D&D General Why TSR-era D&D Will Always Be D&D

[Sacrosanct]

Only quibble: Gaming technology also changes and advances due to innovation in game design.

The rules aren't tied to technology (not the in-person rules anyway). There are lessons learned as time goes by, sure, but the actual rules of a modern game like 5e absolutely could exist in 1974. Books are books, and existed back then as well. I.e., there is nothing technology-wise that would prevent the core 5e books from existing in the 80s. Certainly not nearly as big of a gap as there is between an Intellivision and a PS5.

 

[payn]

There is no need to wonder about the path not chosen. It too, has an ogre on it.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Its certainly painful trying to read a wall of text written in a style from the 1960s. Gramps.

I will save you the pain of both having to read, and getting in trouble for insulting people.

 

[Ovinomancer]

There is no need to wonder about the path not chosen. It too, has an ogre on it.

Top Post.

 

[Professor Murder]

The rules aren't tied to technology (not the in-person rules anyway). There are lessons learned as time goes by, sure, but the actual rules of a modern game like 5e absolutely could exist in 1974. Books are books, and existed back then as well. I.e., there is nothing technology-wise that would prevent the core 5e books from existing in the 80s. Certainly not nearly as big of a gap as there is between an Intellivision and a PS5.

My definition of technology is more expansive. Any system is a technology that can be refined and improved upon.

 

[Morrus]

bro those are two complete different things. The first is a tautology.

Its certainly painful trying to read a wall of text written in a style from the 1960s. Gramps.

This is weirdly aggressive for no apparent reason. And let's knock off the "bros" and the "gramps", eh?

[Edit— ah, it’s you back again, huh?]

 

[Guest 7034872]

You know, sometimes I just come here for Snarf's thread posts. Seriously.

 

[Mercurius]

Nice post as always, @Snarf Zagyg. It reminds me of my thinking back in the early 90s, when I discovered games like Talislanta and Ars Magica, or even White Wolf. I thought some variation of, "Boy, D&D's rules are kinda wacky - these are much better designed." It was a game whose chassis felt out-dated - and it was. This felt especially true comparing it to AM's magic system, or Tal's streamlined Action Table. Where games like Tal and AM were designed and published in the late 80s--after almost 15 years of RPGs--D&D was still borne from the halcyon days of Gygax's fertile (by idionsyncratic) imagination. I mean, even going back to the late 70s, Runequest seemed "better" designed.

Now 2000 comes around and 3E feels like a massive upgrade - mechanically speaking. And of course instrumental in that was Jonathan Tweet, who co-designed Ars Magica and had a hand in a later edition of Talislanta. But it felt like D&D crawled out of the murk of the 70s and--even if it still retained idiosyncratic elements (e.g. AC)--was at least streamlined and felt more like the older brother who still had a mullet, and less like the grandpa who couldn't work the VCR.

Fast forward to today, and I still wonder why I always come back to D&D. There are "better" designed games, and games that suit my aesthetic preference much more. Further, with WotC's recent quasi-ideological emphasis, I find myself withdrawing further ("can't we must play a game of dragons and wizards, and not worry about real-world stuff? There's enough of that on twitter"). But...D&D is still my first love; I was imprinted on D&D and, to this day, love its weird and wacky idiosyncracies and now immense body of lore.

And I think there is something more than just familiarity or imprinting. Despite its quirks, D&D has a unique signature or flavor - both crunch and fluff. From AC to the six ability scores to Vancian magic to mind flayers and beholders, to chromatic dragons and drow. And of course the worlds - Greyhawk, the Realms, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, the planes, etc. It is all "D&D," and nothing else.

So even if I don't like all elements of D&D, and like other games more, or appreciate them more aesthetically or from a design/mechanical point of view, I still love D&D and probably always will, on some level or another. Or to quote Charlton Heston in reference to my first edition hardcovers: From my cold, dead hands!

 

[LordEntrails]

So...? (to Snarf)

Yes, you are right, but what is the value in this? Yes D&D will always be shaped by its initial development. But when our generation dies off, only D&D historians will have any idea what TSR was.

Or perhaps the way I think of it is like an automobile. Automobiles (like RPGs) tend to have certain things that in their early history were found to work well. Like 4 wheels and 1 motor (abilities & dice). Sure, there are some autos that occasionally break these rules (3 wheels or 2 motors), just like their are class-less and dice-less etc RPGs, but the vast majority of folks stick with autoss that have 4 and 1.

Yes, innovation can and does take place. RPGs generally don't have save or die anymore, and some cars are moving to 4 motors (1 electric motor at each wheel). But does that mean a Tesla is still a Ford?

And about path dependency, sure, yea. Ok, again you are not wrong. But it seems you are arguing that they only way to get to a point is by a specific set of decisions. I don't believe that is true. D&D could easily be exactly what it is today had a thousand different decisions been made. How can one say that only if Darcy had decided not to be a (whatever he wasn't) that something like the SRD wouldn't have come to be?

In short, I think you give too much credit to keeping D&D linked to TSR.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Kinda a Ship of Theseus situation, under a long enough timeline. Mechanical refinement and drift inevitably mean that some future version of the game will have no mechanical connection to yea olde Chainmail.

This is definitely true, though the OP is probably correct that some rules (or at least, their names) will stay possibly forever. AC is a distinct example, despite the reversal from THACO.