what makes a game "D&D"?

[woodelf]

The "Sacred Cows" posted by John Tweet, when they designed 3rd Ed, are what defines a game to be DnD and not "Yet another fantasy game." Personaly, I agree, the sacred cows are what makes the game DnD. This does not mean these bovines should be used in d20, but they are essance of DnD.

This, of course ,raises the question: what do you consider the sacred cows? hp/ac? stat range? The Six Stats? particular classes? What about magic is sacred for you? The particular spells? Just the schools? The divine/arcane distinction?

 

[Dark Jezter]

This, of course ,raises the question: what do you consider the sacred cows? hp/ac? stat range? The Six Stats? particular classes? What about magic is sacred for you? The particular spells? Just the schools? The divine/arcane distinction?

Here is what Rich Baker described as "Sacred Cows" of D&D...

"We created a list of so-called sacred cows because we wanted to make sure that we didn't abandon what was good about D&D in the effort to develop 3rd Edition. For example, many people suggested walking away from the "memorization" or "Vancian" style magic, because the all-or-nothing nature of the spell memorization system seemed too grainy to a lot of DMs. We looked at this one long and hard, and decided that we could address some of these concerns with a slightly different description of what memorization really means without throwing out the very good game-play features of the memorization system. Some of the other sacred cows included the real basics like hit points, saving throws, class and level, armor affecting your chance to be hit, etc., etc. When you play D&D, you expect to have hit points, you expect to roll saving throws, and you expect your character to have six ability scores. If any of these were missing, it just wouldn't feel like D&D anymore."​

Personally, I agree with these comments.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Vancian magic is not truly a sacred cow anymore. Sorcerors do not forget their spells and can usually toss their best spell 3+ times per day. It is now quite trivial to create a "Sorceror-like Cleric" or transition to some other system, e.g. "magic points" (psion).

I think the only true sacred cow is the feel of the power scaling which is principally enforced by HPs and levelling.

 

[Chasmodai]

Obviously what makes an RPG D&D are the numerous dungeons and dragons around in the game world. I mean, isn't that what its about?

For me, what I think is important is the spirit of it, not the mechanics or the numbers. Paladins, Wizards, Dragons, Elves, Fortresses, Evil Gods. All these - and much more - make D&D what it is.

So, in conclusion, any game that has these things* - and pulls it off with style, simplicity and enough drama/coolness - is D&D in my book.




*P.S This includes giant ninja robots and zombie pirates.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm curious what you'd do differently in "D&D Done Right." I think it's curious that you appear to prefer a more 2e feel than a 3e feel, as late 1e turned me off from D&D, 2e did nothing to bring me back to the fold, yet 3e brought me back immediately when it was released. 3e is D&D done right, IMO.

Be that as it may, even "D&D Done Right" still has things that bug me, mostly because they are D&Disms that I'd just as soon do away with. Not only that, they'd probably change from setting to setting.

But it sounds like you have very different ideas.

 

[diaglo]

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

 

[NeuroZombie]

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

Here Here!

 

[Desdichado]

Don't you mean Hear Hear?

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

See. I told you he'd be here.

 

[Mercule]

As for alignment...what if there was more to it? The existing alingments were there, but you defined your character's personality with more specificity within the alignment. IOW, a true personality trait system, but with the overarching categories of traditional alignment for judging usch things as using magic and interacting with extraplanars?

I think that would morph it too far. The axes are important for D&D alignment. You could, possibly add a third axis (I don't know what) and get away with it -- just as AD&D added Good/Evil to the existing Law/Chaos axis. You couldn't do much more than that, though.

Again, not that alignment is the best system in the world, but it is D&D.