D&D General What D&D reflects today, media wise...

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, modern computer/video game design philosophy leans more into the playstyle of the class/archetype fantasy so that simply playing the game means that classes feel different in play. As you say, D&D (and its heartbreakers) tend to lean more into "fluff it up, buttercup" or "eh close enough."

This is a good point. 4E remains the only edition of D&D, and one a fairly limited number of TT RPGs to be concerned largely about the "fantasy" of being a class/being/etc., whereas videogames have been leaning that way for a long time. World of Warcraft's designers particularly clearly expressed this, and it's notable that one of the major changes of post-WoW MMORPGs which isn't simple mechanical emulation is taking a similar design approach. Indeed, FFXIV, which is probably now more successful than WoW, or close to it, is very devoted to this principle of design.

I think a lot of tabletop RPGs have sort of tripped over this idea in the dark, benefited from it without fully understanding it, and then wandered off. White Wolf's oWoD games initially really seemed to get this. In the interviews in the documentary about them, Rein*Hagen seems to very much be expressing this idea. In Revised and later they drifted increasingly away from it, but the initial approach was very much about "the fantasy" of being the thing, which isn't just a "power fantasy", but also about how that power is expressed.

Other games, like Spire or some PtbA games seem to get this pretty well, but the industry default still seems to be "let's make a bunch of mechanics, then I guess we can cobble together some classes later" (or to not use classes or similar at all).

 

[Dragonsbane]

Really?

"Just an opinion" is the motte to your earlier bailey post. You decided to voice your opinion in a grossly inaccurate manner that was clearly meant to denigrate younger people than yourself. That seems to have exceeded the respectful bounds of a harmless difference of opinion.

I assure you, I did not mean to denigrate younger people. Please, lighten up. Don't be so sensitive, not everything is an insult or denigrating remark!

 

[Minigiant]

Like most of us here, the WotC staffers are much older than the core demographic.

Meh.

I'm one the high end of the demo and I keep us with the youth and their trends.

 

[Staffan]

I haven't played PF2 yet, just read the rules, but the death rules seem to be nigh-identical to 5E D&D, except you make a "recovery check" instead of a "death save", and if you make even one recovery check, you stabilize (rather than needing outside help or a 20 like 5E). Just like 5E, if you're healed for even 1HP, you're immediately back on your feet.

In the interest of accuracy, there are two things that makes PF2 grittier than 5e. The first is the Wounded condition. When you lose the dying condition, you gain the Wounded condition (or increase it by 1 if you already have it). If you drop to 0 hp again, your Dying condition starts at 1+your Wounded. This means that bouncing up and down at near-zero hp the way you can sometimes do in 5e doesn't work so well. The second is that if the hit that brings you to 0 hp is a crit, you start at Dying 2 (plus your Wounded condition).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Meh.

I'm one the high end of the demo and I keep us with the youth and their trends.

Yeah right.

I'm a school teacher, I know that trying to "keep up with the trends" just makes you look silly.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

In the interest of accuracy, there are two things that makes PF2 grittier than 5e. The first is the Wounded condition. When you lose the dying condition, you gain the Wounded condition (or increase it by 1 if you already have it). If you drop to 0 hp again, your Dying condition starts at 1+your Wounded. This means that bouncing up and down at near-zero hp the way you can sometimes do in 5e doesn't work so well. The second is that if the hit that brings you to 0 hp is a crit, you start at Dying 2 (plus your Wounded condition).

True, I was forgetting about that, and that helps with "bouncing" but fundamentally neither system is particularly gritty or lethal. I'd be relatively unsurprised if DND2024 had such a rule, at least optionally.

 

[Minigiant]

Yeah right.

I'm a school teacher, I know that trying to "keep up with the trends" just makes you look silly.

I'm not saying dress like them.

But I have 2 players 20 years younger. I have Demon Slayer, Jojo, and MCU subclasses and races in my games.

 

[Cadence]

Yeah right.

I'm a school teacher, I know that trying to "keep up with the trends" just makes you look silly.

As the father of a middle schooler it feels like I don't have a choice about at least keeping up with what a bunch of the trends are.

Participating/watching/playing/reading all of them is a different story.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah right.

I'm a school teacher, I know that trying to "keep up with the trends" just makes you look silly.

As the father of a middle schooler it feels like I don't have a choice about at least keeping up with what a bunch of the trends are.

I feel like maybe teachers and parents have rather different attitudes here because parents essentially have to deal with this with one small set of kids with a similar cultural background, who they're extremely familiar with, whereas teachers have to deal with huge numbers of children from considerably more diverse socio-economic, religious and cultural backgrounds, and have to keep dealing with new kids as the decades roll on. I note the teacher who plays in my game would agree with Paul.

 

[Yora]

Personally, I cannot stand the direction D&D has taken. Although it was for kids when I started in the 80s, it was Conan. LotR. Swords and Sorcery. Great posters of monsters and warriors and a little more skin... now it is Pokemon and Harry Potter, with some Care Bears thrown in and a PG-13 rating at best, sometimes G.

My two groups still have tons of fun with TTRPGs, but we switched to Cypher System and now PF2 after a while. No new D&D products interest my players (they are the butt of some jokes heh), and they certainly don't like some of the vague mechanics of 5E, let alone trends like it being so hard to die (a reflection on the new generation? You decide ), all the races being the same mostly (no real differences between the many races with tails and fur), and the nature of the newer generation of RAW fundamentalists.

A shame 5E doesn't have lines of products based on interest or age. Harry Potter for the younger ones, and perhaps something gritty for the grognards. Ahh well, us grognards have so many old books I can make new campaigns for decades!

I "like" 5th edition. I think it's a solid game with good rules.
But I really only care for the Player's Handbook and the Monster Manual that have the rules. I also have the Dungeon Master's Guide for the magic items and 6 pages of other useful things that are in it, but not a single book that has come out since then looks remotely interesting to me.