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

21–30 of 246 posts

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#21

Post by dragonwriter »

nickthegreek wrote: post #17
tunesmith wrote: post #5

Are there any AR apps that let you set up dungeons/maps on your table (through the view of your phone or tablet)?

I just searched for something like this about a month ago and found nothing. I think both an ipad app to design 2d dungeons for print or use on sites like roll20 as well as an AR app could corner the market. The only good d&d mobile apps are on iOS only and have no real competition either (Fight Club 5 and Game Master 5).

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.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#22

Post by dmoy »

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.

Not having to use THAC0 ever again would be one thing they would gain.

I'd make a silly wager that the net time saved by using 5e rules would outweigh the cost of learning them.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#24

Post by botverse »

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!

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#25

Post by Dowwie »

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'm guessing.. Portland?

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#26

Post by dragonwriter »

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.

> Why would someone who already knows AD&D 1e switch to the new one? What does that person gain?

Aside from network effects, the rules are much easier to use in play without referencing fairly arbitrary tables; there's a lot of streamlining and consistency that lets them handle more situations with less lookups, different mechanical subsystems, and fiddly bits.

Notably, a unified success mechanic that covers skill use (including what were “thief skills” in core 1e, as well as “nonweapon proficiencies” from some of the 1e supplements), attacks, ability checks, and saving throws is a big improvement from 1e (D&D has had that in some form since 3e, though.)

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#27

Post by gerdesj »

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.

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.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#28

Post by lotharbot »

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 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 on "balance". (My experience doesn't go all the way back to 1e so I can't comment on its specific strengths and weaknesses.)

One thing I really like about 5e is that it's quite streamlined, but has a variety of options integrated into the core game. Things that were clunky in prior editions (like prestige classes in 3.5, or ritual-casting in 4e) are now supported smoothly. So it's high-powered but also kind of gets out of the way.

EDIT: I think the fear of learning new rulesets is itself a reaction to the overly complex early-edition D&D rules. You have to learn so many different types of mechanics and try to keep them all straight. You have a bunch of different bonus types and have to learn which ones stack, and then try to maximize the overall stack. 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.

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#29

Post by klipt »

dragonwriter wrote: post #8
lotharbot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

of particular note, D&D 5e accomplished many of the technical/balance things 4e was supposed to accomplish but failed at, while still retaining the excellent flavor and sense of power from 3.5e.

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.

Pathfinder still has a dedicated following though - maybe that's the one niche (tons of detailed customizations and third party add ons) 5e didn't fill?

Re: The Uncanny Resurrection of Dungeons and Dragons

#30

Post by nevster »

I think the main thing is 5th edition - it's really good. I briefly tried 4th edition and it just didn't feel right - way too combat heavy and video-gamey.

Then 5th edition came out and it was immediately obvious that it had that 1st edition feel but with all the bugs worked out. I play it with my kids and it's awesome.

Post reply on HN