D&D General What makes a TTRPG a "D&D Variant" to you?

[dbm]

Rolemaster is a good example of not-D&D in my book. It has levels and classes, sure, but it’s not D&D in my book.

D&D variants probably have six stats, class, level, d20 attack rolls, armour class, saving throws, spells-per-level, HP as the primary measure of damage.

By those criteria, 4e is not a full fit since it doesn’t have the spells-per-level feature. But all other iterations of official D&D fit solidly, as does Pathfinder 1 and the OSR games I am personally familiar with.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

This is a fairly interesting question... honestly, "What is D&D?" carries as much philosophical weight as the Ship of Theseus.

I've tackled this before, but I view this in the following terms-

1. Core D&D. The OD&D/1e/2e/3e/4e/5e and BX/BECMI/RC line of games. Or, put another way, D&D are the games designated as such by the D&D rights holder.

That's the inner core of the "D&D Circle." It's pretty inarguable. D&D is what the holder of the D&D rights says it is.

2. But I don't think that this is quite expansive enough. D&D isn't just "official" D&D, because D&D in terms of usage encompasses a whole style of play and rules. I think it's easier to start with the rules- there is an entire universe of games that emulate D&D because they are clones of the rules. Maybe they have a tweak here or there, but these games, everything from OSE to OSRIC to so much more (retroclones) are, in fact, D&D. Any game that seeks to emulate and/or clone the rules in whole or in part to simulate a version of D&D is D&D. Which includes Pathfinder. And A5E (Level Up).

3. But wait, there's more! Following are some edge cases that I define as "not D&D" but could also be defined as "D&D."

A. What if it isn't fantasy? There were a number of d20 games that are not fantasy. The D&D rules in different editions have been adopted for use in different non-fantasy campaigns. There is noting wrong with playing a non-fantasy campaign, and there is nothing wrong with using "D&D rules" for something that isn't fantasy. However, by using the term "D&D," (which, before we forget, means Dungeons & Dragons) you are necessarily invoking fantasy. As such, while you can look at the amount of "fantasy" necessary, I do not think you can use "D&D" to refer to, for example, a purely modern or science fiction campaign.

B. What if it's based on a clone, but not based on D&D? This is the "PF2" exception. PF can be called D&D; but PF2 was developed independently, with new rules, as an evolution of PF. So PF2 is not D&D, even though PF is. Probably.

C. What if it's not designed to emulate the rules, but the "feel" of D&D? If a game is using a completely different underlying engine (PbTA, BiTD), but is looking to emulate the feel of a classic fantasy dungeon game (aka, D&D) ... it's not D&D. It might be a great game, but unless it is trying to emulate the rules of one of the D&D games, it isn't "D&D." That's the Dungeon World example.


But but ... D&D is also an almost generic term for TTRPGs for people that aren't in the hobby. So for many people, D&D is simply all TTRPGs.

I guess D&D is like art- we know it when we see it. But to me, it's interesting that I feel that the rules matter more than the intent (so that retroclones, even ones that have substantial changes, are D&D ... while a game that uses completely different rules to try to get the actual gestalt of D&D, like Dungeon World, isn't). On the other hand, rules matter less than feel when it comes to genre, so a game that isn't fantasy (d20 games set in science fiction genres) doesn't feel like D&D, even if it is using the D&D rules.

For me, D&D (and "D&D variants") is a game in the fantasy genre (either swords & sorcery / gritty like OD&D/1e or high fantasy like later versions) that has some linkage to the D&D ruleset.

YMMV.

 

[Desdichado]

D&D variants are games that vary from the rules (of some official edition) of D&D, and can be used in place of it. On the tight side, I'd even suggest that some D&D settings are best described as D&D variants rather than D&D per se, because they feel too different from D&D as we know it. Dark Sun, for instance. Pathfinder, especially first edition, was clearly a D&D variant, as is Tales of the Valiant.

Games that tread similar territory with different rules are D&D-like games in many ways, but are not D&D variants, they're alternatives to D&D. Shadow of the Demon Lord. Forbidden Lands, Earthdawn, MERP even.

Some games play in the liminal space in between, like ShadowDark or Five Torches Deep, or on the other end of things, d20 Star Wars or d20 Modern.

 

[Faolyn]

A combination of psuedo-medieval fantasy plus at least somewhat Tolkienesque races plus fighter/thief/mage and/or cleric classes and levels.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

I'd put it in two categories, D&D-system variants and D&D-style variants.

A D&D-system variant takes an iteration of D&D and either tweaks the mechanics of said iteration, or tries to recreate said iteration.

A D&D-style variant is a little more nebulous, but if a game has Halflings (not Hobbits, Halflings) it's probably a D&D-style variant.

 

[NN]

Rolemaster isnt D&D, but its not because its got 10 stats or d100 resolution. Its because its combat engine makes D&D style adventuring unworkable. (weak foes gang up effectively: and a death spiral as damage makes you worse at stuff; more difficult healing)

 

[Koloth]

My views roughly align with Snarf's. Except that I consider PF2 a variant. The ORC version is a direct result of Paizo wanting to "License Proof" themselves after the latest Hasbro "Let's modify the license terms" experiment. But the core D&D mechanics are still there. The classes, 6 atributes, feats, skills and spells are mostly there but renamed if there was any concern over copyright issues with 'Official D&D'. Close enough for me.

And don't forget TSR's try at a sort of scifi D&D with Spelljammer. AD&D Adventures in Space being printed on the box. Rather hard to say Dwarves in Space isn't D&D when is says D&D right on the box.

d20 Modern was another attempt to leverage the d20 system for a 'not D&D but kind of is" game. You have years of brand recognition in D&D, you don't really want to get too far away from that. Is D20 Modern a D&D variant? In some ways, sure, the heritage is there.

But lots of room for discussion.

 

[Jack Daniel]

The question is mechanical and historical for me. A game is a D&D variant if its mechanics descend from original D&D. This includes every OSR clone, near-clone, quasi-clone, and hack; every single d20 System game; Castles & Crusades, DCC, 13A, all of Pathfinder and Starfinder, etc.

The one that really rides the line for me — to the point where I think it defines the liminal boundary between "this is a D&D" and "this is not a D&D" — is Gamma World.

 

[Bagpuss]

D&D variant to me means: levels, classes, and the standard attributes.

I agree I would go as far to say to some degree setting doesn't even need to be fantasy.

There were a load of d20 variant games like Judge Dredd, and a Call of Cthulhu that I was put off by the level/class structure.

 

[Gorgon Zee]

Mechanical Characteristics of D&D:

• Class & Level Progression
• Six(-ish) Ability Scores
• Hit Points - Damage chips away at a single pool
• D20 - Roll 1d20 + modifiers vs. a target number
• AC - Armor makes you harder to hit, not mitigating damage

Play Experience Characteristics:

• Kitchen-Sink High Fantasy
• Mixed Archetypes - A fighter, a wizard, a sneaky rogue, and a holy healer all work together
• GM vs. Players Structure - GM presents the world; each player run sa single PC
• Power Curve - Low-level fragility to mid-level heroics to high-level demigods

If it has nearly all of those, or slight variations of them, it's D&D. Taking the mechanics only and using them in a different play experience (e.g. mutant post-apocalypse, space, etc.) stops it being D&D and makes it a d20 game.

If I went to a movie marketed as "A D&D movie", and it was based on Gamma World or Starfinder, I would feel misled (but possibly happier)