D&D General Why is tradition (in D&D) important to you? [+]

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Tradition is important to me because it means everyone gets the D&D jokes.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Tradition is important to me because it means everyone gets the D&D jokes.

That's right!

After all, you can't spell DAD joke without DANDD joke, can you?

....my 1e Paladin is just like my car ... out of alignment! (Joke Courtesy of Grognard Talk with Click & Clack, the Tortle Brothers)

 

[Hussar]

I’m curious about how people view 3rd party products and the idea of tradition?

After all, many 3pp’s drift the game further and further in different directions.

It seems like something that would always be in tension.

 

[Cadence]

I’m curious about how people view 3rd party products and the idea of tradition?

After all, many 3pp’s drift the game further and further in different directions.

It seems like something that would always be in tension.

Some of the early Judges Guild things and the like seemed right in the tradition. Later, PF seems pretty in line with the tradition. And the Goodman game modules for 5e and A5E seem in it too.

13th age on the other hand felt like drift to me.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Some of the early Judges Guild things and the like seemed right in the tradition. Later, PF seems pretty in line with the tradition. And the Goodman game modules for 5e and A5E seem in it too.

13th age on the other hand felt like drift to me.

Interesting. PF actually ended up going pretty far afield in some ways. The whole idea of archetypes and the introduction of like...35 new classes or whatever. By the end, backwards compatibility with 3.5e was loose at best.

 

[Cadence]

Interesting. PF actually ended up going pretty far afield in some ways. The whole idea of archetypes and the introduction of like...35 new classes or whatever. By the end, backwards compatibility with 3.5e was loose at best.

If PF had started out with all the expansions it had near the end, instead of.just the core books, I think I would feel different about it too. But having them gradually added on over the years it didn't feel like there was ever a break to me.


Do all editions that have splat bloat end up like that? Would someone just now trying 5e (from 2 or 3/3.5/PF) with all the expansions feel different about it from someone trying it with just the core books?

 

[Azzy]

Tradition, in and of itself, isn't important to me for the most part. When it comes to lore and fluff, I am turned off by a lack of continuity from older editions (probably the biggest reason 4e was a no-go for me). Though, I'm willing to make exceptions to yeet problematic stuff.

As far as rules, I'm a lot more permissive as long as the core elements (d20, 6 attributes, races (or whatever), classes, levels, spell slots, etc.) are kept.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If PF had started out with all the expansions it had near the end, instead of.just the core books, I think I would feel different about it too. But having them gradually added on over the years it didn't feel like there was ever a break to me.


Do all editions that have splat bloat end up like that? Would someone just now trying 5e (from 2 or 3/3.5/PF) with all the expansions feel different about it from someone trying it with just the core books?

Oh, almost certainly. I've definitely heard people say that late-2e felt like a different beast, due to having a vast number of kits, variant rules, alternate racial features, etc. I believe they call it "Skills and Powers 2e" due to the main book (published in 1995) that held the majority of these things. Late-era 3.5e was a meaningfully different beast from fresh-off-the-presses 3.0 for sure.

Honestly I think the only edition that maintained a fairly singular identity is 4e. Essentials confused folks, but was fundamentally the same game with some very small opened design space (subclasses with different roles, or multiple roles/power sources, for example). Overall though it stayed pretty focused, though admittedly it was only actively published for about four or five years, comparable to 3.5e (3.0 came out mid-2000, 3.5e mid-2003, 4e mid-2007, 5e mid-2014, but they'd stopped publishing things for 4e around early-2012, not long before the Next Playtest started.)

By comparison, 0e was constantly evolving because it was brand new, and 1e had some significant drift due to the rather sudden expansion of players that had no relation to Gygax's culture of play (that is, those who had no connection to people he played with, or who could trace their play education back to him).

 

[Lanefan]

Do all editions that have splat bloat end up like that? Would someone just now trying 5e (from 2 or 3/3.5/PF) with all the expansions feel different about it from someone trying it with just the core books?

Yes, the game becomes less accessible and harder to just pick up and go; and I rather suspect that WotC's slow release schedule might have been done specifically to delay this situation as long as possible.

 

[pogre]

So I'm curious about those of you who really value Tradition in D&D. Why is it important to you? What value does it have?

The traditions I most value in D&D are:
1. Zero to Hero.
2. Dungeons.
3. A kitchen sink of weird monsters.

I play lots of other TTRPGs, so I have different expectations and preferences for those. The value for me is D&D does dungeon delving and leveling of PCs really well. It's great it has such a big umbrella that lots of folks use it for entirely different styles of campaigns.

I don't mind new mechanics and I have no real attachment to lore in D&D.