When does D&D stop becoming D&D?

[Lonely Tylenol]

Ah, what is the Soul of D&D? ...
The Soul of D&D? It's rolling a natural 20 when you're down to 3 hit points and the cleric's on the floor and you're staring that sunnavabitch bugbear right in his bloodshot eye and holding the line just long enough to let the wizard unleash a firecube at the guards who are on their way, because they're all that stands between you, the Foozle and Glory.

Updated.

 

[RigaMortus2]

So it is going back to its roots as a tactical wargame-- and that is just fine for the old schoolers I think. Right?

That is a very good point. Still, D&D has evolved from a war game to something more. A storytelling game with war game elements. Now it seems to de-evolved. Not necessarily in a bad way, but as you put it, going back to it's roots. In the end, is there going to be much difference between 4E and the D&D Mini game? I mean, if you roleplay the D&D mini game, don't you get the same effect?

 

[RigaMortus2]

Does it matter? Surely the important thing, the only important thing, for us players is the quality of the game we're getting.

Only for sentimental reasons.

 

[RigaMortus2]

On a more personal note, ask yourself when you read about the game: if this was not DnD 4th edition, would I play it? Would I make the necessary investment to run the game? Would my friends/players agree to make the investment and play it? If the answer to those questions is yes, than no worries. If the answer is no, well that could be the best lesson on the power of branding and marketing one can get.

There are actually quite a few games out there I would prefer more than D&D 3.5. Star Wars Saga, M&M, and AE. The thing is, getting the rest of my players to play in a continuous campaign of these. I had a pretty long running AE going for awhile there, but I was DMing it and got a little burnt out.

I don't know why we can't seem to switch to a different game. I think part of it is because no one wants to re-learn a new system. The other part of it is because, well, it's not D&D...

 

[Jan van Leyden]

For me D&D is the game I meet with those people to play I started roleplaying 25 years ago, and the game we will be returning to after some detours.

These poeple had no problems adjusting to 2e, 3e, and 3.5e. They did want to return to D&D after detours to, among others, Earthdawn, Midgard, TORG, and WFRP.

But it also means that neither Eberron or Ravenloft are D&D for me.

Whether 4e fits the bill or not, remains to be seen, but I'm pretty sure that it will do so.

Beauty - and D&D - lies in the eyes of the beholder.

---
Huldvoll

Jan van Leyden

 

[pogre]

Medieval fantasy rpg that most people are playing = D&D for me.

The appeal of D&D for me these days is the big playerbase available. There are games I would rather play at times, but I can always get players for D&D.

Assuming 4e becomes the most popular version of the game it will eventually be my D&D too.

BTW - I'm not slamming D&D. I enjoy the game or I would not run it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

My fourth grade teacher thought that you could get lead poisoning from a pencil injury.

D&D is knowing more about English, Science or History then your respective teacher!


I don't know what it is that makes D&D unique from any other fantasy role playing game. Too many elements of D&D can be found also in other games.
It seems to be a lot of things, but none of them is exclusive to D&D, and not everything must be existent in a specific edition of D&D, too. If you have enough elements and add the D&D logo, it must be D&D.

 

[arscott]

To me, D&D is a Role Playing Game in which:

-PCs portray heroic characters. Not heroic in that they do good things, but heroic in that they do amazing things--that they are larger than life.

-The action takes place in a magical world that resembles Earth's past. Doesn't have to be medieval: Anything from the stone age to the Victorian Era can still capture the D&D feel.

-The world is populated by creatures drawn from myth (elves, dragons, minotaurs), creatures inspired by fiction (halfling, mind flayer), and creatures unique to the game (Beholders, Shadar-Kai)

-Conflicts are resolved primarily through combat. Not always, but often enough that combat is the main focus of the game's ruleset.

-In which actions are resolved by rolling a small number of dice, and comparing or applying the numbers rolled, rather than scoring successes or similar.

Or
(and this is important)

-A game whose rules are substantially similar to those described above, and whose setting and character are created as a response to or outgrowth of the Dungeons and Dragons game.

This last point covers settings like Dark Sun, Planescape, And even Urban Arcana, which all feel like D&D to me.



This is a pretty broad set of criteria, that can easily cover a lot of games besides D&D. Which is entirely appropriate, since I've often played other RPGs and thought to myself "This game feels like D&D".

 

[hong]

D&D is a game that lets you kill monsters and take their stuff.

This pretty much mandates that D&D must have monsters, stuff and hit points. Nothing enables killing as a routine pursuit as much as ablative hit points.

Oh, it must also have katanae.

 

[Sphyre]

My fourth grade teacher thought that you could get lead poisoning from a pencil injury.

Haha, and that's the problem with not calling it graphite.

Another story, although my ignorance as a child on this one... when I was a kid, the key to my room was on a thermometer in the hallway. One morning in my zombie state, I somehow managed to break the thermometer and the liquid got into my wound. I knew thermometers used mercury and that mercury was poisonous to humans, but what I didn't know was that this one wasn't a mercury thermometer. Being not even half awake, about 10 minutes later I said "Wait, do I need to go to the hospital or something?" and my mom told me that it wasn't mercury in it. Just a cut and a scar I still have to this day. Boy am I glad that parents were smart enough not to have a mercury thermometer and to know the difference as well.