Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9612026" data-attributes="member: 7635">As with any analogy, you can poke enough holes in it to show it doesn't work if you try, but I think Snarfs analogy is quite apt. A brand will only tolerate so much tinkering before people no longer accept it as part of the brand. It doesn't matter how objectively good the changes are. There is a world where a fantasy RPG has strict controls on magic, limited but flexible character options to create whatever you want and a combat system that is elegant, balanced and equally in line with the other parts of the game. And it will never be called Dungeon &amp; Dragons <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="™️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/2122.png" title="Trade mark&nbsp; &nbsp; :tm:" data-shortname=":tm:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> because people will not accept it as such. D&amp;D has to, at some level, resemble the game played in the late 70s and 80s (even if it gets all manner of glossy updates) because that's what people associate.A different, imperfect analogy. For near a long while, DC has attempted to update Superman's costume. It's outdated. Its a carnival strongman outfit with a cape and a big S on it. They have removed the trunks, added belts, changed it to armor, added collars, gloves, and shoulder pads. Changed it to black and all other different colors, and even put him in a T-shirt and jeans. And every time, he eventually goes back to the iconic original, red underpants and all. Make all the underwear on the outside jokes you want, scream &quot;NO CAPES&quot; like Edna Mode. Superman is going to wear some variant of the same thing he's worn for 90 years. D&amp;D is like that. You can dream of all manner of better designs that are modern, improved, and well designed, but if your D&amp;D variant doesn't allow for a Chaotic Good High elf Ranger, it's not going to be accepted as D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 9612026, member: 7635"] As with any analogy, you can poke enough holes in it to show it doesn't work if you try, but I think Snarfs analogy is quite apt. A brand will only tolerate so much tinkering before people no longer accept it as part of the brand. It doesn't matter how objectively good the changes are. There is a world where a fantasy RPG has strict controls on magic, limited but flexible character options to create whatever you want and a combat system that is elegant, balanced and equally in line with the other parts of the game. And it will never be called Dungeon & Dragons ™️ because people will not accept it as such. D&D has to, at some level, resemble the game played in the late 70s and 80s (even if it gets all manner of glossy updates) because that's what people associate. A different, imperfect analogy. For near a long while, DC has attempted to update Superman's costume. It's outdated. Its a carnival strongman outfit with a cape and a big S on it. They have removed the trunks, added belts, changed it to armor, added collars, gloves, and shoulder pads. Changed it to black and all other different colors, and even put him in a T-shirt and jeans. And every time, he eventually goes back to the iconic original, red underpants and all. Make all the underwear on the outside jokes you want, scream "NO CAPES" like Edna Mode. Superman is going to wear some variant of the same thing he's worn for 90 years. D&D is like that. You can dream of all manner of better designs that are modern, improved, and well designed, but if your D&D variant doesn't allow for a Chaotic Good High elf Ranger, it's not going to be accepted as D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification