What "IS" the Dungeons & Dragons Brand?

[Ranger REG]

Perhaps a better question might be 'what is unique to the D&D brand?'

It's a franchise. A game-based franchise that offers the rules and settings that uses the rules.

 

[Wombat]

D&D is a system, a system that has (unlike, say, GURPS) undergone massive changes to its core, but keeps core ideas -- hit points, armour class, alignment, levels vs. spell levels, divine/arcane split in magic, etc.

The settings are then crammed to fit the system, rather than the other way around.

This leads to strange questions about economics, demographics, morality, religious temperament, etc.

Ultimately, though, D&D is all about system ... whatever system that is in this edition.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Both: the implied setting and the rules.

 

[Clavis]

As far as I am concerned, whatever a creator says about their work is authoritative, and nothing said about that work by anybody else can ever be authoritative. Therefore, D&D, as a thing created primarily (albeit not solely) by Gary Gygax, is a thing that must ultimately be defined by him.

When asked on these boards what the essence of D & D was, Mr. Gygax replied:

"Absolute authority of the DM, rules lawyers given the boot

Rule books seldom used by a competant DM

Action and adventure in play

Swords & sorcery, not comic book superhero genre material

Group co-operation paramount for success

Freedom to extemporize and innovate for all participants

Reliance on archetypical models for characters

Fellowship of those participating"

From this statement I conclude that the current game called D&D is NOT D&D, and no amount of calling it by a the name D&D will ever actually make it D&D, until it returns to its original spirit and essential rules.

 

[Umbran]

The brand, technically, is a set of trademarks and the like - it is a reasonably well defined set of words and images used as a marketing tool. Think in terms of branding cattle - the brand is a stamp of a name and ownership. The brand can be applied to all sorts of things that have no clear connection to the rules or setting - you can have D&D brand lollipops, shaped like dwarves and elves and such.

This is a far different question from, say, "What is the D&D game, to you?"

 

[Odhanan]

Both elements of the system and implied style of adventuring.

 

[tankschmidt]

I'll go with system. In no particular order, D&D is:

1. Strong archetypical characters working together: at minimum fighting man, magic user, and cleric are necessary.
2. Vancian magic and spell levels.
3. Armor reducing chance to be hit, as opposed to absorbing damage. Armor options must include at minimum: unarmored, leather, chain, plate, and shield with any of the above.
4. Divine magic separate from arcane magic.
5. Alignment, whether it be one axis or two.
6. Six ability scores, typically rolled on 3d6.
7. Silliness inherent in many monsters: owlbears, gelatinous cubes, the bullette, the rust monster.
8. Class based and level based.
9. Hit dice, which will cap at name level or the equivalent.
10. Races include at least human, dwarf, elf, and halfling. Races need not be separate from classes.
11. Flavor of the rules based heavily on early to middle 20th century sword and sorcery and high fantasy writing.
12. D&D is organic; if you leave out a couple of these, you can still argue you are playing D&D.

Setting, however, doesn't seem to matter much at all. Blackmoor is gone, the Known World is gone, and look what they did to Greyhawk. Only a handful DM's are still building the megadungeon settings that this game was founded on. All that said, most players (maybe not most of the people on this thread, however) will agree that even WoTC's d20 fantasy game is still a form of D&D.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Ya know, I don't remember the rules of Monopoly being fundamentally changed all the time... And yet I can have fun playing it. Funny that.

The setting changes all the time, but its still Monopoly. Star Wars Monopoly, Simpsons Monopoly, NFL Monopoly, etc.

Its the system. Killing the sacred cows makes everything up for grabs (like whether or not I will buy it).

 

[Stumbling Tiger]

Let us suppose that Hasbro has decided to sell its RPG business, and that Steve Jackson Games ends up owning the Dungeons & Dragons trademarks and all related IP. SJG then releases "the new Dungeons & Dragons game," and all the written rules are identical to those of GURPS.

Mmmm. Tastiest proposal yet for D&D. Put the poor girl out of her misery. Can someone please cc Steve Jackson on this?

 

[Minicol]

Why is the poll closed so soon ?