[Venting] I feel a bit dirty...

[Kae'Yoss]

It has been knocked back in markets other than the US (eg. Germany and Scandinavia).

[/QUOTE]

Which is weird, because the German "top game" is complete rubbish, and stole extensively from D&D.

Tell me, if D&D was so mediocre, why hasn't another game come along to knock it off its perch? Thirty years later, people still seem to prefer D&D. There must be more behind that than simple nostalgia.

Exactly. I don't like 2e, but I love 3e. It can't be nostalgia here.

I played other RPGs on occasion, but I still prefer D&D. Not that I don't play those at all.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I'd be there. If it went the rotue of BESM 3rd edition and provided templates for those who must have have their hand held and then provided open gaming for those who didn't feel that a wizard wielding a long sword was going to be the end of mankind, I'd be there.

Great idea. But the templates must be called classes and they must precede the 'toolkit' in the rulebook. Templates chapter 1 or 2. Toolkit in an appendix or supplement.

 

[sckeener]

You're right. (bold emphasis mine) Popularity does not always equal best. However, was PhantomNarrator saying that D&D is the best? I don't think he said that. What he said was "Thirty years later, people still seem to prefer D&D." He never said 30 years later D&D is still the best.

He also said

if D&D was so mediocre, why hasn't another game come along to knock it off its perch?

which implies that D&D is better than all the other game systems because no other game system has 'knocked it off its perch'.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Nothing, and I really mean nothing, is "essential" in D&D. Let's face it, if WotC wants to scrap what has come before and rebuild from the ground up, they can certainly do it. They can get rid of whatever "sacred cows" they wish to get rid of. However, if they do that, it won't be D&D to me anymore. Maybe it will be interesting. Maybe it will be fun. I certainly will check it out, but if it doesn't have classes, alignment, level progression just to name a few, I won't consider it to be D&D.

You and quite a lot of people, I guess. The more pieces of D&D they get rid of, the more people won't show up for their next show.

 

[sckeener]

That said, there are some silly sacred cows in D&D that "really" dont' need to be there. For those, most civilized DM's have things called HOUSE RULES. They don't run around telling other people to change the entire D&D game because of their own personal whines.

Nothing stopping us from wish for a more generic system. House Rules can only take you so far unless you plan to totally rewrite the game system....

though that isn't a half bad idea...I could tell people that I play D&D, but with house rules and then hand them an Ars Magica rule book with the cavet that these are the house rules.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The only thing I think classes and levels are useful for these days is making things easier on the GM in terms of designing encounters

They are, and always have been, a communication tool. What are the two most important things about a character? - his party role and power level. Thornir nailed it in this quote -

Classes: I think they ought to be kept. It is a nice way to understand the character. Without it DMs reviewing player choices would have to analyze the specifics and/or have the player explain it to them. If the player says "I'm playing a fighter," the DM knows enough to start with, and will get to know the specifics as they play.

It's impossible to overstate the importance of communication in rpgs. They're nothing but communication, almost entirely oral.

 

[Ghendar]

He also said

which implies that D&D is better than all the other game systems because no other game system has 'knocked it off its perch'.

Perch can mean a lot of things. It could mean best. It could also mean highest selling. We all know best selling and most popular isn't always best.

 

[Ghendar]

You and quite a lot of people, I guess. The more pieces of D&D they get rid of, the more people won't show up for their next show.

And I sincerely hoping WotC is listening.

I have absolutely no problem with innovation and change. However, if such change makes 4th ED D&D virtually unrecognizable then it won't be D&D to me. Call it something else.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Part of the reason for Vampire's success imo is that it so closely resembles D&D.

Huh? You're being sarcastic, right?

If I have to think of things that are similar in the two games, I come up with a couple of ability scores (the names and what they do in general) and that's it.

Character creation is completely different. There are no levels, and the Clans more resemble races (they influence what disciplines you can get, but nothing's really exclusive) than classes. The dice rolling system is quite different, too.

 

[Greg K]

To me, DND is sword and sorcery fantasy adventure using:

1) the six ability scores
2) classes
3) use of a d20
4) saving throws
6) the availability of the IP monsters (e.g., beholder, mindflayer, Demogorgon etc.)

As for alignment, Vancian magic, and classes, here is my take.

Alignment needs to be reworked or replaced with something like loyalty although I would keep the good/evil for outsiders and divine powered characters.

Vancian Magic: Vanican Magic should be shot, burned and buried. . Personally, I like the suggestion of using a system like Elements of Magic.

Classes: I don't want to see these go. However, I want classes which much are much more customizeable than we get from WOTC. I think Steve Kenson came very close to getting it perfect, but I think he should have used a few hybrid classes in addition to the three that he went with (Apparently several other fans of True20 felt the same way as they created hybrid classes on the True20 boards).