As curiosity, after going through the debate in the Neverending Thread of Doom, what features MUST an RPG - including both official editions and house rules - have in order to be considered D&D?
I'm trying to work in everything that I've seen people say; I may have missed a few.
If you don't see the poll yet, it will be there in a few minutes...
(Note: public poll)
(Note 2: Since I sadly can't edit my poll options, Choice 1 means the core rulebook(s) must be published as D&D, but this doesn't exclude supplements and house rules.)
-O
I voted 'Dungeons as main adventure locale' and 'other'.
My other is Dragons...;)
You need others to acknowledge it as a D&D game. The individual reasons any given person accepts will vary, and the most important part is that there is a loose consensus about those reasons amongst the players in the group, whether explicit or not.
Quote from: One Horse TownI voted 'Dungeons as main adventure locale' and 'other'.
My other is Dragons...;)
Damn! I knew I forgot something. :)
-O
What's up with the percentages? Is it 'cos i voted on 2 options instead of 1? :confused:
Quote from: One Horse TownWhat's up with the percentages? Is it 'cos i voted on 2 options instead of 1? :confused:
No - the percentages are based on X amount of voters, out of a total number of Y.
So, for the second-to-last option - when I just looked - it had 4 votes out of a total of 6 voters.
-O
for "hit points" it should read, "inflating . . ."
a 10th level fighter with 20 hp (frex.) wouldn't be d&d
Quote from: beeberfor "hit points" it should read, "inflating . . ."
a 10th level fighter with 20 hp (frex.) wouldn't be d&d
Fair enough.
Sadly, I was limited to 10 options. :)
-O
What does the first option mean? I can read it as either "something that has the 'D&D' label," or as "the three corebook model."
Quote from: PeteWhat does the first option mean? I can read it as either "something that has the 'D&D' label," or as "the three corebook model."
I intended it to mean, "The main source of rules for the game is/were published as D&D by a company with the legal rights to publish D&D" while allowing for other, 3rd-party sources & house rules as well.
So, if you use the 3.5 corebooks, or the Rules Cyclopedia, or 1st/2nd AD&D, as your core rules, that game would qualify.
It may not have come across well. :) I kinda thought it would be a "Well, of course!" option, but it looks like I was wrong!
-O
I parse my answers differently for D&D "as published" or "as played." If I ran a psionics-only home game that doesn't use vancian magic, I would still feel pretty comfortable telling my players "we are playing D&D friday." But the game as published, I expect to be more foundational and have vancian magic, for example.
That's how I took it. Lately I'm thinking RPG + Fantasy + Dungeon = D&D to the general public. You need to do something more than just shuffle the dice mechanics, magic system, and some of the backstory for it to not resemble D&D to the casual observer.
Then again... maybe most traditional RPGs are basically just D&D with some rule and setting variations. They're basically all the same game.
IF I was going to run Dungeons & Dragons, then I would consider it required and a courtesy to my players to have : The Players Handbook, Dungeomaster's Guide, and a Monster Manual.
Of the three of those three, I have TWO of them on my bookshelf right now....and I don't even run D&D.
I now realize you meant upcoming future versions of the game.
My answer is still the same then a recognizable, to most people - Players Handbook, Dungeonmasters Guide and a Monster Manual as the basic 3 core books.
- Ed C.
I voted for the 6 attributes, Gygaxian flavor, saving throws, classes and levels, and predominantly fantasy setting. Yes, I would consider such a game D&D even without Vancian magic and hit point bloat... uh, for the most part.
-=Grim=-
My poll, but I went with...
* Published as D&D. I think this is a necessary part of a game being D&D, but I can accept that it may not be sufficient.
* Classes & Levels. Without a doubt, this is a fundamental feature of the D&D system as far as I'm concerned.
* Fantasy setting. I dunno; I can't see fighters & wizards as features of hard sci-fi. :) If the setting's not fantasy, you may be playing something D&Dish, but without swords & spells, it just ain't.
I see everything else as fairly optional - but without at least one or two of these items, things get shadier...
- 6 core stats... I'm close on this, but I think it'd still be D&D with a True20ish +/- system, or changing a stat or two. (Comeliness, anyone? Yah, I didn't think so...)
- Vancian magic. Not gonna go there in this thread, too. :)
- Dungeons as primary adventure locale. I think you can play for years without ever going into a dungeon. Heavily political D&D games, mercenary campaigns and the like would qualify.
- Gygaxisms. I was very very close on this - it's a huge part of the core flavors, but I think you can play (for example) a historical D&D and still have it be D&D. Also, settings like Dark Sun have less Gygaxian influence than games like Earthdawn, so I couldn't pick this one.
- Saving throws... I rather like Saga's defenses, so I could do without for D&D also.
- Hit points. Close on this one, too, but I've seen damage variants like Grim & Gritty which I'd still call D&D. I also think you could play D&D with a damage save of some sort. I'm iffy on this, however.
I'm gratified not to see all too many "Other" selections, so my list at least is largely sufficient for a lot of folks. :)
-O
All of them except "Use rulebooks published as D&D" (especially with the OGL, we can no longer use this as a measuring stick - Mongoose's pocket handbooks are D&D 3.5th edition in everything but name, and C&C certainly has enough of D&D's cultural heritage to count as an unofficial part of the family tree) and "Dungeons as main adventure locale" (although the classical dungeon, especially the megadungeon, is very much a clear identifier of D&Dness).
A few points:
Gygaxian flavor (e.g. beholders, mind flayers, magic missiles): this is responsible for a lot of the differentiation from other FRPGs. D&D is not a generic fantasy game; it is the game with carnivorous gelatine, Giant Frogs, Tasha's Uncontrollable Hideous Laughter and Vacuous Grimoires. Although a game can be identifiably D&D by toning down the weirdness, EGG's personal stamp is very much its core element.
Hit points: hit points are required for a game to work as D&D does, but they aren't sufficient. This mechanic has been adopted by several other systems, as well as most computer games (to the extent that even platformers have them), and is one of the most successful "exports" of the D&D concept (classes are the other).
Classes + Levels (with or without multiclassing): yeah, although the precise selection of classes is finicky. Good arguments have been made both for and against having a larger number of classes and WRT various models of multiclassing. The core four are of course indispensable, others depend more on campaign flavour (e.g. a more sword&sorcery world may benefit from 1e style illusionists, while paladins would not feel right there).
Predominantly Fantasy setting: it is a "yes", but with the caveat that excursions to alternate realities, even non-fantasy, doesn't make the game non-D&D. Also, although the implied setting is very strongly imprinted by the rules, there have been successful attempts to apply D&D to slightly different ideas. Some of them worked (Dark Sun), others not so much (Planescape, and I'd include Ravenloft).
So, for those who didn't choose "main rulebooks published as D&D", are Arcana Evolved and Iron Heroes "D&D" to you? If not, why not?
Quote from: Caesar SlaadSo, for those who didn't choose "main rulebooks published as D&D", are Arcana Evolved and Iron Heroes "D&D" to you? If not, why not?
i read that answer to be "whatever who is publishing d&d says it is" as opposed to "says d&d on the cover". so whatever 4e/5e/15e etc. turns out to be, if they don't feel like d&d
to me, i wouldn't bother.
that said, i'm not sure what's in arcana evolved. does IH have action points or the like? that sort of mechanic is more of "fantasy heartbreaker" (thanks to whoever came up with that term) than d&d (to me).
my answers were:
--the attributes
--dungeons
--saves
--h.p.
--classes & levels
--predom. fantasy
My other is a majority of the things on the list. I don't think any single thing taken away, besides the name D&D, would make it not D&D. If a bunch of them were taken away, it would no longer be D&D.
Quote from: beeberi read that answer to be "whatever who is publishing d&d says it is" as opposed to "says d&d on the cover". so whatever 4e/5e/15e etc. turns out to be, if they don't feel like d&d to me, i wouldn't bother.
No, these are all "It must at least have X" answers - things that are necessary, but may not be sufficient.
-O
Quote from: Caesar SlaadSo, for those who didn't choose "main rulebooks published as D&D", are Arcana Evolved and Iron Heroes "D&D" to you? If not, why not?
I actually
did choose the Main Rulebooks as D&D, but I wouldn't have a problem calling either one of them a D&D variant. I ran Arcana Evolved for quite a while, and while the AE book was mostly sufficient and totally replaced the PHB, it really does require the MM and DMG for play. Both stride the line between settings and core rules.
-O
Players.
Classes, levels, hit points, saving throws, dungeons, six stats rated 3-18, fantasy settings. Got that? Got D&D.
Hmmm, just the three for me. I happened to pick the three most popular ones too. Go me, or something.