What's your idea of a fun D&D game, droog?

droog,

About 3 years ago I got back into D+D after an absence of more than 15 years.  I got out of D+D in the first place because I wanted to do things it didn't do well...explore other character types (merchants, spies, political types...even fire mages), focus on other kinds of conflict, other ways magic might work, etc.  Just before I got back into it, I realized I had had a lot of time to focus on other character types and other types of conflict and other ways magic might work...and I realized that if I took D+D for what it was and didn't try to completely rewrite it, then I could find some really interesting things to do within the D+D paradigm.  

So I think it's a matter of outlook.  If you can embrace what D+D does well, even if you don't embrace everything it does, then you can have fun with it.  For example, I ran a Black Company game (before the Green Ronin sourcebook) where I used pretty standard core-only 3.5...but I threw out the cleric class.  It was fun for me because I wasn't struggling against the limitations of D+D but rather I found something fun to do within what D+D offered.

The question is:  can you find something fun to do within what D+D offers?

Quote from: droogOkay, though I hope it doesn't derail my own thread. My tastes are like a red rag to a bull round here.

Fear not; my point in asking wasn't to go off-topic; it was to see if there was anything in the games you enjoy that is translatable to D&D.
You see, it may be a fool's errand if (as some have suggested) your post amounts to veiled D&D bashing, but I'm going to go with the "hope springs eternal" thing and see if we can't actually dialogue for a bit.

Quote

• I'm always up for some Pendragon.
  

Ok, well let's start there, since its the most salvageable of the games you listed.

Is the only thing you see in Pendragon to be of value the mechanics? Or is it the setting and the concepts in it that you like? Because while Pendragon does have its share of dirty-hippy mechanics, in essence, Pendragon is about making Knights and going questing.
D&D, at its essence, is the same thing. You could certainly run a game of D&D borrowing some of the things you find cool about Pendragon ( you could even adapt the whole concept of traits and passions to D20, as a replacement for the D&D alignment concept), and make a very old-school D&D game of "heroes of the kingdom" going off to quest for the sake of honour, glory, the King, and noble causes.
You can make D&D have a setting where magic and monsters are more fantastic and rare than the bog-standard and where heros are particularly heroic.  Iron Heroes is pretty good at that, for example.

Quote

• I've still got a soft spot for V&V, though I'm pretty sure that has to do with my last campaign rather than anything intrinsic to the game.

I know you were specifically talking about D&D, and not D20, but Mutants & Masterminds would possibly be to your liking then.

But again, what was it about the campaign of V&V that you liked?
Because another possible way to take D&D, one that is pretty easily do-able, is where Adventurers are the Superheros of their world. Your PCs start off as low-level "sidekicks" or "teen titans" or whatever, and progress to become one of the great superteams of their setting.

My point is that one of D&D's greatest strengths is that it can be run in SO many fucking ways; I know you've come to believe that obsessive little micro-games with very focused playstyles is supposedly a "good" thing, but if you can take the vastness of D&D and frame it into a more focused orientation that is to your liking, you will find that far from being "generic", no two D&D campaigns need be the same way.  The key is taking the "toolkit" of D20 and narrowing it down to do what you want it to for each campaign run.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Lee ShortThe question is:  can you find something fun to do within what D+D offers?

then again, if he's having fun doing high or low fantasy with something else, why bother?

Quote from: beeberthen again, if he's having fun doing high or low fantasy with something else, why bother?

Plethora of published support, plethora of gamers familiar with the system, plethora of options for expanding or changing or growing a game/setting, etc... Could be many reasons. Then again, could be none, if none of the reasons are particularly compelling or applicable. The question was asked though, so the answers are being explored.

well, looking back on the original post, it seems the main question is (paraphrased), "why do i put up with the d&d-like elements in a video game, but don't care for it in my gaming?"

the answer to that is simply mechanics, in my book.  if i want videogamey gaming, i'll play d&d.  the whole mechanics (xp tables, hp inflation, ever-increasing reliance on magic items, etc.) just screams vids.  which given its roots, is no surprise.  but if i want to play anything with a sense of realism, i'd use something else, like traveller or BRP.

Quote from: beeberwell, looking back on the original post, it seems the main question is (paraphrased), "why do i put up with the d&d-like elements in a video game, but don't care for it in my gaming?"

the answer to that is simply mechanics, in my book.  if i want videogamey gaming, i'll play d&d.  the whole mechanics (xp tables, hp inflation, ever-increasing reliance on magic items, etc.) just screams vids.  which given its roots, is no surprise.  but if i want to play anything with a sense of realism, i'd use something else, like traveller or BRP.

No argument from me there. I personally like both, but I do know that if D&D has a real weakness, it's in modeling realism. Our group has used the Grim N Gritty rules plug-in and that makes it get closer where lethality is concerned, but still, realistic it ain't.

It sounds like you don't like D&D right now, but you want to. If that's the case, then thinking about and answering Thanatos02 and Dr. Rotwang's questions are key.

For example, I like the development of skill and competence over time not only of the characters, but also of the players as they learn to more cleverly and more effectively use the sub-systems of D&D (tactical combat, magic, classes and prestige classes, etc.). I also love no-holds-barred gaming, where PvP, evil characters and everything else are permissible, and D&D is less hostile to that style of gaming than other games would be.

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!What would you get out of it if somebody did?

I think that variety is a good thing in and of itself. If it's as good at combat as it's reputed to be (I don't think AD&D was, particularly), it may be just the thing to round out my RPG experience.

But--it's a big investment. It's not even just the books, because I think that highly tactical games do benefit from using a board. Back in the day I played RQ with a handmade board (staggered squares) and handmade cardboard figures, and we found that it was a great aid to combat. I don't see why I would get into the most highly-touted combat game there is without using some sort of board and markers. That either means making them for myself or buying them, and I'm short of both time and money.

Thus, I need some persuasion.

Quote from: Thanatos02What's your idea of a fun D&D game, droog?

Is this a trick question? I guess it would be a high-challenge combat-filled game. As I say, I think you should use a game for what it's best suited for, and that is my reading of D&D 3.5. The IH variant even more so.

You lack only one thing:

enthusiasm

Quote from: RPGPunditYou see, it may be a fool's errand if (as some have suggested) your post amounts to veiled D&D bashing

Please. I have a life, you know.

QuoteIs the only thing you see in Pendragon to be of value the mechanics? Or is it the setting and the concepts in it that you like? Because while Pendragon does have its share of dirty-hippy mechanics, in essence, Pendragon is about making Knights and going questing.

I see games holistically. The system of PD isn't reduceable, in my view, to the blackjack dice mechanic or the Traits and Passions. Those are only parts of a structure that includes the Glory system, the Winter Phase, the time-scale, the 'historical compression' and the way characters are created. Those all support and frame the knights and the questing. The questing knights bring colour and meaning to the structure.

What I would want from D&D would be something I get from no other game on my shelf. If you buy a Ferrari, it's because you want to drive like a lunatic (or impress chicks, I guess).

I've had twenty years of bending a game to do the things I want it to do. No more. Now I play a game for what it does, and if I want something different, I play a different game.

QuoteBut again, what was it about the campaign of V&V that you liked?

What I liked about that campaign was that it involved people I'd known for years playing themselves as superheroes (that's the default set-up for V&V), and the situations that that produced. That's not repeatable with a different group. I'm not actually interested in superheroes as such. I'm not at all inclined to pick up Capes or With Great Power, to name the two best-known Forge supers games as examples; no matter how groovy their mechanics are.

QuoteMy point is that one of D&D's greatest strengths is that it can be run in SO many fucking ways;

That is not a selling-point for me. You're talking to a guy who used one system (ie RQ) for everything for at least twelve years. No more.

I sincerely hope this is not seen as 'bashing' (than which I can hardly imagine a more useless pastime).

Quote from: SettembriniYou lack only one thing:

enthusiasm

Well, total disinterest has blossomed into being intrigued, so maybe I can work the enthusiasm up.

Quote from: droogIs this a trick question? I guess it would be a high-challenge combat-filled game. As I say, I think you should use a game for what it's best suited for, and that is my reading of D&D 3.5. The IH variant even more so.

I'm not the kind of guy to field trick questions, guy. I ask because it may be useful to work backwards. I'll explain what I mean, though.

I've seen you ask this question on rpg.net, at least, and I have no reason to think you're not asking in good faith. But, given what you percieve to be D&D's strengths and flaws, it looks like you're clearly working against and not *with* the system. But, as you said to Dr Rotwang!, you're interested in variety, et al. So, my actual question is (because, some things are implied), "Assuming you're asking in good faith, and you're really interested, you probably have a reason you're trying to make D&D work for you. If you assume this is the case, what is the basics of what you imagine a good game to present when you use D&D?"

Now, some of that's been answered. You view D&D as providing a good tactical combat game, but if that were really it, I would just say that it's not likely to be worth the effort of going through all that stuff you *don't* like. So, I know you're trying to present a strong combat emphasis, and that's fine. D&D does combat well. So what else?

Well, the thing to keep in mind is that it's easy to keep combat at the front of the game, but the other thing to remember is that D&D 3.5 doesn't play nice with the Big Model school of play because it was built according to a more traditional school of design. You like a lot of Forge stuff, so I feel I might be better off to approach this in the negative of Big Model, though, so bear with me because I'm not exactly a flawless scholer of that design school.

D&D is a game that is trying to promote a variety of agendas, and it does them at the same time. It's an amalagam. As long as you use the standard exp system, the narrative is driven by besting challanges. It is a task-based resolution mechanic where each resolved task is a single frame by itself, and warrents its own resolution. Solve problems, gain exp. Simulationism and Gamism function on their own merits, but it's not that clear. The world that D&D replicates is it's own myth, created by previous varients of D&D. That is, 3.5 was designed to replicate other D&Disms. That's why the internal logic works on its own accord almost flawlessly but breaks apart when you try to compare it to the outside world. The gamist logic should hold together in its own right.

But, when you play D&D, you must not try to seperate your agendas. When you play, you must view these agendas as reconcilable. Thus, when you play D&D, what you're getting is a game with reconciled agendas in a task-based resolution mechanic. Your game is about solving problems with the system. Preferably with bitchen swords and uncanny magics, and probably there is a dwarf (and someone always wants to be an elf).

Unless you change what gets you exp, or add a fate point system (like d20 modern), do not try to add 'narrative' rules on the fly, because it will probably suck. Don't try to change it from task based to scene-based, because it doesn't work. The stakes set are always the object of the skill check (I climb the mountain, I open the chest, I shiv the gaurd). The stake is implicit in the action (because I want to get to the top, want the item, want to gank the guy before he sees me).

Optimally, you should have a strong mastery of the game, allow creative imput from the players, shouldn't try to cheat them, work around the rules, or rail-road them, and should hold them accountable for their decisions mechanically and as they choose their story. Ask Pundit for advise on 'a cast of thousands' for example.

Does that help? I'll narrow on a topic or expand on something as you like.

EDIT: I should note that you're clearly online when I typed my message, but it's 2:30 here and I'm pretty wiped out. Any other replies get responded to in the morning. Good night!

My advice to work up your enthusiasm:

Un-learn.

Get yourself a PHB.

BE A PLAYER IN A D&D GAME WITH A DM OF YOUR TRUST! [utmost importance]

Look at quality 3.5 material, let´s say the first Adventure for the Age of Worms Adventure Path, or the Wilderlands box.

Feel the excitement of grandiose high fantasy adventure, combat, problem solving and badassery, along with epic one liners, snappy comments, and pure excitement.


Play more.