn't happen to the Avengers or JLA. That said, there is a tonal shift as the PCs gain level and leave alot of "mortal" concerns behind them and as their adventures tend to get bigger in scope -- or, at least, higher in SFX budget.

True. But at the same time let's take ... I dunno ... Iron Man. The guy flies as supersonic speeds, shoots energy beams that can cut through steel, can easily take out tanks, ignores machine gun fire, can lift several tons (75-100 based on a quick google search).

A 20th level PC can do none of those things. I'd say a tank could be considered roughly equal to a dragon ... and they're no match for Iron Man. Several of them might be a challenge but just one? Yawn. Team up Iron Man with the league? The dragon would be toast in a round or two at most.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

To each his own, but any edition of D&D once you got past 9-10th level you were way past Aragorn fighting orcs, or Conan fighting ape-men and having a challenge. You fly, teleport, alter reality, slay 20 men solo via sword or spell, etc. Personally I lose a bit of interest when it gets too over the top, but I've always thought D&D from B/X on became more Justice League than Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser at a certain point. But at higher level you don't have to focus on that aspect and can do other things.

Fafhrd: 15 R, 13 Th, 5 Bard
Mouser: 11 F, 3 MU, 15 Th

(Deities & Demigods- they have slightly different levels in the Lankhmar book that I don't feel like digging up now)

D&D does a really poor job of translating fictional characters.

 

[Maxperson]

Reminds me of that thread from a while back, titled "Gandalf was a 5th level wizard."

That thread was wrong. Gandalf cast multiple lightning bolt/fireball spells in the Hobbit. That puts him higher than 5th right there. He also single handedly defeated a Balor, something no 5th level wizard could do.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

So optional rules are OPTIONAL rules, not really the game as written.

This debate? Really?

"And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them. " p. 4

"The D&D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren't in charge." p. 4.

Or, heck, just all of Part 3. You know- Master of Rules.

I appreciate your view, but you are not master of the rules of this game, my game, or any game that you are not the DM of.

If this is not to your liking, I suggest playing a game that does not have a DM, or such explicit instructions.

 

[Fenris-77]

So optional rules are OPTIONAL rules, not really the game as written. They're basically official house rules.

Dude, don't be like that. They are rules written in the official rule book that describe several different ways to expand or alter game play. They aren't house rules. Call them official options if you want, I guess, but denigrating them as 'houserules' in order to prove a rhetorical point is a little disingenuous IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

This debate? Really?

"And as a referee, the DM interprets the rules and decides when to abide by them and when to change them. " p. 4

"The D&D rules help you and the other players have a good time, but the rules aren't in charge." p. 4.

Or, heck, just all of Part 3. You know- Master of Rules.

I appreciate your view, but you are not master of the rules of this game, my game, or any game that you are the DM of.

Absolutely. I house rule the heck out of my game. That doesn't make my house rules RAW or how the base game was intended to be played. You on the other hand have called people playing the base game as it was intended to be played, "Manifestly wrong." That makes YOU wrong. About the game anyway. The way you play is right for you of course.