What's the difference between D20 Fantasy and D&D?

[thedungeondelver]

By the time 2e had come out, AD&D's audience had ALREADY been cut in half. It wasn't because of 2e, it was because of the negative media exposure and parents reactions against the game during the time period.

What's your source on this, and can you cite specific numbers?

 

[Rothe]

...

....
We're never going to agree on this, the grognards are on one side of the fence and the d20 fanciers on the other. Nobody expects you to admit that d20 is not D&D, you're not going to get the reverse from any of us. It's moot.

I'd have to disagree, unless your definition of grognard is someone who doesn't believe 3.x "D&D" is D&D. Then grognard becomes a self adopted title for those who agree with you.
If on the other hand you adopt the definition of grognard as someone who played wargames before D&D came out and started with OD&D before AD&D came out, then as that person (and my friends can attest) 3.x is a D&D to us from a mechanics point of view, even though we don't prefer to play it for reasons of "feel."

Fast forward to the 21st century and there are those who want to, to use a phrase form the '70's, "put their trip on us", i.e., replace our subjective view of what D&D is, worth their subjective view. That to me, this more of a supposed AD&D thing based on editorials not an OD&D thing. If you want to talk about things objectively, e.g., mechanics, cool. But evaluations based on such subjective experiences as "feel," "play style" will get nowhere.

And yes, sites like ENWorld and e-mail correspondance with 3.x players convinved me that there is more similar to disimilar in the games. They also overcame my initial very negative gut reaction to 3.x books, the art, layout and rule changes. It's not matter of conversion, I don't play 3.x and probably never will. Finally, they had a open inclusive spirit, which I associate with OD&D, and that sense the spirit of those I corresponed with was more in line with my biased, subjective recollection of the good 'ole days of D&D.

Now 3.x may not "feel" like D&D but that is purely subjective and we can't really discuss that objectively, although we can share why we feel that way. Or we could take a vote. But who gets to vote? Everyone? Only those that started in 1974 when the game came out? Do you need to have wargame or miniatures experience prior to D&D? Can you vote if you sarted with AD&D or BD&D? Can you vote if you started in the 80's? When it comes to the subjective evaluation are we looking for those who had first hand experience with the "spirit" of D&D when it can out in 1974 and before the first revision in 1977?

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

What's your source on this, and can you cite specific numbers?

Well, Bill, I'd heard this too (iirc, from Gary Gygax, who doesn't tend to cite specific numbers). He (if it was Gary) said that D&D's popularity peaked in 1981-2 and was in freefall by 1984, when he had to cut short other business activities in order to rush out Unearthed Arcana and basically save TSR from the bailiffs. This rings true to me -- I think UA was a rush job compared to the previous material.

He also said that after all the court wrangling, he was still getting royalties on the 1e rulebooks even though he no longer had any control over the company. Therefore the Powers That Be in TSR told Zeb Cook & Co to write a second edition.

I don't doubt that Zeb himself and his design team thought they were improving the game, of course. He was a gamer through and through, and while I don't agree with his design decisions I respect his personal integrity.

But the people who told Zeb to do it were motivated by trying to cut Gary out of the loop and it misfired. It was definitely Gary who said that those idiots in the polyester suits with the briefcases full of balance sheets "halved D&D's audience to get out of paying me a few cents on each book."

 

[ssampier]

In order to answer the question of whether 3.5e is D&D, you first need to determine what makes something D&D, and it will be a different thing for different people.

For some, it is simply a matter of what the legal owner of the D&D brand calls D&D.

For others, it is a matter of iconic game concepts such as the six ability scores, hit points, armor class, races, classes and levels, experience points, saving throws, memorizing or preparing spells, magic missile, fireball, etc....

The last one is mine. I like my scared cows.

If 4.0 for some reason dropped some of these (especially levels and iconic spells like Magic Missile) it be fun, but wouldn't be D&D to me.


Don't you know about the new D&D honey?
All you need are minis and a whole lotta money.
It's the next phase, new wave, variant craze, anyways
It's still Dungeons & Dragons to me.

 

[WayneLigon]

By the time 2e had come out, AD&D's audience had ALREADY been cut in half. It wasn't because of 2e, it was because of the negative media exposure and parents reactions against the game during the time period.

Eh, I'd have to question that as well. The media exposure is what made D&D/AD&D popular; it was free advertising on a massive scale. Gygax makes this point in one of his quotes, that sales went up over 1000% (one thousand, not one hundred) from that. But that was in the early to mid-80's. By the time 2E came out, all that had mostly died down into the background.

Even by the time 2E came out, the main D&D/AD&D audience were still college-aged guys, who didn't give a rat's behind what their parents thought. Most of the teens I knew of that played it, their parents knew and didn't care. A couple played whose parents knew and forbid them from playing, which just meant that they did it anyway. The rest of us would bend over backwards to lie for them, too, if it became nessesary.

 

[teitan]

What's your source on this, and can you cite specific numbers?

See penandpapers reply. It is from anecdotes from various former employees of TSR, not seeing numbers etc.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Regarding 2E, my anecdotal input is that 2E pushed me away from D&D; everyone was moving to it, and I didn't care for it. I flirted with other systems for a while, but eventually started running a campaign with BECMI. Oddly, my attempts to run OAD&D met with resistance along the lines of "Why not just use 2E?" but my players accepted a BECMI game without batting an eye. Actually, I'm glad it worked out that way, because that particular BECMI game was probably the longest-running and most successful campaign I've ever run.

 

[teitan]

Eh, I'd have to question that as well. The media exposure is what made D&D/AD&D popular; it was free advertising on a massive scale. Gygax makes this point in one of his quotes, that sales went up over 1000% (one thousand, not one hundred) from that. But that was in the early to mid-80's. By the time 2E came out, all that had mostly died down into the background.

Even by the time 2E came out, the main D&D/AD&D audience were still college-aged guys, who didn't give a rat's behind what their parents thought. Most of the teens I knew of that played it, their parents knew and didn't care. A couple played whose parents knew and forbid them from playing, which just meant that they did it anyway. The rest of us would bend over backwards to lie for them, too, if it became nessesary.

I had similar experiences in 1989-1991 myself. Half our group was allowed to play, the other half wasn't. I was considered a Satanist in my school because I played D&D actually. I didn't start studying the occult until 1994 though and after I got out of D&D for a bit and it was because of my interests in comparative religion and not rpgs. Some of our players though were college age and married and their wives wouldn't let them play and I had to lie for them a lot.

 

[teitan]

I rejected 2e myself as well. We didn't use anything out of 2e except for the thief skills and we had already been using THAC0 so that wasn't a big deal. Eventually as the availability of 1e books became harder and harder in my area we converted to 2 in 1991, early 92 by getting a DMG because one DMG had fallen apart and I had the other copy but didn't want it to get ruined (still have it). We got PHBs shortly thereafter but used the first 2 Monster Manuals until the Monstrous Manual came out cause the loose leaf stuff was the crapper.

 

[thedungeondelver]

See penandpapers reply. It is from anecdotes from various former employees of TSR, not seeing numbers etc.

AD&D in a slump? That I'd buy. Especially considering the depredations of Brian and Kevin Blume and those in league with them. Considering the turnaround Gary brought on by getting UNEARTHED ARCANA published, I would rather say it had more to do with poor business management on the Blume's part than any "steam tunnels" bogeyman.