I'd say you're not playing DnD if you're not following the "core rules". Then I asked myself "exactly what are the core rules?"... thus I'm still unsure (precisely).

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

Hahaha exactly right? This was a pretty fun and confusing thing to think about!

@zachhanks4399

18 күн бұрын

I think this has an answer for D&D 5e. The core rule “Specific Beats General” assembles all of the pieces of D&D into a coherent whole. Unfortunately, the *books* aren’t formatted in a way that reflects that structure, and so, the formatting of the books obfuscates the game’s structure. What are the core rules? The description of gameplay in PHB’s introduction is the most general - if you aren’t doing something that at least resembles that description, you aren’t playing D&D. Next layer of core: this is the next section - how checks work (the three types of checks), specific beats general, etc. Then we have the basic mechanics of exploration, movement, time, combat, roll modifiers like inspiration and advantage/disadvantage, and Ability Checks and saving throws. Almost everything after that is “specific” ie: “yes, and…” additions and “no, instead…” exceptions. Tables who misunderstand this structure end up memorizing the area of effect of a fireball while being completely ignorant of the Order of Combat, how Surprise works, that “Skill Checks” don’t exist in 5e, and how out of combat movement speeds (fast, normal, slow) work and why they matter.

@007ohboy

18 күн бұрын

​@zachhanks4399 Yep, everything you said. It's also about INTENT (RAI) and lore. We didn't create this game. We didn't think of all the balancing mechanics and most of us are not very good game designers; let's be real. My evidence is the badly voted down homebrew we've seen. Some hombrew is tolerable but most are based on vibes/ignorance of the rules and macro game design. How many times have we seen videos of some young noob DM complaining about Invisibility rules and how "dumb" it is that See Invisibility and TS don't get rid of Disadvantage to hit the creature and Advantage to hit its foes. Those are also the same ones that complain about Invisibility not equaling Hiding and they pretty much ignore all the stealth mechanics and Passive Perception so they can control the "narrative" ie make the Rogue with a 25 PP run into a DC15 trap because "laughs". Instead of letting the dice and skills decide the outcomes, these DMs love to have a hand in it and bend game mechanics to suit their narrative. The intent of the Invisibility Condition mechanics is balance. Game designers: "Hey! Martials! Would you rather know which square the BBEG mage is so you can get Disadvantage to hit her, or would you rather play a game of "Battleship" where you have to swing at random squares to see if you have a chance to hit the BBEG lobbing fireballs at you?" Martials: "Yeah! Casters are already waaay OP, so maybe giving any old mage all the benifits of Arcane Tricksters for free isn't the greatest idea. I think if a mage want to be a very hard to detect fireball machine of death, they should have to invest some points into Stealth and have the Action economy to both Attack and Hide in the same round (ie cunning action or Bonus Action spells that open up your action. Most the things "noobs",players and DMs, think are busted aren't actually all that bad if you do a little research... DMlair channel, I'm looking at you. No, players can't just use Forbiddance spell to wipe out a whole dungeon. Please consult Area of Effect rules before banning things. Banning is weak. Cover blocks that spell and it takes 10 minutes to cast. good luck😅😂😅

@thedungeoncounsellor

18 күн бұрын

​@@007ohboyI'm with you, even if you have some homebrew in your game, it's still 100% DND!

@user-yq1nt4uo9m

18 күн бұрын

Which core rules? 0, Basic, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3.5, 4e, 5e?

I would say that if you printed your version of the game without the ogl and tried to sell it and got sued by Hasbro then it was probably still D&D

@Richinnameonly

18 күн бұрын

You can't get sued unless you copy it, or try to create confusion between the two brands. Just creating a TTRPG isn't grounds for a lawsuit against you.

@RJWhitmore

16 күн бұрын

Mechanics and ideas are not copyrightable. They can be patented, however, that is a whole other slew of ropes to jump through and many things just are not applicable (including basically any mechanic that is likely to appear in a TTRPG). What ARE copyrightable are layouts, styles, names, etc - basically flavour. However, these need to be original - that is, not done before - and complex - a simple rectangle around some words off to the side of the page would not count, even if it was actually original. Very little counts at this point, with particularly unique names being often the only easy chases. Now, this is not the saying you can't be _sued_ - being sued does not imply success or even plausability, it just implies someone is throwing money at it. To fight being sued you also need money - so often smaller entities just give in, even if they are not in the wrong. This is how bogus attaching any meaning to being sued can be unless you know both sides have and are willing to throw lots of money at it. Even then, a lawsuit that is fought thus vigourously with Hasbro coming out successful would *_still_* not imply the other product to be D&D - it would merely mean some protected _components_ have been ruled as coming from D&D. This is like copying the numberplate from Hasbro's car, putting the copy on say Paizo's car, and then you saying that Paizo's car is the same car as Hasbro's - no, just the number plate is (and then only for identification purposes).

I've had this discussion in a number of groups online - Some people will make the argument that the core of playing D&D is "Sitting around the table with your friends, building a collaborative story. Maybe Dice will be involved." and it doesn't matter if it's 5e, Pathfinder, Blades in the Dark, or Call of Cthulhu - it's all playing D&D. For them D&D has become something like Kleenex or Band-Aid...it used to mean a specific product but now it's a generic term for "A Role Playing Game." And while I don't agree with them...they're not precisely WRONG. On the flip side I've seen people argue that if you aren't playing RAW from WoTC rules, it's not D&D. I don't agree with them either. For me I'll call it D&D if it still looks and feels like D&D. Totally subjective, and others might not agree with me...

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

I think this is a fair thought to me honest. The question is inherently impossible to answer, it's all just perspective and opinion. But it definitely exists somewhere in between going RAW and just making things up as you go haha. Maybe the idea of D&D just being a kleenex of its genre is appropriate though!

@zachhanks4399

18 күн бұрын

They are wrong. And it’s not totally subjective. If D&D is “whatever you want it to be,” then everything is D&D, which means nothing is, and the concept because meaningless (eg: everyone is beautiful, therefore beauty is the baseline, therefore one cannot be “not beautiful” nor “more beautiful than beautiful,” and “beauty” becomes a word without any coherent meaning). What you described re: stealing a story together with friends is also long-form improv, which is an entertainment form, not a “game” (despite improv jargon referring to it as an “improv game”). It also implies that Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, etc are not types of TTRPG’s, but types of Dungeons & Dragons. If you aren’t rolling dice, especially a 20 sided die to make checks, you aren’t playing D&D. If you’re using a Jenga tower, you are playing Dread. Deck of cards? Savage Worlds. The important D&D question shouldn’t be the categorical one “are you or aren’t you playing D&D,” but the “Ship of Theseus” question of degree - how and to what extent are you playing D&D and how and to what extent are you doing things which are definitively *not D&D* instead.

@marcos2492

18 күн бұрын

Hey, I said a similar thing on IC's discord!

@emjtucson

18 күн бұрын

Some would say if you’re playing a WotC ruleset of “d&d”, then you’re not really playing D&D.

@anthonyrenli8740

18 күн бұрын

@@emjtucson I tend to agree with you....but the argument has merit that D&D has become a generic term to cover all RPGs - like linoleum, bubble wrap, thermos, etc. - for large swaths of RPG players and GM's out there. We can argue if someone saying that their Blades In the Dark is really D&D or not...but for large swaths of the RPG playing world it is going to come off like people arguing that "Unless it was Manufactured by Thermos LLC, they you should call it a Vacuum Flask, not a Thermos" I mean...it's technically correct, but there is a good chance that whoever is calling it D&D is going to tune the argument out and ignore whoever is saying it.

I play a lot of RPGs (or at least like to pretend that I do and read through loads of rulebooks, let's be real). But I do actually play a lot and I almost actively avoid official editions of D&D at this point. I really like a term that Dungeon Masterpeice introduced me to, narriative contracts. The idea is that rulebooks _are_ primarily that. If you plop the rulebook for Call of Cthulhu (the standard version) down but don't have your players experiencing a 20s / 30s Lovecraft-adjacent scenario, they'll be pissed, because now it's just a specific branch of BRP that you've commandeered for your game. You could have said you were playing BRP and revealed that you were stealing a lot from CoC, and I think most people would be fine with that. Of course it depends on the game. The actual rules might be the primary draw or secondary, which runs into the issue of RPGs really being several genres we lump under one label. You keep just saying D&D, but I think you mean 5e. D&D has been wildly different games over the years, to the point where IMO the trademark doesn't matter. I think thst name is "owned" by the community, there's loads of games that are obviously D&Ds without legally being allowed to say that. It's kinda vibes-based. But, obviously, _which_ D&D you're playing matters a lot. Can you play D&D without combat? Up to 2e I'd argue that combat is a fail state, or at least perilous enough that inevitable combat should be rare. A session where you ghosted through a dungeon is a good session. D&D 5e makes this question uniquely hard to answer, because WotC wants it to be all things to all people, and there is much weeping and gnashing of teeth amongst people who try to treat it as such. WotC can't even decide if it's a toolkit or a pre-packaged game. They want a toolkit because that's financially smart, but they also want that D&D heritage. It weakens the rules. People on opposite sides butt heads. IMO WotC should do both, but separate them. 5e has the bones of a solid generic narriative system. Make that stripped down toolkit, and then build a much tighter, more opinionated edition of D&D with it.

So is Pathfinder D&D? At the time, it resembled the previous edition far more than 4E. Even with the latest remaster pushing it farther from its D&D roots, it still has classes, levels, roll against Armor Class, and so on.

@apjapki

17 күн бұрын

Yes

@kyleward3914

15 күн бұрын

No, but it's closely related. They're like two species that have recently diverged from one another and still look very similar.

I feel like the key reason people use a TTRPG system at all, instead of just improving everything as they go, is for consistency added to the shared imagined experience. It helps to standardize both what everyone is imagining to some extent, and helps arbitrate opposed actions, such as combat. Also it helps the Game portion of the TTRPG, feel like a game, because there are rules to be learned and used to reliably succeed.

Well if you think you’re playing D&D, aren’t you? As long as you and your table are having fun, that’s all that matters

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

10000% The most important thing is that your table is having fun, regardless of what game you're playing. That goes without question. This was more about the thought experiment than anything else though!

IMO the answer to the thought experiment about the ship is that as long as it is recognizable as the original, then it is the original. You don't say your wife is no longer your wife just because she has prosthetic legs now. As long as you recognize it as D&D, it's D&D. Though, there is a point to be made that when people are discussing D&D online, even if it is recognizable as D&D, they are NOT playing the same game you are.

@tibot4228

18 күн бұрын

If your wife's brain is replaved with one that has the exact same memories, is that still your wife, or a perfect copy? You might argue that there's no difference, but the "original" has experienced death.

@Putoaduh

18 күн бұрын

@@tibot4228 It doesn't matter because we aren't talking about the actual original. If you replaced every part of the boat one at a time and spent time with every part of the boat as it was replaced, it's still the same boat to you. If your wife was perfectly copied, it's still your wife, which is the same as the original to you. The point I'm making is that the "original" is based on subjective perception, not objective replacement.

@darksavior1187

18 күн бұрын

I would agree that if its no longer recognizable as D&D, its not. White Wolf games, Warhammer Fantasy, FATE, Shadowrun, are not recognizable as D&D, but are TTRPGs. They are not D&D.

@RJWhitmore

15 күн бұрын

You're shortcutting the answer though; by saying you recognise it as the original then you must have came to that conclusion for a reason - which is what is to be established (the reason, not the conclusion). It is like saying A is A because A is A, rather than showing how you determine A is A.

@Putoaduh

15 күн бұрын

@@RJWhitmore It's subjective and unique to each person. That's why you can't give an objective answer to the reasoning. I couldn't tell you how to determine why A is A, because your answer would differ from mine.

You're not playing D&D if you're not using at least the rules as a framework, you're just playing make believe. Which is fine, it's just not D&D. Your ending summary is ON POINT.

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

Oh for sure. Yeah, if you just scrap the books entirely then it's definitely not D&D. The question is more of a granular one though, like how many rules can you abandon before it isn't the same game.

@zachhanks4399

18 күн бұрын

Funny thing is, you’re not just pretending to be warriors and wizards, but, another layer - you’re pretending to play D&D.

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

D&Dception

@darksavior1187

18 күн бұрын

@@InsightCheck It isn't the same game the nanosecond you change any rules, but if it mostly maintains the character of D&D and your table is cool with the changes, its D&D for all intents and purposes.

@tkc1129

17 күн бұрын

​@InsightCheck I was coming up with houserules for when my D&D game restarted, and at a certain point, I just said, "Yeah, this is basically its own, new game now." When I actually accepted that, I actually became happier about that situation.

For me, we play most things rules as written with between 5-10 homebrew rulings on very specific things. I do use a lot of homebrew items, subclasses, monsters, etc(I just like designing things) but yeah. In general, most things are either RAW or close to it.

Another point of perspective: "D&D" as an encompassing term for ttrpgs. And I've yet to play a game without house rules, which leads to the assumption that we're *supposed* to change the rules - that it's encouraged and presumed that every table will have its own spin.

For me, its DnD if: 1. You roll a d20 and try to beat a score. 2. You use the 6 traditional ability scores to get your modifiers. Aditionally, its 5e if: 3. Your types of d20 roll are divided into attacks, saves and ability checks.

@smippycis6285

17 күн бұрын

Yeah, once you switch from a d20, it is no longer dnd for me! There may be other stuff too but that's a fixed rule if you want to consider it DnD. Bounded Accuracy may come slightly later.

@robinmohamedally7587

15 күн бұрын

Everything you listed in #3 is all true for the 3.x systems. ......You've never played anything other than 5e, have you?

@smippycis6285

14 күн бұрын

@@robinmohamedally7587 3.5e is also DnD yes?

@matthewtopping

14 күн бұрын

@@robinmohamedally7587 That's a good point. I've not played 3.5 for many years, mostly 5e and 1e now. Should probably add: 4. Uses the proficiency bonus system. To make it 5e.

Were doing a thing my brother cooked up right now which is dnd dungeon crawl but we roll on a table for features after encounters. Dnd? Depends on which 5 minute snip you watched. At this point i view dnd as a lobby with any number of doors. Versions, game modes, special one off rules for one shots, weird classes, all of these fit inside dnd. The ships parts never broke. They were never replaced. We just added to the ship over the years.

For 5w, I've only played in my friends games in his customized world. The core rules are the same, but only humans are playable, the classes have all bean heavily customized, the pantheon is different, but skills and spells and such are mostly the same. So I describe this as DnD with a very customized setting. Now the pathfinder game I'm in is even more customized, so I just call it pathfinder-ish.

I view this as depending on the point of view on your table. In my table we are playing a campaign using D&D rules as our tool of choice, not playing D&D using the campaign as a paint layer to pretty up the tool used. What's most important, the tool or what you are creating with whatever tool you thinks is best for the job?

With a multitude of creators failing to differentiate themselves against the long standing 5e framework, this has frequently been on my mind of late. Thankfully this quandary was actually solved by the Sage of the Nag’s head: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lXuEs8uNpMu6ito.htmlsi=3J1QB5dIsNw8wH8u

"The Core is more like guidelines than actual rules" to paraphrase Captain Barbosa. I "haven't" played D&D since 1981. The various groups I've gamed with played numerous TTRPGs and always brought outside elements to the D&D games. Our "D&D" pilfered from GURPS (their cursed magic items are a blast), Chaosium games like Stormbringer and CoC (probably some of the few players overjoyed when Call of Cthulhu became available as D20), Pathfinder, Hero System, Vampire the Masquerade, 7th Sea, etc., in addition to homebrewing elements from fiction like Zelazny's Amber series. The only "hard" rule was DMD (Dungeon Master's Discretion).

For those of you who have seen the Dungeon Dudes Video "Wich Class is your DM" I'm a Paladin DM so I erforderlich the rules as much as possible but even tho that is my DM style I would never say that a homebrewer rule of cool game isn't DND so I think if it is DND to you and your groupe, it is DND.

An interesting question and discussion in the discord, as I recall. I'd say it's common for DMs to have home brew rules (like BA potion), but let's say for example if you are joining an online game that is advertised as 5e, I think it is pretty fair to expect all of the rules in the books to apply. Often, games that have a good amount of homebrew will straight out say it in the game description, but usually based around the core structure of 5e, meaning Dice rolls, Action economy, classes, Short rest and long rest mechanics and features. Usually they say something like "Taking the best part of 5e and fixing the problems" haha Personally, I don't really care if people call their game 5e even if it is a ton of home brew, but it gets into a problem if 3rd party content says it is 5e, when it has a bunch of non 5e stuff (like Bob the World Builder's stat blocks).

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

This raises the another interesting element of the question which is the context that it comes up. If you're looking for an online game and someone describes it as 5e, you have a pretty good assumption of what it is. If you're discussing it with an in-group, you can get pretty descriptive. But if someone not very familiar with TTRPGs asks you what you're playing, you'd probably call Daggerheart, Pathfinder, Call of C'thulu or whatever else "D&D".

@darksavior1187

18 күн бұрын

@@InsightCheck Agree, because the distinctions to such a person would be confusing instead of useful. D&D is the McDonald's or Coke of TTRPGs, most have heard of it, but know little about it, so its easier to just say that to them.

Great vid! I love the philosophy, and I like to think I am still playing DND. But, I don't use monster stats anymore, and I have many home brew rules. I have changed the magic system quite a bit. I suppose for me, it's that my player still uses a 5e character sheet. There is a general feeling of DND when we play. It does not feel the same as playing Pathfinder. Anyway, thanks for the video.

@InsightCheck

17 күн бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it :)

Well, the question "is it d&d?" is different than the question "is it d&d 5e?", and if we count all editions od d&d as d&d, then it make sense to even count pathfinder as a type of d&d (pathfinder 1st edition is closer to 3.5e more than any other edition of d&d).

If you take 'Rulings Not Rules' to its conclusion, Hasbro would hand you a blank piece of paper and ask for $50. WotC's job, under Hasbro's hand, is to make rules - they don't make rulings. Furthermore, the three-word slogan (we in the UK have had enough of that, I tell you) sounds catchy but is actually nonsense; rules do not prohibit rulings. You might as well say 'Bananas Not Cars' for as much point as it makes.

Reading through the DM's Guide on D&D Beyond I was more than halfway convinced that what I was reading was that thing that some websites do where they let you preview 50-60% of the content and then if you want more you have to subscribe to some higher tier of monthly payment. Imagine my horror to discover that that wasn't the case, they just lay out that you _might_ want to have one of these many different systems, and here's sort of what that might look like, but they never flesh it out, they never finish the job. The whole book is basically half-baked. ---------- Bonus action comment: criticism of D&D and D&D spinoffs go through I think 'fashions'. The 'fashion' with 4e was to complain that it made things too 'video-gamey'. But playing 5e on digital tabletop or VR? Perfectly fine. The fashion at the moment seems to be criticising the 'rules-light' spinoffs for not having any rules about 'how to roleplay'. Like ... why do you need rules for that? And sometimes it's 'more subtle' where they complain about the games 'just being a bunch of rules for combat'. Well ... yeah ... take some rules for combat, slap on an out-of combat task resolution system (i.e. a skills or something similar) and you have a perfectly functional RPG. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Heck, if you really want to, slap on some rules on about hex-crawling, and boom, you're basically done with rules design. Now all it needs is a screed about how OGL sucks and a kickstarter.

I agree with this whole heartedly. I love 5e for the homebrew flexibility, however stretching things so far you can start looking like a completely different system. I think it for most of my homebrew ideas it has always been to ADD something to the system, such as allowing all players to have battle master maneuvers prof per day to give martials just more options. However when you start REMOVING and disregarding too many key features that make dnd what it is, you are left with a watered down RP hangout that has forgotten why it started in the first place. We all know some rules aren’t perfect, so adjusting accordingly is fine, but adjusting, and adding a few flavorful things is one thing, removing core mechanics removes meaning and strips the game down to a meaningless point.

Traditionally, the rules have always been left up to the DM. D&D has also always been built on house rules & design.

D$D (yes I did use a collar sign😊) is a role-playing experience. Notice I didn't use the word "game"? You're still having a role-playing experience whether you use rules, dice, etc.. a game by its definition requires a "winner". There should never be a "winner" in a role-playing experience. Sure, PCs might "win" & combat or may "win" at a negotiation with an NPC. But ultimately everyone wins if everyone has had a great time AND WANTS MORE from the experience. Lastly, imo it's all about the "social experience" that role-playing "games". Bring. Sorry for the long drawn-out explanation but that's just my take.

5:39 bludgeoned to death? I thought we had resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning damage

Bro quoted my comment!

I think you need to clarify *fifth edition* D&D when thinking about this, because, for example, your poll on the pillars of play would have been flipped bottom to top in an OSR community.

I'd say that if you ship-of-Theseus your way into Vampire the Masquerade or Warhammer40k because you and your group *know* the rule and needed a houserule or rule-change to address how your table plays, then that's still D&D. However, if you houserule yourself into BESM because you didn't bother to actually learn what the books even say--just assumed they were wrong or didn't address your situation--then you weren't playing D&D in the first place.

I think 4th edition is valuable for this analysis. One of the major complaints by players was that it didn't feel like D&D and is thus those complaints are a good starting point. Some expanded thoughts below: 1) 4th ed valued balance over diversity. The classes felt very similar and all the powers kind of merged together. D&D needs defined separate classes even if that means there will never be perfect balance. 2) No support for theater of the mind. Everything was regimented into in game units (e.g., distance measured in squares and not ft). 3) Lack of continuity. By which i mean characters would forget lower level powers as they progressed to learn newer ones. You'd no longer be able to cast flaming sphere because you had to forget it to learn the higher level fireball. Similarly you churned through magic weapons and armor because they were expected in the math and you'd fall behind if you weren't constantly upgrading.

@Nastara

15 күн бұрын

For point 1 it’s more like classes having same “Ability Learning” framework tricked people into thinking classes played the same. In reality 4e classes are vastly different from each other. A Ranger and Rogue in 4e are incredibly different just from core class features alone. A Fighter and a Paladin go about their role as a Defender much differently. Fighters do more damage are more mobile and have better melee AoE. Paladins focus on locking down one dude are more durable and can heal and buff allies in addition to defense. It’s like saying all spell casters are the same because they have spell slots. Otherwise your points make sense.

@joshl4751

15 күн бұрын

@@Nastara Interesting note! I was thinking more about how a rogue might have a "dagger swarm" type attack that mechanically was very similar to a wizard's thunderblast (I'm vaguely remembering from my experience a decade ago rather than going back to look, apologies if the terminolgy is a bit off). In some ways the mechanics first drafting of the powers also pushed people to thinking that A and B are the same as opposed to if there was more fluff text the way there is in 5th ed.

This comes up a lot with video games that change significantly in their mechanics but are part of a long running series, to the degree that newer games are neigh unrecognizable in several respects from the older ones, with the biggest commonality being the shared name (Assassin's Creed is a good example of this). It is D&D if it says D&D on it, true, if we are talking about just brand and IP ownership, but if we are talking about the character and experience playing it, then it can depend on many different variables. What has changed from one edition to the next? If you knew D&D at second edition, then 3.5 edition isn't D&D to you, same if you knew 3.5, and so 4th edition isn't D&D to you, and 5th etc.... There is also the weight of different DMs and different tables that have different interpretations of the rules, or make houserules, or disregard some rules, that can all change the fundamental experience. There is also the massive difference that may come from a table using an official campaign setting vs someone's homebrewed world (for some folks, it isn't D&D if its not in Forgotten Realms as an example). So a better question might be what fundamentally makes a game D&D? What is a sacred cow that cannot be slain before its not D&D anymore? These questions should not be conflated with asking what the rule is, in X edition, because that isn't as subjective, its printed in black and white, and can be shown to be either true or not.

Overall yes. Most of my variant rules come from official D&D product. But in reality using those rules transforms it into a game that is foreign to most players don't feel like is D&D.

What if the things you're adding to D&D are _also_ from D&D, specifically older editions of it (for example, spellcasting rules from 3/3.5E and powers lifted from 4E)?

D&D is a philosophy of gameplay in a fantasy setting. Some editions choose to focus on different aspects of that philosophy for better or worse but they’re still D&D.

Never having combat in dnd sounds wild A lot of class features are designed around combat And a handful of the classes would struggle to engage with that kind of gameplay Like I'd never play a paladin, fighter, monk, or barbarian if we were never going to fight anything

@Skimmer951

15 күн бұрын

happened to us with a urban social intruge game. The dm did not convey their choice of play at all at session 0, a lot of roleplay and investigating but very very low on combat. Heck we later learnt after like 1 year and a half they didnt even have a monster manual or basic resources. Me as a bard and our warlock did a lot in our investigations but our poor monk and fighter got absolutely nothing to do. And when we finally adressed it in a personal talk with the dm they just said "this game wont have much combat" like..thats what you say at the start of the campaign so you can build a character that fits not mid campaign when we have characters we already ar every very attached to that are pretty hard to change in build and playstyle. I enjoy more social games and systems but this was a very understimulating experience and was the only time I have experienced the players being the one to beg to change the system to something else. (We eyed The sword of the serpentine in particular)

I think I'm in one of two camps. 1. If a player who is well-versed in D&D and only D&D comes to your table and you can explain enough in a couple minutes for them to play with you, you're playing D&D. If not, you're not. 2. If you think you're playing D&D, you are. If you don't, you aren't.

You are right, I am not playing D&D, I am playing Lancer by Massiff Press 😎

My feeling is that as long as your still sticking to the base concepts of the general guidelines based off of what is intended within the core rulebook. If what your playing could generally be understood to be DnD by someone who has not played with you before then I would say yes it's DnD. If you've changed the rules so much that a player would not recognize what your doing without extensive learning then no, not DnD. In many legal situations there is a "test" if a common person who has not seen the given situation before that point would deem something to be true or false. Like the ship, if you keep replacing planks with basically the same thing and keep a consistent shape then it's the same ship, but if you start making major changes to the point at which someone who saw the ship new would have a hard time recognizing it later, then ya I would say it's different. Anyway that's my thought.

It depend on your perspective- when we play Call of Cthulhu in the eyes of my parents we are playing D&D and who is to say we are wrong. Isn’t CoC just Sandy Petersen’s highly modded version of D&D?

To take this even further regarding the question of whether you are playing D&D, are you actually you? The cells of that baby born all those years ago have all been replaced.

@InsightCheck

16 күн бұрын

Asking the *real* questions here!

I think for me, D&D 5e requires players to use d20 rolls for attacks, ability checks, and saving throws, while their characters have a class with ability scores consisting of strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma. I think everything else can be homebrewed, but as long as the system has this basic skeleton, it can be called D&D 5e.

Being a 50 year what D&D and what is D&D is no longer under Hasbro's/WotCs control. It's a game with many established play cultures. To a large part of the community at the time, whatever 4E was - it wasn't D&D. For me to be D&D - You have to have the primary game - the one where you sit around the table and have a conversation that results in a story (for some reason this seems to be invisible to a lot of people, but this is the most important bit to get right). In addition I would say the identity features at this point are - the 6 stats with a range between 3 and 18 ± modifiers. Classes, with at least fighter and wizard or some synonym preferably Cleric and Rogue. A selection of fantasy species / subspecies that you can play. D20 as the central resolution mechanic but all the polyhedral dice being used. An experience point progression system that works in a particular way (It's hard to explain but this is the main reason 4E wasn't D&D). regretably it probably means HP scaling per level.

A key value is **portability**. If you take this play-procedure to another table "playing D&D" are they likely to recognize it as part of the same game? Are they likely to incorporate it? Are they using this procedure already? If you're playing with your besties, you know what they like, they know what you expect. Do whatever. But a key value of 5E has been its high level of portability. A random group of players online will have fairly uniform expectations about what any given D&D game will be. (And this is a very good and powerful thing!) Any deviation from that needs to be handled in your LFG description and Session Zero.

At a minimum I think four things make a game D&D. Classes (cleric, fighter, thief, wizard minimum). The 6 ability scores (STR, INT, WIS, DEX, CON, CHA). Races/species (humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes). And combat. Get rid of any of these and I don’t think it will feel like D&D to me.

Trying to define D&D is like trying to nail down your own shadow. It always changes, yet remains the same. It offers Law in its right hand, Chaos in its left. It promises freedom, yet it is inescapable. It is within all things, yet apart from them. It is the brightest light, it is the deepest darkness. It is all things, it is nothing... ::Also Sprach Zarathustra begins to play, as if from nowhere:: You look to the horizon, where the sun rises over a barren landscape, completely desolate except for the presence of an ominous black obelisk, its edges perfectly defined, yet its faces boundlessly infinite. Entranced, you reach out to touch it...but an apeman clubs you over the back of the head with a femur. Oh shit that's a natural 20. Umm so that's...19 damage. Oh, you only had 11hp? Fuck, roll a death save.

I am at 1:39, but I'm going to say this: Dnd is just a form of pretend play that provides a certain structure that keeps us from going "bang bang, I got you" "nuh uh, you missed" "nuh uh" beyond that unless you are playing with officially recognized rules you are not playing Dnd... since homebrew is an officially recognized rule, all changes are allowed, so as long as you started playing Dnd, your game is always Dnd, no matter how many changes you make.

what is dnd? 6 stats, d20 attack roll, and character classes. If you change these its no longer dnd, if you add more qualifiers to it you start excluding older editions. 'wouldn't this make pathfinder dnd?' yes, pf is dnd, its a taken is a different direction but its still dnd.

@emjtucson

18 күн бұрын

I disagree, D&D is more than specific stats and a die mechanic. D&D is a philosophy of gameplay.

You suggest "removing" one of the three pillars, but the number of WotC-published adventures that provide lip service to exploration and social interactions suggests that you can at least remove two of them.

I think that not only are all the variations that you mention (and more) are still "Dungeons & Dragons" in spirit as a fantasy role playing game, but all offshoots of D&D since it's beginning are still D&D even if they are branded as something else like Pathfinder. The only thing that defines D&D exactly is the legal identity of the property.

Like you mention toward the end of your video: D&D is a brand, not any particular set of mechanics. I believe this is true because the mechanics of the various editions of the game are so radically different that they are essentially different games. But if you’re playing any of them, you’re playing D&D. If you’re buying into the brand, you’re playing D&D. We can argue about what the brand identity means, what we associate with D&D and whether playing any particular edition is “real” D&D. But for my money, if you buy into the brand in any capacity, then you’re playing D&D.

Does that mean 5e is no longer dnd? It's direction, epecially over the last few years, doesn't seem particularly suited to the intention of facilitating dungeon crawls.

I think this idea though a good theoretical tgought experiment. I think it is inherently flawed. I dont play 'dnd' I play 'ttrpg'. A good example is looking into the videogame world. Each video game typically runs off of a handful game engines such as Unreal. Each videogame takes that engine and retools it to fit thier purposes. So each effectively uses a different engine right? Well, not really. It still has the same base that it originates from. Ttrpgs are the exact same way, with different engines such as DnD, Cypher System, Powered by the Apocolypse. So minor changes mean nothing. Because its the original us what its based on.

D&D isn't a system it's a fantasy setting. It's the specific multiverse with the fantasy things they created that makes it D&D. You can remove all the pillars and rules but still use the fantasy setting and it's still D&D (granted that's probably a D&D novel at that point.) Being D&D and being a TTRPG are different imo.

@ruolbu

18 күн бұрын

that's a bit of a hot take. So you'd say if I take Savage Worlds and ran Phandelver with those rules it would still be dnd? At the same time, taking all the dnd rules and rewriting them to be used in a modern day zombie survival game, but nothing really changes about the numbers, mechanics, statistics and odds, (like fireball being reflavored as a pipe bomb or whatever) you would say thats not dnd?

@darksavior1187

18 күн бұрын

I'd say its part of D&D, the settings. I can take 5E and instead run it in Golarion (PF2E's world), but I'd still tell a group looking to play, that I am using 5E rules, because the system is important to many players. As a DM on StartPlaying, game listing are searched for by system first and foremost. People want to know what they can expect to be playing in terms of game/ruleset.

@emjtucson

17 күн бұрын

@@ruolbu Yes, a modern day survival setting is not D&D. Gamma World is not D&D even though it’s by the same company and similar mechanics.

@Richinnameonly

17 күн бұрын

@@ruolbu correct that's how I feel about it anyway.

@Richinnameonly

17 күн бұрын

@@darksavior1187 yes rules are very important to players looking to play TTRPG's that is why they are listed by rule sets but the rules don't make it D&D. If I play a game in "final fantasy setting" with "5e rules" it's not D&D to me, it's a Final Fantasy TTRPG.

I know people who say anything after 2nd ed isn't D&D

I think a good measure is if you can still use the game's character sheet. 5e's sheet isn't the best, but it still ephasizes which rules are a "must" (except its missing spellcasting). When you don't have 6 stats, PB, Action, Bonus Action, Reaction, attack roll, weapon damage, etc then you aren't playing dnd anymore. As for monsters being improvised, as long as they somewhat follow the 5e statblock I would see it as a dnd monster.

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

That's an interesting though, using the character sheet as the measuring stick.

DnD is when you use DnD as the core rule set. If you homebrew and/or use house rules, it's still DnD. If you use different core rules, it's not DnD, it's something else. If you still use DnD core rules but homebrew it until it's nearly unrecognizable, it's still DnD since there's still enough recognizable aspects. If you homebrew until it's unrecognizable, just call it your own system.

Replacing my Wife's brain, LoL, ahhh I can dream. Anyway, what about a potion of youth? Can I give my D&D Wife a potion and make her 10-15 yrs younger and still have same memories per D&D and still be my Wife? I would say yes, but not sure I'd have the energy for it, haha. In the Tomb Of Horrors, original versions, your sex is swapped from male to female in a certain trap. What about that one? Same soul for Kelemvor to govern, but different body...

1- true DND is so versatile, you can have two very different games that are both bona fide DnD. 2- dnd 5e rulebooks say outright that it is up to the DM to change or alter any rules they want, and calls the rules "suggestions." So couldnt you change every rule? As long as you call yourself the DM, its still DnD? As long as you keep at least ONE rule from DnD, you are using it as a base and therefore are playing DnD, albiet a extremely altered version.

RAW/RAI also make rules debates mute. Player: "Why are you running crit fumbles, that wrecks my fighter who makes a ton of attacks?!" DM: "Oh right! That does hurt Martials more. I didnt think of that in my pursuit of 'dynamic combat' for the lolz. Lets stick to RAW/RAI which doesn't screw over Martials in that way." Why have the pointless debates so you can tweak some little thing in the mechanics that causes even more imbalances? Is controlling the NPCs and grand narrative possibilities not enough for these peeps? 😂😅 If you run a small table of friends, who cares? Really. If you are that insular then RAW/RAI can be whatever in your niche group. Take that online and you will run into issues. If we all just play the same system of rules of the game we all supposedly love, we have less problems and it makes things more fair and TRANSPARENT. Im not a complete RAW/RAI zealot, there are a few tiny, tiny ,tiny rules I can stomach and there seems to be an online consensus around. I dont know any "rules lawyers" that will not join a table because they allow bonus action potions. No one cares and like 75% of online tables use this. Crit Fumbles are so annoying and stupid (seriously) but I do play at one table who runs them. They also allow us to stack Inspiration to negate some of them. Once again, does this add fun? Meh! Some like "Benny Hill" in their game. I hats it but can bypass it through Advantage and save/suck spells. I wouldn't play a martial at that table. Not thanks! 😊 Start mucking around with Stealth Mechanics or the Invisibility Condition or banning spells, subclasses, feats and I definitely will go to another table. There are way too many open tables that run the game smoothly using 99% RAW/RAI and its so much better. If you play one game of DnD weird homebrew might seem normal. Now try being me who plays at 5 - 7 tables a week and have to deal with all the changes. No thanks! Not interested! That's a valid perspective.

I think D&D has some core conceits that it must have. However, having these things does not nessesarily mean you are playing D&D. D20 system. The driving factor must be a D20 6 Stats. D&D uses 3 physical stats, and 3 mental stats. And all skill checks, attack rolls, and saving throws are tied to one of these stats Class System. Players play classes, not skill trees. If you don't have all of these things, you are difnitively NOT playing D&D. If you have ALL these things, you MAY be playing D&D. The other side of this is, if I'm speaking to a 'normie' (someone who doens't play TTRPGs), then any TTRPG could be described as "D&D" just for simplicity. Other things that heavily imly D&D. Combat rules. Spell Casting rules, Action Economy, High Fantasy tone and feel. You can change some of these, but if you change too many, or stray too far from the written, then many might consider it not to be D&D. A lot of the critism of 4e was that it was an okay gaem, but it didn't feel like D&D anymore.

If you would walk over to a table playing a decent game and having fun and say, "This isn't D&D though," you are the problem.

@InsightCheck

16 күн бұрын

100%

Whatever Hasbro says is D&D is D&D. The fact they can stop others from using the brand or the work is all that matters. Rules have changed and will continue to do so. The rules have never been d&d. In the start of the Appocolypse World game the author says anyone can claim to be "powered by the Apocolypse" if they want to. No requirement by rule system, and some of the derivatives are very different and mechanically distinct. The thing that makes anyone able to do that is the ip holder giving it. D&D could claim to be pbta as could a Ford F-150.

I am a *very* strong proponent that after a while you're not playing D&D. Why? Because other TTRPGs exist, and it's depressing how much people try to reverse-engineer things into 5e that already exist and still call it 5e. Like.....if you want to play Star Wars, Fallout, or Cyberpunk (that on really hurt to see a 5e of), just........go play those games? Backdooring 5e into something unrecognizable in an effort to not change systems just saddens me. IMO: It's not D&D anymore if it's not a class-based system where derived stats effect mods and a d20 is rolled, where combat involves an action with bonus actions and reactions, spell slots and the like, and more rigid rules with how the whole thing works. (Last one may seem strange to people who don't look into other games, but trust me. D&D 5e is a rigid, medium crunch game that is player rules light and DM rules heavy.)

It's all pretend

Do you have a tumblr account? You are not playing DnD.

You can ask this question of anything because it's fairly absurd. If you aren't speaking in language Chaucer would understand are you even speaking English anymore? You are playing D&D if you say you are and people understand what you intend to mean by that. Nothing else is particularly relevant. At what point does a house rule filled game deserve a new label? IDK, different editions OF D&D or different inclusion of official optional rules within 5e are different enough that they are probably more different than whatever your houserule is. I just don't think there's much that's productive here, despite the Grognards. As you say, people saying you aren't playing D&D is just toxicity.

@InsightCheck

17 күн бұрын

Of course you can ask the question about anything, that’s the point, it’s just a thought experiment :) It allows people to think outside their own bubbles and beliefs for a second and just might have them challenge something they always thought to be true.

@apjapki

17 күн бұрын

@@InsightCheck I take it you replied to my comment only reading the summarised bit before you have to click "read more".

@apjapki

17 күн бұрын

I'll go further. Whether or not you identify what you do as D&D is mostly just a statement of intent. Do you intend what you do to be characterised as something new? If someone says you are wrong to call what you do D&D, that's mostly a judgmental imposition of their mores on other tables. I'm sure the hinted at question under the question is - should you try out game philosophies other than the one you have now? Good question. But nobody owns the title of "pure" D&D and nobody should be denied it. I don't even get why we are putting that on the theoretical table even to ourselves when so many trolls will honestly say that to people.

@InsightCheck

17 күн бұрын

@apjapki lol to be totally honesty it was like 6:17am and I was still 80% asleep

@apjapki

17 күн бұрын

@@InsightCheck relatable

If you're not playing DnD RAW/RAI, youre not really playing DnD. Yes, the rules say you can disreguard the rules but lets be real, RAI the developers wanted you to use their rules and they make more sense than ALTERNATIVES ive heard from the playerbase that make up their own rules. So much better and balanced. DnD is about the only game where knowing RAI well makes some people who dont know them, angry. 😂😅 "OMG! How dare you study the game we all are playing! Youre not playing DnD right unless you are ignorant of a lot of the rules and dont google stuff!" 😅😂

@InsightCheck

17 күн бұрын

OK

@007ohboy

17 күн бұрын

@@InsightCheck Your welcome 🙏

@InsightCheck

17 күн бұрын

1:31

D&D is any medieval fantasy class-based game with the 6 attribute scores and leveled spells. 5e specifically uses the d20 system + has an action economy of Action, Movement, Bonus Action and Reaction. You can change some of that (adding or substracting a score), but not much before it's a different game.

@emjtucson

17 күн бұрын

That’s 5e not D&D in general.

I'm not sure if The Ship of Theseus thought experience can be applied well to D&D. While a ship is a physically existing object with parts what are necessary to it to function a game like D&D is not like that. It is more 'elastic'. Like yeah, you can argue there are certain parts what needed to an RPG system to be considered D&D but what are those parts? The core rules? Well, which core rules? Also if you change the sail of a sail boat, the new one will still serve the exact function as the previous one but if you change a mechanic in D&D, then is it still serve the same function than before? So would that be answer? Even changing one official rule would mean that we are not longer playing D&D? I don't think so. Currently I'm running some official modules for my group but in the meanwhile I'm also working on my own world, and for that we already agreed to try out some new mechanics, rule changes. For example making the weapons more unique by adding new properties and changing how race/background works in the game (race would only give you physical attributes and abilities), but I still consider it D&D. I have some other ideas, but among them there are some what could not work with the core mechanics of D&D and I would not try to add them to the games I run. I only would use them if I would create the new system from scratch. Maybe when we are trying to find the answer to this question we should not think about rules and mechanics, or at least not only. Maybe it is not just the mechanics what makes an RPG D&D. Perhaps it has other attributes what are fundamental and those attributes make D&D truly D&D. We should ask what are those attributes. The open-source nature, the modularity of the game, the famous high fantasy settings, the history or something else entirely?

D&D playerbase discovers the ship of theseus.

@InsightCheck

18 күн бұрын

Hardly :P

Pillars of gameplay is wrong, use core gameplay loop instead: Social to cause Exploration or Combat, Exploration to cause Combat or Social encounters, and Combat to cause Exploration and Social. Core Game-play Loop: Social/story, Exploration: Travel/fantasy things, Combat, Loot, a Cliffhanger (puzzle or trap), and Repeat starting the loop again.

Im sorry to say this but effectively all of these ttrpg systems do not have designers with a competency high enough to handle how broad a range of tables and situations there are. This results in the vast majority of players having MORE fun the MORE of the rules they let themselves forget. The other way to have alot of fun is to self select which ttrpg best meshes with you and your table because then the designers didnt have to successfully create a system that is very good on average... it only has to be good at a specific thing and you the user figure out which seems reasonable. This is also why ttrpgs dont really see popularity waves like you see in some other things. The reality is is that making a ttrpg have good rules on average, accounting for all the variations... Im sorry but they arent even close in the competency needed to handle that. ttrpgs have way way way more variables that practically all other products. Its like the exact opposite of something that is easy to get right. And thats what I love about the format... its the perfect format for the perfect game because of the insane flexibility and number of variables. Yet that means its ungodly hard for a single central entity to make a design that is generally good. So we end up with the world we are in where you can maximize fun by self selecting a system that meshes well, or by maximizing how willing you are to forget rules(typically by accident). The future is bright though... there will be a system that does much better eventually.

@RyeAlboa

18 күн бұрын

Nurture that flame, do not let it extinguish!

The ship of theasus is only a hard question to solve if you havent realized that words are just arbetrary lables we make up. I think alot of the trouble comes from schooling where teachers falsely tell you there is a "correct" way to speak a language, spell a word, use symbols, ect. Its worth pointing out; People dont realize how many arguements are actually just an arguement over a difference in arbitrary definition. So many arguements secretly have that at the core... but no one involved knows. The arguement wouldnt happen if the people involved had realized that theres no such thing as a "correct" definition. Hey! that would be a great thing to teach in school! ...rather than teaching the exact opposite.

I can answer this question. Is the edition youre playing made before 4e? Youre playing Dungeons and Dragons.