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

[dcas]

No, the tables are a geometric progression.

Now you're just picking at nits. A geometric progression exhibits exponential growth when its common ratio is greater than one. And while I did not use the term "exponential progression" (it was your term), it is sometimes used by laymen to describe a geometric progression.

I apologize if what I wrote was misunderstood.

They were optional in the same sense thieves were. And since OD&D without supplements is clearly D&D, none of them are needed for a game to be D&D.

Class- and level-limits were not introduced in the supplements. We may as well say that all the races and all the classes are optional.

 

[jdrakeh]

No, it isn't.

It is when you look at the big picture -- the recent activity of a certain group of posters who are well known for harboring an intense hatred (and no, that isn't going too far) of D&D 3x to the degree that they have created a special lexicon of slurs to discuss the game elsewhere, the ratio of recent "lets call out D&D 3x fans by insulting their game" to "let's talk about why old school game rock, based on their own merits" threads, etc.

In the context of a post here or there, you're right -- the analogy is totally skewed. When applied to all of the aforementioned activity of the last three days, however, it's pretty dead-on. I know some of these posters. The ones I'm familiar with aren't poor, misunderstood, well-meaning fans of old-school games. They're deliberate trolls, lobbing insults with the intention of causing hard feelings. For them, this is standard operating procedure. Business as usual.

People like diaglo are well-meaning fans of old school games. People like Treebore. People like Joe Browning. People like Rothe. You know, people whose participation on these forums isn't limited to coming over here two or three times a year to tell people that Their Favorite Game is inferior crap. People who talk about the old school games they love without pulling out the list of 100 reasons why Older Game X is better than its new counterpart and anybody who thinks otherwise is a dumbass.

What I'm saying is that there's a productive way to discuss old school games in a mixed community, and "Old Scholl RoXXorz! New School SuXXorz!" ain't it.

 

[dcas]

It is when you look at the big picture -- the recent activity of a certain group of posters who are well known for harboring an intense hatred (and no, that isn't going too far) of D&D 3x to the degree that they have created a special lexicon of slurs to discuss the game elsewhere, the ratio of recent "lets call out D&D 3x fans by insulting their game" to "let's talk about why old school game rock, based on their own merits" threads, etc.

I think one would be hard-pressed to identify an "intense hatred" exhibited in this thread. And I'm not sure that "intense hatred" of a game (as opposed to "hatred" of people who play the game) is necessarily a barrier to civil discussion.

They're deliberate trolls, lobbing insults with the intention of causing hard feelings. For them, this is standard operating procedure. Business as usual.

I haven't seen any evidence that posters are trolling in this thread. Could you cite a post or two that you think is that of a "deliberate troll" who has "the intention of causing hard feelings."

 

[Thurbane]

A silly illustration of my point

Baseball Fan: Say Grognard, I hear you don’t recognise today’s baseball as being real baseball, and refer to it as Blurnsball, is this true?
Grognard: Yep, it sure is.
Baseball Fan: But you do know that by all technical, legal and popular definitions it IS baseball, right?
Grognard: Uh huh.
Baseball Fan: …and even though some people might take offence to it being called Blurnsball, you still use the term?
Grognard: Well, that’s really their problem, not mine. I don’t see what one old codger calls the game being anything significant enough for people to get in a huff about, do you?
Baseball Fan: Hmm…

Please let me make something clear: I am NOT defending people who come here and say “3.X is crap! I don’t know why you newbies play it!”. (The same way I will always challenge people who say the reverse). I am saying that worrying about what one person (or even a group of people) refer to a game as seems like a storm in a teacup to me.

 

[Storm Raven]

Now you're just picking at nits. A geometric progression exhibits exponential growth when its common ratio is greater than one. And while I did not use the term "exponential progression" (it was your term), it is sometimes used by laymen to describe a geometric progression.

You mean it wasn't you who posted this?

What if one says (with good evidence, mind you) that the features of D&D are: exponential experience-point tables, undeveloped or under-developed skill system, demi-human class- and level-limits, descending AC, no critical hits, non-unified die-rolling mechanics, thieves, etc.?

Class- and level-limits were not introduced in the supplements. We may as well say that all the races and all the classes are optional.

Nonhuman races as PCs were introduced in the supplements. The original character classes were fighting-man, magic-user, and cleric. That means that class and level limits were not part of OD&D when introduced. Yet it was still D&D.

 

[thedungeondelver]

It's like, I really, really like good vanilla ice cream. I will, however, pass it up every time for cookies and cream from the Somerset Creamery. Some things are good, but others are awesome.

...and other things, like what flavor of ice-cream is best or which version of the D&D rules are best, are wholly subjective.

 

[MerricB]

Nonhuman races as PCs were introduced in the supplements. The original character classes were fighting-man, magic-user, and cleric. That means that class and level limits were not part of OD&D when introduced. Yet it was still D&D.

You're misremembering.

OD&D Men & Magic:
Fighting Man; Magic-User; Cleric

"Dwarves may opt only for the fighting class, and they may never progress past the 6th level (Myrmidon)."

"Elves can begin as either Fighting-Men or Magic-Users and freely switch class whenever they choose, from adventure to adventure, but not during the course of a single game... However, they may not progress beyond 4th level Fighting-Man (Hero) nor 8th level Magic-User (Warlock)"

"Halflings: Should any play wish to be one, he will be limited to the Fighting-Men class as a halfling, Halfling can't progress beyond the 4th level (Hero)..."

Cheers!

 

[dcas]

You mean it wasn't you who posted this?

No, I said I didn't use the term "exponential progression." Since a geometric progression with a common ration greater than one has exponential growth, it follows that the XP tables, if they are geometric progressions, have exponentially-increasing values. That's not too hard to grasp.

Nonhuman races as PCs were introduced in the supplements. The original character classes were fighting-man, magic-user, and cleric. That means that class and level limits were not part of OD&D when introduced. Yet it was still D&D.

You are mistaken as MerricB points out above.

 

[dcas]

Baseball Fan: Say Grognard, I hear you don’t recognise today’s baseball as being real baseball, and refer to it as Blurnsball, is this true?
Grognard: Yep, it sure is.
Baseball Fan: But you do know that by all technical, legal and popular definitions it IS baseball, right?
Grognard: Uh huh.
Baseball Fan: …and even though some people might take offence to it being called Blurnsball, you still use the term?
Grognard: Well, that’s really their problem, not mine. I don’t see what one old codger calls the game being anything significant enough for people to get in a huff about, do you?
Baseball Fan: Hmm…

What if instead of ERA, RBI, etc., "new baseball" used slightly different terms that were calculated differently, so that (for example) a high "new ERA" was now good (the max. ERA in "old baseball" was infinity; the "new ERA" in "Blurnsball" starts at infinity and goes up from there)? And what if the number of outs per inning was decreased, but the number of innings per game increased? Oh, yeah, the fielders keep changing positions. Would you still call it baseball or would it have become something else?

[/tongue-in-cheek]

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Yes, d20 players and groggies everywhere have finally found a reason to unite: Our hatred of British English!

British English is teh suxxors! AE&G R0xxorz mY B0xx0RZ!!!

No such thing as British English, mate. That's an American fabulation.

There's Scottish English, Irish English, and Welsh English (all at least as different as American English) -- plus English, as in, the language spoken by English people.

Basically, we English people are right about the language by definition. They don't call it "United Statesese".