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

[Voadam]

I, as apparently others, use d20 fantasy when I mean d20/OGL based but different rules from D&D. This means Wheel of Time d20, Everquest RPG, Iron Heroes, Arcana Unearthed, BESM d20, C&C, Runequest, Slaine, Conan, etc are d20 Fantasy. Stuff you have to modify to plug into a 3e D&D game. I consider most third party d20 products D&D as that is what they are designed for. So all my Oathbound and Scarred Lands stuff I consider D&D even though they don't carry the trademarked D&D brand logo.

The fact that non D&D d20 fantasy products can use the d20 logo which requires labelling saying "requires the used of the D&D PH" is just required marketing labels that confuse the issue.

 

[Umbran]

The game isn't AD&D by any stretch

"By any stretch" is a pretty tall order. You wanna make room for other opinions in there, or will you out of hand dismiss all stretches presented to you? You see, to me, it seems like a good long stretch, but the stretch is there. The thread of developing elements, design, and style from AD&D, to Second Edition AD&D to 3e is pretty darned clear, to me. So I say your claim is pretty weak.

You might try, "It doesn't feel like D&D to me". People will accept that without question.

I mean, from a purely pedantic numbering standpoint, "3" doesn't make any sense at all.

Again with the "any". The more absolute you get, the more people will struggle against the iron grip of your statements as fact

See above - it is effectively the 3rd edition of the Advanced game, in terms of actual rules-revamping. But as a marketing point, labelling it as "Advanced" is probably a barrier to purchase. Don't laden good faith discussion with other posters with the burden of what marketing people figured was best for sales, hm? That isn't our fault, so don't hold it against us.

 

[RFisher]

The normal rules of language apply here: Anyone who uses the term will draw the line where-ever feels right to them. For some people, this may even vary from conversation to conversation.

The context I have seen it used in both typically and lately is by Dragonsfoot natives, as their stand of defiance and getting in a "zing" on Dungeons & Dragons 3e, because they believe that it's not worthy of the name "Dungeons & Dragons".

For myself, it absolutely has nothing to do with worthiness. It's that d20 Fantasy is--in ways that are significant to me--more similar to Rolemaster or Ars Magica or any number of other games than it is to D&D. I think d20 Fantasy is a great game with some D&D window dressing; I just don't think it is D&D.

In fact, I feel like there is a better game in d20 Fantasy lurking behind the D&D window dressing. I'd probably like it even more if it wasn't trying to be D&D.

(Although, I really don't use the "d20 Fantasy" moniker much. I'm more interested in trying to communicate clearly than in trying to make this particular point in an obscure way in discussions that have little to do with it.)

 

[thedungeondelver]

"By any stretch" is a pretty tall order. You wanna make room for other opinions in there, or will you out of hand dismiss all stretches presented to you? You see, to me, it seems like a good long stretch, but the stretch is there. The thread of developing elements, design, and style from AD&D, to Second Edition AD&D to 3e is pretty darned clear, to me. So I say your claim is pretty weak.

You might try, "It doesn't feel like D&D to me". People will accept that without question.

It doesn't feel like AD&D, 1st edition to me. And this is a realization I've had: it doesn't, because the bridge isn't from 1e to present. It's from late 2e to present. I think there's a lot of carryover from that era, which for me was too much, because I never went that far along. I've been happy in my backwards, "bad old days" gaming for many, many, many years. While I've run and played in current D&D I've never truly been comfortable there because (aside from...maybe a half dozen or ten sessions of 2e) I didn't "evolve" along with everyone else.

So yes, I admit. To me it doesn't seem like AD&D.

I don't see the similarity with "my" AD&D, but I recognize it's probably "better" for folks coming from a fully evolved (IOW played through 2e to current) point of view.

I don't mean that by way of denigration, however.

Again with the "any". The more absolute you get, the more people will struggle against the iron grip of your statements as fact

HEY, that's a quote from a different d20 game (and one I rather enjoy, actually...! )

See above - it is effectively the 3rd edition of the Advanced game, in terms of actual rules-revamping. But as a marketing point, labelling it as "Advanced" is probably a barrier to purchase. Don't laden good faith discussion with other posters with the burden of what marketing people figured was best for sales, hm? That isn't our fault, so don't hold it against us.

Are you percieving insult where none is? I don't mean any. I think just wiping the slate clean, dropping the silly number (and it is silly, and "three point five" is even more ridiculous; the only software I can think of that has prominently featured a "3.5" designation is WinNT 3.51, and is that something you'd want associated with any D&D?! ) and calling it D&D might have been better overall. Regardless of what you, or I, think of the "cleanliness" of the break between 1e/2e and the current edition it is there, and a tabula rasa approach would've served the game better.

In my opinion.

 

[RFisher]

But as a marketing point, labelling it as "Advanced" is probably a barrier to purchase.

Ironic since among the various circles of gamers I moved in at the time, the lack of "Advanced" on the classic line was the barrier to purchase.

Even though I had the Basic & Expert sets before any AD&D books, it was a long time before I looked back at the B/X game & realized how much I preferred it.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I tend to agree with Umbran's pistachio/ice cream analogy. 3e is D&D using the D20 Fantasy ruleset as a base. "D&D" itself, to me, is more about the core assumptions (as I see them) of the gaming environment (i.e., multi-racial party, class-and-level-based characters, etc.).

 

[drothgery]

I, as apparently others, use d20 fantasy when I mean d20/OGL based but different rules from D&D. This means Wheel of Time d20, Everquest RPG, Iron Heroes, Arcana Unearthed, BESM d20, C&C, Runequest, Slaine, Conan, etc are d20 Fantasy. Stuff you have to modify to plug into a 3e D&D game.

That's what I mean, too; in more than a few 4e threads I've said that what I'd want of Dave's Perfect d20 Fantasy Game is not what I'd want in D&D 4e. Some sacred cows I'd quite happily slay in a game built from the ground up certainly should be in anything called D&D (most notably the arcane/divine split in magic).

 

[delericho]

I, as apparently others, use d20 fantasy when I mean d20/OGL based but different rules from D&D. This means Wheel of Time d20, Everquest RPG, Iron Heroes, Arcana Unearthed, BESM d20, C&C, Runequest, Slaine, Conan, etc are d20 Fantasy.

Don't you just hate "me too!" posts? Well, tough . This is one.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I'd use d20 Fantasy when referring to a game that's different from typical D&D, like Violet Dawn. Still, not a lot of people that I've met outside of the internet get the whole "d20 System thing". So I usually say its like D&D, but with different x and y. Its hardly something to make a fuss and get all anal over.

 

[el-remmen]

I wonder why all the games I have run or played in whether AD&D, 2e or 3e still feel and play out like "D&D" to me?

I prefer to think that is because they all are.

Hell, I would probably say "D&D" even if I was playing Iron Heroes- as the basic premises are the same.


I would not use the term D&D to describe boot hill, star frontiers, call of cthluhu, gamma world, feng shui or deadlands - the premises are different.