Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 246 posts

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#41

Post by amorphid »

gerdesj wrote: post #27
acbabis wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another very important reason was left out: The 5th edition of the game was very well designed and received critical acclaim among veterans who were disappointed by the 4th edition. The article makes it sound like there's been a resurrection when in fact the game was just hibernating.

What on earth are these edition things? I'll have to dig out my DMG, PH, MM, FF etc. Apparently, they might be cool. Then there is Traveller, Runequest, Tunnels and Trolls, Car Wars (with Truck Stop etc) and rather a lot more.

My gaming group stopped playing Car Wars after I min-maxed a trike vehicle to absorb damage with armored beer fridges. The beer fridges had more "hit points" per pound than regular armor. Every attempt to be clever after that felt like too much work.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#42

Post by dragonwriter »

tunesmith wrote: post #39
dragonwriter wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deep integration with rules may have licensing issues, and as D&D Beyond expands, apps which lack such integration may have trouble competing with the growing first-party service.

What's the growing first-party service?

D&D Beyond.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#43

Post by vkou »

forapurpose wrote: post #20
dragonwriter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5e did what I would have thought impossible: the people that preferred 4e to earlier editions largely liked it, the people who were repulsed by 4e but stayed with 3e/3.5e or forks of those liked it, and a lot of the “old school” crowd that preferred OD&D, B/X or BECMI D&D, or AD&D 1e or 2e also liked it.

Why would someone who already knows AD&D 1e switch to the new one? What does that person gain? Imagine this hypothetical person wants to spend as little time as possible learning and on details, and as much as possible on creative experiences.

Never having to look up the rules that govern attacks of opportunity made by a giant creature with long reach.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#44

Post by saalweachter »

botverse wrote: post #24
gilbetron wrote: post #19

I'm shocked by the number of people popping out of the woodwork. I've been gaming consistently for the past 35 years, and while gaming was more popular overall in the early 80s and late 90s, I know more gamers right now personally than ever. I have a game group, of older people, on my fucking street!

I did play some RPG when I was a kid (born 1981) and I’ve been thinking about how to get back to it for the las 5 years. I was probably difficult not so long ago, but my friends are starting to freeze their fb accounts and restrict mobile use, might give a try!

I'm in a similar demographic and recently got back into it (D&D 5e). The impetus for me was that (a) it had been "long enough" since I'd stopped playing (probably 15 years, Jesus) that I was craving it and (b) I wanted an excuse to drag a group of friends over to my house on a regular basis.

Any resurgence is probably rooted in a number of factors, like the good design of 5e, but I wonder how much of it stems from the same cohort who played it in the 90's simply reaching some point in their life (spending less time at bars, looking for more of a break from work, wanting to spend time with friends "IRL", etc etc) that they fall back into it.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#45

Post by mhink »

acbabis wrote: post #3
arkades wrote: post #2

I’d have liked this article if it had taken a more critical stance as to the resurgence of RPGs rather than hand-waving some ineffable bs about simpler times and half-allusions to political tensions. The more accurate answer is, IMO, two fold: (1) kids who grew up on RPGs are now old enough to want to want to play with their own kids, and funnel disposable cash into it (2) kids who are interested have less stigma to…

Another very important reason was left out: The 5th edition of the game was very well designed and received critical acclaim among veterans who were disappointed by the 4th edition. The article makes it sound like there's been a resurrection when in fact the game was just hibernating.

There was also a very interesting podcast [1] the other day with Mike Mearls, Adam Koebel, Matt Mercer, and Matt Colville discussing the design decisions in 5th edition. Specifically, one of the most interesting points Mearls made is that the 5e design team specifically set out to craft a game which "felt like" Dungeons and Dragons, and which explicitly recognized and created a place for the "culture" of D&D which has been around for years (certainly since I was futzing around with 3.5 statblocks in high school!)

An example they brought up is the alignment system: it's one of the most criticized aspects of the game, especially with regards to mechanics. Nevertheless, it's baked into the culture of D&D by now ("What would Batman's alignment be?") and while getting rid of it might improve the gameplay, it would be removing something core to the game experience.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqjLO6YNKV0

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#47

Post by squeaky-clean »

lotharbot wrote: post #28
forapurpose wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would someone who already knows AD&D 1e switch to the new one? What does that person gain? Imagine this hypothetical person wants to spend as little time as possible learning and on details, and as much as possible on creative experiences.

the short answer is that some systems better support creative experiences than others. Each system provides both power to tell stories and restrictions on what stories make sense within the framework. 3.5e, for example, was a high-powered but extremely clunky framework -- it let you build epic creative experiences, but often got in its own way. 4e was a lower-powered storytelling experience because it was so focused…

> 5e is actually really quick to learn, and as such, it gets out of the way of the creative storytelling experience a lot more than earlier editions.

To add to this, one minor thing I like about 5e is how much freedom the game explicitly gives the Dungeon Master. Obviously nothing is truly different, the DM is god in every edition. But I've played with many, many DMs (usually new DMs) who will refuse to do something fun because it goes against some way a rule is written in the book. Even if they and the whole party wants it to happen, it would be breaking "the rules".

The first DM I ever played with actually would never let us call anything a rulebook. It was a Player's Handbook or guidebook, or what have you. Because as she said, she was the rules, not the book.

I think that really helped form a mentality of "Fun First" when I run a game. The 5e books felt a little heavy-handed at first, every third spell says something along the lines of "If the DM chooses". But it's already helped me in some real games as a player, where the DM can do what they want and not what the book says, because by doing what they want they're still doing what the book says.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#48

Post by samstave »

acbabis wrote: post #3
arkades wrote: post #2

I’d have liked this article if it had taken a more critical stance as to the resurgence of RPGs rather than hand-waving some ineffable bs about simpler times and half-allusions to political tensions. The more accurate answer is, IMO, two fold: (1) kids who grew up on RPGs are now old enough to want to want to play with their own kids, and funnel disposable cash into it (2) kids who are interested have less stigma to…

Another very important reason was left out: The 5th edition of the game was very well designed and received critical acclaim among veterans who were disappointed by the 4th edition. The article makes it sound like there's been a resurrection when in fact the game was just hibernating.

Roll for pop-culture-perceptiveness

The tighter your grip on the threat of D&D, the more mid-40s nerds slip through your fingers!

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#49

Post by egypturnash »

forapurpose wrote: post #20
dragonwriter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5e did what I would have thought impossible: the people that preferred 4e to earlier editions largely liked it, the people who were repulsed by 4e but stayed with 3e/3.5e or forks of those liked it, and a lot of the “old school” crowd that preferred OD&D, B/X or BECMI D&D, or AD&D 1e or 2e also liked it.

Why would someone who already knows AD&D 1e switch to the new one? What does that person gain? Imagine this hypothetical person wants to spend as little time as possible learning and on details, and as much as possible on creative experiences.

The biggest gain: A much larger pool of potential players/DMs. If you limit yourself to other old farts who still have their battered old AD&D 1e books then that’s a pretty elite set of fortysomethings - my D&D Blue Book and my set of AD&D 1e is long gone, after three cross-country moves and one hurricane.

Also 5e is AMAZING for giving out a TON of story hooks as part of the character creation process. Sure, you and your GM may be old pros who know how to make a story, and that’s great. But if you’re having an off day, or bringing in some new players who don’t know how to prepare the seeds of a story, it’s pretty damn useful to have all these hooks lying around.

Everything is generally streamlined, you will mostly be rolling a d20. Other dice show up for your HP and damage, because it’s just not D&D without that handful of weird-shaped dice.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#50

Post by racer-v »

forapurpose wrote: post #20
dragonwriter wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5e did what I would have thought impossible: the people that preferred 4e to earlier editions largely liked it, the people who were repulsed by 4e but stayed with 3e/3.5e or forks of those liked it, and a lot of the “old school” crowd that preferred OD&D, B/X or BECMI D&D, or AD&D 1e or 2e also liked it.

Why would someone who already knows AD&D 1e switch to the new one? What does that person gain? Imagine this hypothetical person wants to spend as little time as possible learning and on details, and as much as possible on creative experiences.

For me, nothing. I play 1e (and have played 5e et al). Pick the one that gets you excited. If you like the art, the names of the monsters, and the community, those factors outweigh any minor differences in rules or organization.

It's similar to programming languages - there's an ineffable quality to a language that makes you just want to use it (or not). I knew someone who picked up DarkBASIC several years ago; I could have suggested he get into Python or something more "mainstream", but I think the right choice is the one that makes you want to sit down and work on your project.

Post reply on HN