The cleric was always sort of an odd man out because it's an archetype that doesn't really exist anywhere outside of D&D. There's no counterpart in the classic fantasy and S&S literature that early D&D took inspiration from.* And although the class vaguely references medieval Europe, there's no counterpart there either. The original cleric archetype is basically pure Gygax.

Thinking back, none of the parties in our long running campaigns back when included a cleric.

*The "evil priest" is a familiar character in S&S stories (Conan & etc.), but they don't resemble the early D&D cleric much at all.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;629446I just want D&D to be D&D.

When I want a more S&S feel with low magic and no magical healing then I use GURPS. Skilled combat characters can use defenses to avoid getting wounded in the first place.

Its too much to ask the D&D core game to be everything to everyone.

But you surely woundn't mind some optional rules to allow that style of play?
Or the 4e superhero style of play if that is what floats a group's boat?
An extra book with feats etc so it can play like 3.5 optimiser?
 I can't see why you would object to those things provided you can play yopur version?

The question I guess comes with what if your version, the OSR D&D if you will, is an option and not the core and you need to use some optional rules to make it run that way.

Quote from: Dimitrios;629447The cleric was always sort of an odd man out because it's an archetype that doesn't really exist anywhere outside of D&D. There's no counterpart in the classic fantasy and S&S literature that early D&D took inspiration from.* And although the class vaguely references medieval Europe, there's no counterpart there either. The original cleric archetype is basically pure Gygax.

Thinking back, none of the parties in our long running campaigns back when included a cleric.

*The "evil priest" is a familiar character in S&S stories (Conan & etc.), but they don't resemble the early D&D cleric much at all.

this is why I find it such an odd fit. Where divine characters do exist they are nothign liek the cleric so i think the 2e priest is a much more flexible archetype. I understand a Holy order of knights who might get some magic in certain settings but that magic needs to relate to their god. the only thing that might touch a D&D cleric is a hospitaler and that is such a narrow type its not even an archetype. It might well fit in some settings, but it's hardly a Warrior or a wizard or a rogue.

Quote from: Piestrio;629321Sure, but if you want to play D&D you should just play D&D.

So yes, if you want to play D&D, play D&D right. Translation, play D&D the way Piestro like to play.

Quote from: Piestrio;629330So when D&D loses healing clerics and vancian casting and the hundred other things that make D&D unique it becomes a product with no real draw, just an empty bucket.

As you say, there are hundreds of things that make it D&D losing one or two doesn't make it not D&D... maybe not to you.

Furthermore, your "go play something else" that's exactly what the people at Wizards are attempting to stop you from doing. They don't want you to play something else, they want you to play D&D

The Brand D&D, not what Piestro thinks D&D should be.

Quote from: VictorC;629454So yes, if you want to play D&D, play D&D right. Translation, play D&D the way Piestro like to play.

.

Seriously?


No, more like, "Play D&D the way it was played for 20+ years.  The way that made D&D what it was.  It's identity.  Not some mediocre product that tries to be better at all types of gaming than any other system."

Quote from: Sacrosanct;629455Seriously?


No, more like, "Play D&D the way it was played for 20+ years.  The way that made D&D what it was.  It's identity.  Not some mediocre product that tries to be better at all types of gaming than any other system."

But if they put in some optional ruels and you use them and they work then its win win right?

Quote from: jibbajibba;629449But you surely woundn't mind some optional rules to allow that style of play?
Or the 4e superhero style of play if that is what floats a group's boat?
An extra book with feats etc so it can play like 3.5 optimiser?
 I can't see why you would object to those things provided you can play yopur version?

The question I guess comes with what if your version, the OSR D&D if you will, is an option and not the core and you need to use some optional rules to make it run that way.

WOTC can include whatever they want. If the core is too far off from classic D&D then it won't stop me from playing. I just won't be running it.

Quote from: VictorC;629454Furthermore, your "go play something else" that's exactly what the people at Wizards are attempting to stop you from doing. They don't want you to play something else, they want you to play D&D

The Brand D&D, not what Piestro thinks D&D should be.

If WOTC hasn't learned that "The Brand" means absolutely jack shit without the goods to back it up by now then there isn't any hope for them.

Quote from: jibbajibba;629456But if they put in some optional ruels and you use them and they work then its win win right?

The elephant in the room here is popularity, and I think the dichotomy Sacrosanct just displayed underscores it nicely.

On the one hand -

"Guess what? So I don't play with that rule. It's literally that simple."

On the other -

"Play D&D the way it was played for 20+ years. The way that made D&D what it was. It's identity."

So it is okay for an individual to change the rules, because that's 'house ruling' and is no threat to anything.  But as soon as a group - particularly a popular group - does it, it becomes a threat.

Quote from: jibbajibba;629456But if they put in some optional ruels and you use them and they work then its win win right?

Absolutely.  But again, this comes back to people wanting the core rules to have all these things.  D&D will never be the best system for all genres or styles of play.  That's impossible.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;629459Absolutely.  But again, this comes back to people wanting the core rules to have all these things.  D&D will never be the best system for all genres or styles of play.  That's impossible.

so the releases seem to say core is like AD&D, next tep up adds 3e feats and powers stuff top end adds all teh bells and whistles.
Now d20 is a system that has been modded up the kazoo. They shoudl be able to take the best bits of that and use them as additioanl supliments for the core right?

Quote from: mcbobbo;629458The elephant in the room here is popularity, and I think the dichotomy Sacrosanct just displayed underscores it nicely.

On the one hand -

"Guess what? So I don't play with that rule. It's literally that simple."

On the other -

"Play D&D the way it was played for 20+ years. The way that made D&D what it was. It's identity."

So it is okay for an individual to change the rules, because that's 'house ruling' and is no threat to anything.  But as soon as a group - particularly a popular group - does it, it becomes a threat.

No it isn't.  You're missing a key part of what I'm arguing.  The Core Rules.  I don't care if optional rules are in place that make D&D a completely different animal than it was for the first 20 some odd years.  But the Core shouldn't be.  D&D has an identity.  People play D&D because of that experience.  If you try to make it the best for all experiences in the Core, then it will fail miserably.

So you see, there's no contradiction at all.  The Core D&D should match with it's identity, and optional rules (rules that I can ignore) can be added to tailor to individual experiences.  But all these optional rules should not be part of the core game.

Quote from: jibbajibba;629460so the releases seem to say core is like AD&D, next tep up adds 3e feats and powers stuff top end adds all teh bells and whistles.
Now d20 is a system that has been modded up the kazoo. They shoudl be able to take the best bits of that and use them as additioanl supliments for the core right?

I suppose they could.  In fact, the Core rules would be more like B/X with a few AD&D elements.  Then they could have one expansion module that allows you to have more of a d20 experience.  And other module that allows you to have a 4e experience.  And another that gives you a 2e experience.  But each module is independent of the others.

So you've got your core D&D that matches what the D&D identity is, and for those folks who like the other flavors, can just bolt those on.

Oh my god that comments thread it's like these people have never heard of D&D.  

What I am not seeing is how they are going to reconcile D&D Next with 4e AND with the older editions. 4e is just too different to make a core game that also works for older D&D.

Even if they had an optional powers and detailed tactics module that you can tack on, I doubt the resulting game would feel or play anything like 4e.

One thing we do know that B/X style D&D was very good at introducing the game to novices and expansive enough to keep them coming back for more.

I think that having D&D Next as a B/X clone with some revised mechanics (like Ascending AC) along with some customization options is the way to go for the core. Bonus points if you can make the core classes a decent result of a pre-picked build from the "advanced" version.

I think some people here are confused about what rules go where and what the structure of Next so far would be. You have the basic rules, the standard rules, and the advanced rules.

When people say "hey playing without a cleric and making healing easier than potions and the like should be an option in there" I say yes, sure. That should be an option in the game for those that want that. As soon as you talk about "options" though, that just doesn't go into the basic rules. It's either "standard", or "advanced", depending on the particulars.

The basic game should have clerics and potions/magic items doing the healing. Period. Then you can add all the bells and whistles in the expanded rules (standard and advanced) everyone will be able to pick and choose from to build their own play experience.

Make no mistake: if the basic game isn't "D&D" and isn't recognizable as such through and through, this next iteration of the game is going to pepper out "meh" style the way 4e did in no time. And that's a fact people who don't like D&D, "not really," should come to terms with.