Third ed is still D&D, what makes D&D D&D is still there. PLOTLINE.
Plotline is in several different versions of various games throughout the dice-chucking world. Plotline is the responsibility of the DM/GM.
But I can take a monster or a PC/NPC I find interesting in a D&D campaign, I can translate it into 2nd Ed terms. Can't do that with 3rd Ed stats... I've tried, too.
Post by Atreides Conscript on Jun 11, 2005 4:08:02 GMT -5
the entirety of the game is the job of the DM/GM/ST/other. If they want to use their own system, then the game runs under that system. If they want to use their own plotline, then the game runs under that plotline. 2nd Edition D&D is a game with a certain world, back-plot, and system already created. 3rd Edition D&D (and 3.5 for that matter) are no different. It is the responsibility of the DM to make the game an enjoyable experience for everybody.
So I pose the question (like a lawyer, already knowing the likely answers of those around me)....
If I ran a fantasy RPG with the 2nd Edition system (keep in mind that I'm only using the system, not the back-plot or the world), would I be running a D&D campaign or not?
What do you call 4 crows milling about at the side of a road?
If I ran a fantasy RPG with the 2nd Edition system (keep in mind that I'm only using the system, not the back-plot or the world), would I be running a D&D campaign or not?
So you are stating that the plot makes the gameline? Right then. I must appolgize to everyone who has ever played in my campaigns. You have not been playing AD&D 2nd Edition, as you thought. Instead, you have been playing, um, ugh, something else.</asshole>
Dood. If you look through the PHB and DMG, there is no pre-established history. It isn't like the drama based RPGs (WW and Alderac liked to publish these). Instead, they offer their "sourcebooks" as their histories.
If you play a campaign with 2ed rules, then obviously you have a Dungeons and Dragons game. Conversely, if you play a campaign with d20 rules, you are not playing a Dungeons and Dragons game so much as you are playing a Wizards of the Coast interperetation of a TSR game. But, since WotC bought TSR (and every other company that they have released an RPG for), there isn't a TSR to challenge the d20 name with a real 3rd Edition, like what Alderac is doing with Legend of the Five Rings.
Though d20 uses many similar mechanics as D&D, the game is still different. And to finally clarify, D&D does not have a plotline. Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, Dragonmech, Oriental Adventures, etc., are the "history" of the D&D world. Sure, there are some distinct D&D "heroes" if you will: Tenser, Mordenkainen, Tasha (who gets the axe in 3rd), Vecna, etc. But each world's history is different from the main system.
Last Edit: Jun 11, 2005 8:21:02 GMT -5 by eunhathes
But TSR was working on d20 before they were bought out. All Wizards did was change a ew things to make it easier to use because TSR was a fan of confusing shit.
System does not make a game. Story does, now if you don't want to believe me that D&D has a plot then fine. But AD&D and D&D share a similar thing, the feel. There is aways fantasy, unless you play the sci-fi one(which we don't speak of).
Post by The Hatter on Jun 14, 2005 11:32:54 GMT -5
Wait a sec, There was a Sci-Fi RPG that they released that we do not speak of?......hrmmmm.....you and I must speak of it sometime...........*rubs hands together*
If you play a campaign with 2ed rules, then obviously you have a Dungeons and Dragons game. Conversely, if you play a campaign with d20 rules, you are not playing a Dungeons and Dragons game so much as you are playing a Wizards of the Coast interperetation of a TSR game.
Now... wait a second. Just how does this work?
You are saying that since AD&D is D&D, playing with its rules means that you are playing D&D. Conversely, since 3ed Ed is not D&D, it is not D&D, and playing a game using its rules means that you are not playing D&D.
No, what he is saying is that since Wizards realased D&D 3ed. it is not D&D. Well my boy, Fanpro bought Shadowrun and I still like 3ed Shadowrun. In fact I think it is a little easier than 2ed. TSR sold out, and it pisses him off. And I say that is no way to judge a game.
Post by Atreides Conscript on Jun 14, 2005 18:55:03 GMT -5
Eunhathes does appear biased in his take on this situation. I have done everything possible to keep myself objective here, and I believe that most others have done the same. Let us keep up that good ethic....
And to open up again, I will state: 3rd Edition D&D is just that. It is D&D. It's not Fantasy d20... and it shouldn't be. Moving on to point support....
d20 Fantasy is a title that you would make for a d20 system take on all fantasy settings (that means all of them across the board). For example, BESM d20 doesn't have a plotline at all (sourcebook or otherwise) and thus the errata of Big Eyes Small Mouth is named with the system alongside it. d20 Modern is another one, and so is Mecha d20. These are names of erratas for the d20 system itself. You use these when you want d20 rules, but also a particular feel. They never give you a universe to work with.
3rd Edition D&D does have plotline, and should be recognized as such. D&D referrs to the plotline of the game. Look at Star Wars for an example of this rule of thumb. It uses d20 rules, but they don't call it Star Wars d20 now do they? And they sure as hell don't call it Space Adventures d20! Bottom line... Fantasy d20 wouldn't have the D&D plotline now would it? And on to the conclusion....
Plot overrides system... not the other way around. End....
Wait a sec, There was a Sci-Fi RPG that they released that we do not speak of?......hrmmmm.....you and I must speak of it sometime...........*rubs hands together*
No. No you don't. Ok, Spelljammer. ** Beats head in in repentance ** Let us pray it never returns... Wait, Dragonmech...
atreidesconscript said:
Plot overrides system... not the other way around. End....
Granted. For you.
Plot is a device in D&D that I have long dismissed as unecessary to the continuation of the game. Indeed, people play games for the "feel", as Az so eloquently worded it. However, d20 Fantasy does not "feel" like D&D. It feels like Final Fantasy meets Magic: the Gathering (high fantasy + UBERFUCKYOUOVER UPNOW PLZKTHNXBYE). Second Edition feels like D&D. Not because it's my favorite. I have spoken up many a time stating "Legend of the Five Rings is the sexiest RP system known to man". 2Ed is D&D because it is a continuation of a pre-established "game". The game's history is irrelevant to myself primarily because the history of my games has been made by myself and the PCs playing in them. In d20, the history comes pre-packaged and all but force fed down your throat! Look through the 2Ed PHB. Notice any language lists? Any dieties named in there? Character examples (yes, there is one: Rath. and he's not even completed.)? If the heart of D&D is an original device (character, plot, enemy), then d20 has a distinct predisposition to stunting creativity.
This argument sets me up for many rebuttals. Allow me to elaborate: 1) d20 is usable as a base rules set for games. However, this would eliminate the "plotline" argument, as you are now the one creating the plot, not WotC. Also, note that all the TSR staff who created D&D had their original character's names removed from the d20 Fantasy book. Find me a spell by Tasha. Find mention of Cwell the Fine. Locate me a notation on Tenser. Those are the people of D&D's history. 2) You can indeed create an original character. I'm just pointing out the absolute irrelevance of doing so when WotC has taken the time to do so for you. 3) There was Greyhawk, and Kara-tur, and Krynn in second edition. And I treated them as expansion sets, just like I do with d20 Fantasy. 4) "STOP CALLING IT D20 FANTASY, YOU COCKMONGERING KNOBSLOBBERER!" Not until the day I start calling it d20 Magic the Gathering. Just wait, when one of the core rulebooks is set in Dominaria, or any close varian thereof. Or when a MTG expansion is called Oriental Adventures (Champions of Kamigawa), or Dragonmech (Mirrodin), or Planescape (Ravnica?). 5) Plot does indeed make the game. Which would you rather play for a vampiric-horror genre game: Vampire 3Ed, or GURPS? How about the cyberpunk genre: Shadowrun or TORG? And as for fuedal-japanesque intrigue: Legend of the Five Rings or d20 Oriental Adventures? Basically, we play what we want when it comes to system, and the plot simply accentuates and elaborates on the original system. Would L5R be the same without the battle of Sea Bridge? Or the Falling of the Kami? Most assuredly not, but the need for those events is perpetuated by the fact that the system exists. Would L5R be the same without the INSANE emphasis on honor? No, and it's called d20 Oriental Adventures, played in Rokugan. Is D&D the same without the people? Yeah, pretty much. Is it the same without THAC0 and negative armor? No, it's d20 Fantasy.
Last Edit: Jun 14, 2005 23:10:02 GMT -5 by eunhathes
Yeah, but TSR was still going to change it to the d20 system for third edition if they still owned it. But they were losing money because the new age gamers couldn't make heads or tails of the system. When WotC bought the rights some of the TSR staff that had been working on it for years went with it. They then continued work on making the d20 system for D&D. They weren't the only ones that worked on it, but they did have their hands in it. WotC looked at the system and said, "Hey, why don't you change THACO to To Hit, and we can use it like this."
So I impose this question upon you, if TSR did realse third edition as it was would you still call it d20 fantasy?
Post by darkprophet on Jun 27, 2005 3:38:45 GMT -5
atreidesconscript said:
As for "BESM meets Whitewolf", I could use the BESM d20 system to play Vampire: The Masquerade if I wanted to. I could rewrite the classes to be the clans, and transfer the Merits and Flaws into BESM terms. I could follow up by figuring out which abilities are class skills, and which are cross-class, and so on....
It would still be Vampire, but with a different system. Are they different games? Yes... but the part that matters is still the same. If I want to play D&D, I'll play D&D... the system is merely an empty skeleton that the true "game" fits itself on. Don't be mistaken.
[/color][/quote]
not true conscript. the games were written for those systems because they fit the mechanics best. if you really want to get specific about it changing from a d10 system to a d20 system complicates the game needlessly and makes it far less enjoyable for the casual player who's just there to have a good time. it is after all just a game to relax and enjoy your time with. math is good, it just never got me off so i stick with something requiring fewer checks for a single action. and leave v:tm out of this. if you cant stick to the topic at hand perhaps a broader spectrum of thought is best for you. shoo fly you bother me. 2nd ed D&D all the way baby.
Post by Atreides Conscript on Jun 27, 2005 15:04:19 GMT -5
darkprophet said:
not true conscript. the games were written for those systems because they fit the mechanics best. if you really want to get specific about it changing from a d10 system to a d20 system complicates the game needlessly and makes it far less enjoyable for the casual player who's just there to have a good time. it is after all just a game to relax and enjoy your time with. math is good, it just never got me off so i stick with something requiring fewer checks for a single action. and leave v:tm out of this. if you cant stick to the topic at hand perhaps a broader spectrum of thought is best for you. shoo fly you bother me. 2nd ed D&D all the way baby.
Did you even read this thread? Or did you pick out a post and react to it? As for the "needless complication of the game" I'm not trying to turn a d10 system into d20. I merely used that as a reference for my points. Back off Darkling....
What do you call 4 crows milling about at the side of a road?
Post by gryphonpoet on Jun 30, 2005 3:26:50 GMT -5
atreidesconscript said:
Plot overrides system... not the other way around. End....
The rules of any game are to provide a common place to compete. Whether that is between two PC's, the group of PC's and the DM or between two athletic teams is irrespective. To play by gridiron rules and try to call a game "baseball" is absolutely ludicrous, and what happened in the previous season is completely superfluous.
If you play according to AD&D rules and ignore the background history and plotline OF COURSE you will have an AD&D game. The rules aren't there to enforce the plotline, but to enforce the mechanics of the game.
To ask if you play by one set of rules but ignore the basic plotlines would it still be that game is the same as asking if the Green Bay Packers played the Detroit Lions two years ago, but I am at a Miami Dolphins vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers game today, am I still watching football?
I have NEVER found a rule in ANY game that I have EVER played that says that the players are required to use a specific plotline without variation. Not even S&T games.
Sorry. I don't believe the plotline argument works. 1st Ed and 2nd Ed are AD&D. 3rd Ed is another game that I find not nearly as fun.
But you see they are still the same game. TSR, like I have said twice before, was working on cleaning up the system, the d20 system, for 3ed. They ran into a funding problem and then they could not realease it so Wizards bought them so their product could be sold. Most of the staff that was working on the 3ed project at TSR got picked up by Wizards to finish the job. Wizards threw in a few helpful ideas, and behold we have the told selling RPG of the known gaming realm. So if the entirity of the gaming population calls it D&D then low and behold, we have a D&D game.
No one answered my question here.
So I impose this question upon you, if TSR did realse third edition as it was would you still call it d20 fantasy?
Au contraire... The question is indeed answered. The mechanics are what defines the game, despite the plotline. The same way that the rules define a sport or any other pastime.
I have played several other games in the fantasy realm as well. I wouldn't call any of those "D&D" either, though they may have similar plotline... even a couple were from TSR in its heyday...
One might ask if Boot Hill, another game from TSR in the 70's is a Wild West D&D, as it used a very similar system to 1st Ed. However, it was just as different from D&D as 3rd Ed is, also from the same company.
The question is no longer whether or not the 3rd Ed D&D game is D&D. It is obviously NOT, except in name only. Any other statement is to imply they are the same only different. So the question now has become "Is the new game WoC/TSR has devised good enough to play?" That answer is "Yes!"
This ends my discussion on this matter.
Last Edit: Jul 11, 2005 18:04:08 GMT -5 by gryphonpoet
Ok, I understand you, but my quell here is with eunhathes. He seems to think that just because WoC released it it shouldn't be named that. He has stated anything to make me believe he believers otherwise. So I ask him to answer my question.
Wizards of the Coast had never, before 1999, released a single RPG. They created the CCG. They redefined the gaming through Magic the Gathering. Allow me to elaborate:
Magic: the Gathering Jyhad Battletech Rage C*23 Herucles Legend of the Burning Sands Netrunner Xena
None of these games, though fun and each original, had any traces of RPG in them. WotC has never even sponsored "Storyline Tournaments" like AEG has in almost all it's games. My problem with "3rd Edition D&D" is in the fact that the game was so radically altered, by a company with no RPG experience. WotC is a giant golddigging company after marketing ploys. If WotC had released "3rd Edition" as its own d20 line instead, then it would have been perfectly fine. I understand that TSR was working on the system. Given this little fact, I would be forced to do nothing but detest all D&D from this point forward and play strictly L5R. However, I can only look at the actuality of the system. In actuality, WotC released d20, not TSR. TSR is no more, slain by the mighty Juzam Djinn of WotC. In essence, there is nothing more unfair to your fanbase than completely changin the rules base they have been playing with for the last quarter century.
Do not mistake my intent. d20 is a good system. I like 2nd Edition better if I want to play fantasy. On the note of the other systems, I prefer AEGs Legend of the Five Rings to d20 Oriental Adventures. I prefer Battletech to Dragonmech. I prefer Tri-Stat dX to BESM d20 (though this is still a close fight).
I prefer the original to the WotC cheapass knockoff.
I would like to point out the book Thirty Years of Adventure. It is a book that talks all about the history of D&D, from its conception thirty years ago to its current incarnation. It has much in the way of interesting facts, such as what happened with TSR and why they made AC go up and not down. If you do not want to buy it, at least crouch down in the aisle of your local bookstore and flip through it.
For one thing, a very large chunk of the D&D crew from TSR is IN the current WotC crew. They were all simply transplanted to Washington, with the offer to continue the game that they had been working on. While WotC does not have much experience in making RPG's, the TSR people that joined WotC DO.
