The Many Species of D&D

[M.L. Martin]

I'm not sure there are three categories though, but rather two: Advanced and Basic. 4E is the newest Basic, having evolved from 3E rules but shedding the Advanced's RFE appendages and returning to the gamist simplicity and "adventuring focus" of Basic.

I don't know; there's a sense of openness and encouragement to tinker with and customize the system in Basic that was both encouraged and discouraged in 1E (the latter on paper and in the side of gaming culture that focused on 'official', at least), encouraged more in 2E, both encouraged and discouraged in 3E again, and that I'm not seeing in 4E, at least at a remove. (Own the core books and AV, but have no play experience yet.)

Moreover I believe that the evolution of D&D has now come to a near standstill thanks to the GSL, and that while this will allow Wizards to capture more of the benefits created by the OGL Explosion, it will mean that much future progress will simply not happen. Many beautiful species will simply never be born.

Another way of looking at things that I've considered is that 4E is one of several evolutions from 3E; while the GSL means it will have no direct descendants of its own, it's possible that some other species may evolve in 3E with greater or lesser parallels to 4E.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Okay, okay everyone. I was just having a little fun with the "superiority" quip. I knew it would poke people. I was just "in character" as the 19th century botanist, including the Victorian bias of superiority of the present.

I also know how evolution works. There's no better or worse when describing different species in different niches; the most we can say is that they're better or worse at certain activities or things, things which may or may not even be relevant to the other's niche at all.

4E seems absolutely nothing like Basic D&D to me.

That's sort of the fun of deciding on species, naming genuses, and such; you get to decide what makes a category or not. I see "Basic D&D" as D&D where the rules focus on adventuring, and everything else about the PC is "just make it up." AD&D (and 3E) insists on having rules for those things.

But yeah, BECMI D&D was definitely D&D with "the safeties turned off." But it shared that quality with every version of AD&D (1-->3) with Save or Die effects and such, even if it became less pronounced with each evolution of AD&D. So I don't see that as a distinguishing feature.

 

[jdrakeh]

I would add Arduin to your list of non-branded but still recognizably D&D games. The first volume of the Arduin Grimoire, though playable on its own, owes much of its existence to OD&D (1974) and AD&D 1e.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

If we're including games that directly evolved from D&D we must include almost all of the early RPGs. Empire of the Petal Throne, Runequest, Vilains and Vigilantes, etc., etc. (Yes, V&V started as a D&D game!) I vaguely recall reading somewhere that even Traveller owed much of its existance to D&D, but that's hearsay at best. (Unless someone can offer more 'proof' than that.)

 

[Kerrick]

This is a really interesting topic, and a very apt analogy. I'd have to agree with Reynard in saying there are four main D&D genii (genuses?): Basic (OD&D, B/X, BECMI) Advanced (1E and 2E), d20 (3E), and d20 Advanced (4E).

To draw another analogy: Basic is one of the earliest primate species; Advanced is a more advanced primate (chimps and orangutans); d20 is the first hominid, and 4E is an as-yet-undetermined mutation (perhaps Neanderthal).

I originally started this with strictly hominid species, but then I realized that 3E represented a huge leap forward in evolution: a more robust and flexible system that allowed for greater survivability in any environment. In evolutionary terms, this was: upright posture, the ability to speak (in rudimentary terms, sure, but still), a larger brain, and superior reasoning ability. IOW, hominids, a species different enough from primates to deserve its own genus.

4E represents another, different offshoot of the hominid family. It builds from (and uses) the d20 framework, but clothes it in a different set of rules. Basically, it's got most of the same DNA, but there are enough differences to make it a new species of its own. Whether or not that species will survive, however, remains to be seen.

 

[rogueattorney]

If we're including games that directly evolved from D&D we must include almost all of the early RPGs. Empire of the Petal Throne, Runequest, Vilains and Vigilantes, etc., etc. (Yes, V&V started as a D&D game!) I vaguely recall reading somewhere that even Traveller owed much of its existance to D&D, but that's hearsay at best. (Unless someone can offer more 'proof' than that.)

and Metamorphosis Alpha/Gamma World and Tunnels & Trolls and Rolemaster (like Arduin began life as a series of supplements for OD&D) and Palladium and etc.

Many of these, T & T being a good example, are closer to the original D&D than the game that's currently called D&D. Which leads to the question... What makes 4e "D&D" and these other games not? If these other games are "D&D" is there any meaning to the term other than "fantasy role playing game?"

 

[Lanefan]

and Metamorphosis Alpha/Gamma World and Tunnels & Trolls and Rolemaster (like Arduin began life as a series of supplements for OD&D) and Palladium and etc.

Many of these, T & T being a good example, are closer to the original D&D than the game that's currently called D&D. Which leads to the question... What makes 4e "D&D" and these other games not?

The simple fact that it holds the brand name, and thus - for better or worse - sets the standard.

If these other games are "D&D" is there any meaning to the term other than "fantasy role playing game?"

Two (well, three) different definitions:

1. D+D as the specific TSR-WotC branded game, through its many iterations.
2. D+D as an entire genre of fantasy roleplaying games based to a greater or lesser extent on the original branded game - many examples of which are listed in posts above.
(and 3. D+D as the game I happen to play, regardless how it relates to any other game in existence - not relevant to discussion here, but it's an oft-heard use of the term)

By the first definition, T+T is not D+D. By the second, it probably is. (and by the third, who cares?)

Lanefan

 

[Reynard]

If we're including games that directly evolved from D&D we must include almost all of the early RPGs. Empire of the Petal Throne, Runequest, Vilains and Vigilantes, etc., etc. (Yes, V&V started as a D&D game!) I vaguely recall reading somewhere that even Traveller owed much of its existance to D&D, but that's hearsay at best. (Unless someone can offer more 'proof' than that.)

There have been many a (long) thread about what makes a game D&D, regardless of its official designation as such. I don't think we're likely to hammer out a definition here, and I think to attempt to do so would be better suited to another thread. however, i do think any definition that would include Traveller or V&V as "D&D" would be a defintion that would not be useful for any kind of discussion regarding the evolution or taxonomy of D&D.

Perhaps if we call all RPGs mammals, descended from the wargaming proto-mammals, we can find common ground for those early days games. Any game, i think, that was created as a direct response to D&D, as a way to cover a genre not included in D&D or to do something different than what D&D did is best described as its own genus. Metmaorphasis Alpha, for example, spawned its own wierd lineage, but whatever similarities it bears to D&D is based on common ancestry (and possible lateral gene transfer -- I forget what its called at the moment) rather than direct descendency.

I chose the games I did because there are clear and distinct lines of descent and points of divergence. Some games, of course, are so similar that they might be called "D&D". The palladium fantasy RPG, particularly the 1st Edition and the 1st Edition Revised, are very close to "D&D" (and, in fact, one could do worse than to cross pollinate either with ideas from the other). I am not familiar enough with T&T or Runequest to say whether these games were New Ideas or simply D&D clones.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Hrm.

Basic = Fish.

4e = Dolphin.

The similarities that some see are the result of unintentionally filling similar niches. They are not evolutionarily connected.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

GYGAX CREATED EVERY KIND OF D&D SEPARATE AND FULLY FORMED WE JUST HAVEN'T DISCOVERED THEM ALL YET!!!

STOP PUSHING YOUR "THEORY" OF EVOLUTION ON THE CHILDREN!!!!!!

SHOW ME THE MISSING LINK THAT...

what... looks over at book of nine swords, unearthed arcana, wilderness survival guide, 2nd edituion player's option....

never mind...