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

[diaglo]

What distinguishes D&D from D20 Fantasy?

for me it is preference.

i love D&D. on the other hand

my hat of d02 knows no limits.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

To me, D&D has always been about a certain feel of the game. Wierd monsters (frequently of the goofy variety like rust monsters and beholders), cinematic combat normal folks couldnt survive (check out the rules for falling damage), etc. You can play D&D with nearly any system, so long as you can re-create that feel.

 

[thedungeondelver]

my hat of d02 know no limit.

Fixed yr typo.

 

[RSKennan]

As someone who's written d20 materials that were meant to extend D&D, I've used it simply because I wasn't allowed to say 'D&D'.

 

[Umbran]

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.

Interestingly, for me, the "evolution" wasn't through 2e. I played 2e, but I learned the value of some of some of the 3e design when I played entirely different games that didn't have any D&D trappings to speak of.

Are you percieving insult where none is? I don't mean any.

No, no insult was taken. I was attempting to make sure none would be taken, by noting that the matter of numbering or naming isn't actually about the substance of the editions. They each have strengths and weaknesses inherent in them, but how they were named just isn't one of them. A rose, by any other name, would smell just a sweet, right?

Labelling the numbering as "rediculous" in this context may have the tendency to paint the design differences that are beign discussed with a brush that ought to be aimed at a discussion on marketing. Whether or not the name is hokey has little to do with whether the game is D&D, is all I'm sayin'

 

[DonTadow]

I was told recently by a potential player that my game wasn't dungeons and dragons enough for him, which completely confused me. Even when the player got to fight an actual dragon in a dungeon (tell me when the last time that happened?). His opinion came primarily because I used a lot of Iron heroes feats, classes and abilities in my game, which according to him made it more d20 fantasy than dungeons and dragons, which i always assumed was the same thing.

I'm fairly leary as to what to even call my next campaign. I'm using a dark fantasy setting for the d20 ogl steampunk book.

T

 

[Arashi Ravenblade]

Does it really even matter?

 

[Desdichado]

You mean something like Iron Heroes or Arcana Unearthed?

That's how I use it. I consider my own homebrew to be d20 Fantasy and not D&D, because of the extent of the house rules and agglomerated miscellaneous rules. The magic sysem from Call of Cthulhu (including Sanity), only three D&D classes, only one D&D race, etc.

Wizards of the Coast seems to make a similar distinction--they don't call d20 Star Wars, Wheel of Time, d20 Modern, or d20 Call of Cthulhu D&D either, even though they have a very high degree of similarity. I use kinda the same ballpark standard. If it's as different from baseline D&D as d20 Modern, Wheel of Time or Star Wars--more or less--then I call it d20 Fantasy instead of D&D.

If it's one of those semi-snide remarks from grognards to the effect of d20 D&D isn't really D&D or something, then I completely ignore that semantic implication. d20 D&D is as much D&D as anything else, as far as I'm concerned, and quite the improvement on any prior edition.

 

[JVisgaitis]

my hat of d02 knows no limits.

 

[thedungeondelver]

Interestingly, for me, the "evolution" wasn't through 2e. I played 2e, but I learned the value of some of some of the 3e design when I played entirely different games that didn't have any D&D trappings to speak of.

Then you have me, as they say, at a bit of a disadvantage. You brought no baggage with you in terms of expectations...!

No, no insult was taken. I was attempting to make sure none would be taken, by noting that the matter of numbering or naming isn't actually about the substance of the editions. They each have strengths and weaknesses inherent in them, but how they were named just isn't one of them. A rose, by any other name, would smell just a sweet, right?

Labelling the numbering as "rediculous" in this context may have the tendency to paint the design differences that are beign discussed with a brush that ought to be aimed at a discussion on marketing. Whether or not the name is hokey has little to do with whether the game is D&D, is all I'm sayin'

Oh sure, I gotcha. The whole marketing calling it "3e" "3.5e" and so on and so forth is silly in the extreme, but you're right: that's (mostly, probably) another discussion.