I apologize in advance if some of the content of this post can be found elsewhere on these forums. My intention is not to produce redundant content but to summate a few separate but relevant topics into a single topic in as cogent a manner as I am able.
Reader beware: This post will be quite long. I appreciate your patience.
The most logical place to being making my case is to explain why it is that I think ability to create custom classes should be a priority for the dev team. I'll start by referring to the Dungeon Master's Guide and how it describes the difference between Low, Middle, and High Fantasy. While those names are not used, monikers like Sword and Sorcery are;
Sword and Sorcery: A grim, hulking fighter disembowels the high priest of the serpent god on his own altar. A laughing rogue spends ill-gotten gains on cheap wine in filthy taverns. Hardy adventurers venture into the unexplored jungle in search of the fabled City of Golden Masks. A sword-and-sorcery campaign emulates some of the classic works of fantasy fiction, a tradition that goes back to ...
While I can understand the power-fantasy associated with the traditional high-fantasy setting, it is not for everyone, and many players prefer games tethered more strongly to narrative elements and personal relationship that are, simply put, not possible in the aforementioned setting. In a world where clerics and paladins can purify the body of sickness with a magical touch, entire plot devices such as disease, or illness are rendered impossible. Likewise, the ability to magically conjure food and water removes the human need to farm, develop agriculture or exchange such goods between nations. Even the most dire concerns of human beings - the fear of death, our very mortality - is set aside by the availability of resurrection magics. This topic is meaty enough on its own to merit a full post, however I will digress here in the interest of connecting this to explain why it matters, and how it is connect to this post.
D&D is an RPG. Shocking I know. in an RPG (Role Playing Game), the most significant element of gameplay is the adoption of a role by the players. In its most literal form, all games are RPGs. In Call of Duty, you take on the role of a soldier, in StarCraft, you take on the role of a battlefield commander in control of your military forces. In D&D however, the art of playing a role is central to the experience. It could even be said that role playing itself is the game and that the rules of combat, the casting of magic, and the value of goods and services exist in the rulebooks only as a framework for fairness should those events take place in your game. I hope that this is sufficiently self-evident that no further explanation is required.
It's worth mentioning at this point that my previous two statements are inherently connected. Certain types of games such as the Low, Middle, and High fantasy settings described above lend themselves to particular sets of rules. A Low Fantasy setting is, more tethered to reality and as such will lean far more heavily on the element of Role Playing. Contrastingly, High Fantasy settings almost entire exclude the element of role playing; after all, how emotional can you be when your adventuring companion dies if all that death means is a trip to the nearby priest for a quick resurrection. Sure it sets you back a few (thousand) gold, but it fully undercuts an emotional investment. Why be cautious at all if death is only a temporary hinderance. High Fantasy settings tend to lack in Role Playing and lean heavily on other mechanics such as combat, to forward the experience.
To quote a famous comedian; Not that there's anything wrong with that!
I obviously have my own preference, as do the players in my campaigns. While High Fantasy and role playing may be oil and water, that doesn't mean they aren't fun or entertaining in other ways.
But back to the reason I am writing the post in the first place: 4th Edition of D&D is written and configured to accommodate only a High Fantasy setting. Obviously there is some wiggle room in terms of what a DM can do by limiting access to certain characters. Setting rules like "no wizards allowed" or some such.
The only two classes that have no High Fantasy elements backed into them are the Fighter and the Rogue. And both of them have very 'magical' subclass options. Those classes are well balanced, fit into almost any setting, and have a plethora of various playstyles available to them. But even as that is the case, a party of Fighters and Rogues does not a party make. Perhaps I want to play a Paladin-like crusader without the ability to revive the dead and cure disease - or a Barbarian that doesn't fly around like an eagle-buzz while surrounded by an retinue of his fallen clansmen.
As of right now, it is not possible to make sufficient changes to the base classes using the tools we have. I can customize some features, or the order in which it progresses, but I can't (for example) remove spellcasting from the Paladin, or add a replacement to that feature that would thematically fit.
I don't think it's reasonable to expect a tool to allow for every conceivable need a player may have, but I think that it would be quite reasonable for us to be given the power to mix and match base class features from within the existing catalogue of class features between all the classes (and new ones that may come).
Thank you for the well thought through feedback. :)
The really short answer is - there are many more features that the team will be working on first, that will benefit the majority of users the majority of the time.
As cool as homebrew classes would be, they would benefit a minority of players.
While I can understand the power-fantasy associated with the traditional high-fantasy setting, it is not for everyone, and many players prefer games tethered more strongly to narrative elements and personal relationship that are, simply put, not possible in the aforementioned setting.
You may want to avoid silly phrasing like “not possible”. I can understand you not encountering these aspects in high fantasy games but just because you have not does not mean it is impossible. Every single high-fantasy game I have played has these aspects and there are whole shows of these games set in high-fantasy with an abundance of these aspects with emotional scenes and development of personal relationships. Watch Critical Role – it's a perfect example of how high fantasy D&D can most definitely have these things. I actually feel sorry for you if your high fantasy has not had them. It's the mix of these elements with the high fantasy that makes D&D so compelling for those like myself and many others.
In a world where clerics and paladins can purify the body of sickness with a magical touch, entire plot devices such as disease, or illness are rendered impossible.
Once again you're describing something entirely possible as 'impossible'. Clerics and Paladins need not be some super abundant things going around curing everything and there can be sicknesses and diseases they cannot cure. Many plot points are centred around the magical afflictions that cannot be cured by a mere touch of a Cleric or Paladin. Take a look at Tomb of Annihilation, an officially released adventure, for this because it has an example of this. Just because something is beyond the creatvity of you or your DM does not make it impossible.
Likewise, the ability to magically conjure food and water removes the human need to farm, develop agriculture or exchange such goods between nations.
Good grief how many spellcasters with access to this do you have? You do realise these magics are exceedingly rare? Adventurers, the characters you play, are rare. A couple of spellcasters producing a few meals a day is not suddenly going to feed the millions of others. Farming is very much required to avoid mass extinction. If your games suffer an abundance of food for everyone then this is you making it out of balance, do not put your mistakes on the rest of us who keep the ratio normal – which is about one in every few million who are even capable of these magics and they are very limited in how often they can use it.
Even the most dire concerns of human beings - the fear of death, our very mortality - is set aside by the availability of resurrection magics.
Yes. I mean ignoring how rare this is supposed to be, sure. Genuine clerics are one in a thousand, no, less and that one cleric in a thousand clerics might have some limited ability to resurrect but it requires a very pricey and rare diamond (not just gold, it must be diamond which is much, much, much more difficult to get than the gold). So, no, resurrections should not be so abundant to just mitigate the risk of death. It can be if you want it to be and that's on you but many of us do not play it that way.
A Low Fantasy setting is, more tethered to reality and as such will lean far more heavily on the element of Role Playing. Contrastingly, High Fantasy settings almost entire exclude the element of role playing; after all, how emotional can you be when your adventuring companion dies if all that death means is a trip to the nearby priest for a quick resurrection. Sure it sets you back a few (thousand) gold, but it fully undercuts an emotional investment. Why be cautious at all if death is only a temporary hinderance. High Fantasy settings tend to lack in Role Playing and lean heavily on other mechanics such as combat, to forward the experience.
What poor excuse of games have you been in to come up with this drivel? You have my deepest sympathies, whoever was your DM just had no creativity at all. I've never come across a high fantasy game that lacked lots of roleplaying. Recently I have played a session with my changeling in a bit of a spy-session and it was thrilling. The entire session was involving, heart-racing and thrilling as I tried to come up with ways to get the information I needed out of the groups of warring factions and no combat at all! High fantasy can definitely lend itself to emotional settings, drama, conflict, personal relationships and character development and you can have whole sessions filled with roleplaying, high-fantasy, fun with not a single hint of combat in them.
If high fantasy was so devoid of character do you really think high fantasy fiction novels would be so successful?
Again, death is a very real possibility. You need to realise these classes you play are very, very, rare. They are the truly exceptional individuals. Spellcasters even rarer and clerics rarer still because their power comes from a deity who has full say on what they can and cannot use their power for. There will likely be only a handful of clerics actually capable of resurrection in the whole world and would still require you to complete a quest or obtain the component which is a really pricey diamond. Again, diamond not gold. Gold is abundant – diamonds are not. They are some of the rarest non-magical substances in the world which is why they're so valuable. You may be able to get a 50 gp value diamond but a single diamond worth thousands? Based on the buying power of gold in D&D a gold coin can equate to around $150 (US) so a diamond worth thousands in gold coin would be like getting a diamond worth millions of dollars in this real world – and in D&D they cannot mine diamond as efficiently because they lack the technology. You're not going to find that at a local jewellery store. In the game these diamonds are going to be so rare you will struggle to find any. You will do, you're a powerful adventurer, but this will be limited and certainly not something the average person can get (who earn only a few silver a day, if that).
I'm going to stop the quote-reply method now. I do agree it would be nice to have custom classes but I disagree with everything else you have stated. You seem to be mistakenly thinking that just because you've played your high-fantasy games in such a poor fashion that the rest of us do. This is far from the truth. Many of us like our high fantasy games that contain risk of permanent character death, lots of non-combat storylines, arcs of character development and growth, intrigue and vast magical powers that, while fun and fantastic, don't solve any of the major problems facing the races as a whole.I would urge you to not describe these things impossible and as some justification for your personal request, when really it's just you or your DM lacking creativity and, evidently, having never read a fantasy novel before.
Despite the disagreement I do thank you for the laughs you have provided and the encouragement of discussion. We do need more of this.
Good grief. I am glad that you enjoy playing High Fantasy games and have found other players that enjoy them with you. Kudos.
I'm not sure why you have such a bad attitude or feel compelled to repeat, ad-nauseum how you 'feel sorry' for something or other. Nowhere in my suggestion did I ever imply that Low Fantasy gameplay was the only way, or even the best way to play. It is no better or worse than High Fantasy settings in so much as they are both games.
The entirely of this post was intended to provide the DNDBeyond team with compelling reasons to add functionality to their online toolset so that a wider range of players can make use of them. If they feel that Low or Mid Fantasy games represent such as minority of players as to not merit representation, that is their call to make as it is their business to run.
Regarding your defenses of High Fantasy; I can only suggest that you read some of the scholarly works of Clive Staples Lewis, or John Ronald Reuel Tolkien. Both of these authors wrote extensively on the many methods of storytelling and how important it is to create an internally consistent narrative. After this I would recommend you revisit the dungeon master's guide and revisit their descriptions of High and Low Fantasy.
In a High Fantasy setting, magic is absolutely not rare. Wizards and Clerics are not singular and the availability of their spellcasting services and crafted items are available for anyone with coin. This is explicitly stated in the book. After all, who do you think brews all those healing points your players buy at the store? Who crafts all the magic items they buy or enchants the armor they wear? Who were the wizards that created the tombs they explore and so on and so forth.
Regarding Critical Role - this is not a serviceable example of how to play D&D. I happen to enjoy watching that show but fully understand that it s a group of professional voice talents with a long history of personal relationships that happen to share the hobby of table-top gaming. I would never hold my players to that standard as it would be unreasonable and would turn a game that is intended to be fun into an acting-school device that is more challenging than enjoyable.
As it regards my initial request: I think that issue was dead even before I wrote this thread. As the moderator has stated, they are not concerned with adding features that apply to 'only a minatory of players'. Which is unfortunate for all of those players but fully justifiable from a business perspective. The only reply I can offer to that is an attempt to clarify that I am not necessarily asking for fully customizable classes, but rather 'editable' classes. If they could create objects for each of the current base class abilities and allow them to be interchanged from within a drop-down menu system, it would provide the framework that myself and many others are asking for.
And while I absolutely do represent a minority of players, that does not mean that, once implemented, these features would only be used by that minority. It's likely that even traditional players would make use of them.
The entirely of this post was intended to provide the DNDBeyond team with compelling reasons to add functionality to their online toolset so that a wider range of players can make use of them. If they feel that Low or Mid Fantasy games represent such as minority of players as to not merit representation, that is their call to make as it is their business to run.
Please note that this has NEVER been said.
As per my post above, there are many more features for the team to work on, that will benefit the majority of users the majority of the time.
Will D&D Beyond introduce homebrew core classes? Maybe at some time in the future, but for now it is not on the roadmap of planned features.
This has nothing to do with catering for styles of play and has everything to do with introducing new features that are going to be awesome. :)
It could even be said that role playing itself is the game and that the rules of combat, the casting of magic, and the value of goods and services exist in the rulebooks only as a framework for fairness should those events take place in your game. I hope that this is sufficiently self-evident that no further explanation is required.
Certain types of games such as the Low, Middle, and High fantasy settings described above lend themselves to particular sets of rules.
Given that the rules of D&D (and therefore D&D Beyond) are geared toward High Fantasy and you would prefer to play Low Fantasy, does it make sense to change the rules of D&D to the point where you can play Low Fantasy?
As you've pointed out, most of the character classes are magic-using classes. Magic-using monsters would have to be changed. Magic items would have to be changed.
There are so many changes that you'd really be playing a different game, with similar mechanics.
Instead, why not just play an RPG with rules that are better suited for a Low Fantasy game? It would be easier than trying to hammer D&D's High Fantasy square peg into a Low Fantasy round slot.
There's no shortage on non-D&D RPGs to select from. I started playing 2nd edition RuneQuest in the early 80's for that very reason.
There is indeed nothing stopping me from playing any other game. As it happens I have tried many of them.
While some of the various games out there would be a better thematic fit for the games I tend to run or play, they are nowhere near the quality of the products produced by WotC or Paizo. I don't say it with any disrepect, but the fact of the matter is the tabletop RPG market is functionally a duopoly and there are only two companies producing quality products.
Secondly, D&D Beyond is a relatively unique service. It's not the only way to do what it does, but even with its relative newness, it does a great deal that other online services do not. I would rather have a better relationship with D&D Beyond: They add the services their customers (me, the only one that matters :P ), and in exchange I invest more in them, paying for additional material and services. Yay capitalism!
I think this is much more desirable than leaving this platform and playing roulette with Paizo in the hopes that they release something that may or may not meet my needs.
All this being said, both WotC and Paizo seem to be refocusing their efforts and engaging in marketing that reaches an increasingly younger demographic. Like MTG, there is a larger market for the power-fantasy narrative in younger age brackets. It's natural that their customers eventually age out of their market as new blood grows into it. Perhaps it's simply time that I bow out of the market all together and engage in other hobbies :)
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil as much as i understand your points, i have to be on the side of CyberMind... your post had a lot of good explanations, but somehow as i was reading it, it felt like you bashed in the skull of those high fantasy gaming group saying they didn't know how to play d&d. that's literally how it felt... now im not saying your way or mine are good or bad, i think all ways in d&d are good and everyone should have a prefered play setting. But yeah, look at the way he quoted you... you literally bashed in high-fantasy. that's why he acted that way.
As for my own gaming... most of the poeple i get around my table have varying ages. it ranges from 12 to 40. i ahve a rotation of people every week and believe it or not, most of the people who come at my table are all about high fantasy. and most of the kids i played with (im the oldest at the table with 37 of age). They all play cause of magics and faeries and unicorns and that kind of stuff. hard to get the next generation in on your game if all you do is make it availlable to older demographics.
now with those in mind, your arguments do make sense, but you have to understand why they are focusing on the majority here and not the small minority. it would take them a lot of time to make other settings availlable, time that can be used to make the actual engine much better as is. that's why they preffer to finish what they started and make sure the engine is finished first, which the engine is not finished. even the campaign management is far away on the road map. they have no tools, they have no real things except database stuff. that's far from a thing in this kind of thing. just saying, try to understand them before you start asking these things.
but i have to commend you, you took time to type all that, so by respect i took the time to read it, by the look of the others, the mods did it too, so im sure your suggestions have gone through. Major Respect for that one. thanks for having you around. at least we know your minority is in good hand. that's all that matters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
To be as clear as I can be, I do not think that players with a preference for High Fantasy games are doing anything wrong. I am glad that they are able to enjoy D&D 5e and hope that they continue to enjoy many High Fantasy adventures. I think that what may have come across as my admonishment for that group is actually my earnest dislike of that setting and not the players that enjoy it.
I wrote a much longer post than this but before posting it I read it over and decided that it basically sounded like further complaints and I have no desire to complain about the game.
Ultimately, my thoughts are that the game mechanics in combination with the material available, as well as the High Fantasy setting, greatly restrict creativity without taking great pains to create your own supplemental material, or writing an entire errata of the rules to accommodate modes of player other than what is initially prescribed.
Everyone should be entitled to play the game in a manner that suits them. If that means that you want a narrative-light but combat-heavy campaign with elements of High Fantasy, that's completely okay! I don't say this with any malice at all. I understand why that sort of game has appeal. I also completely understand why this is a deviation from the majority and am perfectly happy to wait until my desired changes either manifest or don't.
I hope it is clear that my request is not at all implying that other players should abandon their methods to play in a manner like my own - this is far from what I want. I want the game to be so well designed that it can accommodate everyone's way - it seems mine is just a little too fringe to be financially viable as an investment of their developer's time. Again - no malice here. I get it :)
Here's to hoping that they may one day have some time to spare and add some features to make my life a little easier.
now you talk a lot about settings... so this leads me to think one thing that needs to be answered... are you asking Curse gaming (d&d Beyond) to make whole new settings ? because if you are, i think you missinterpretted their websites then... they dont create settings, they only get their data from wotc and then add it to their 5e engine database. they are not here to give people their own settings, they are here to give people the settings WOTC gives them. as for adapting.. we're using 5e mechanics... if your game play is not using said mechanics then you shouldn't be in this place. there are other places with other mechanics, like Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds who have rules for many other non-D&D genre and mechanics.
here they have only D&D 5E. so if your setting do not work on that, then i feel like you should go see other venues instead. I for one, play with my own homebrews, but they are all 5e and beyond is easily able to help me with those homebrews. I play spelljammers, which 5E easily can do. i play westerns which 5e can easily do. i play gritty realism games in modern times, which 5e can easily do. i play sci-fi (star trek or star wars), which 5e can easily do.
sure i have to create my own monsters, sure i have to create my own races, sure i have to create my own items... but once all that is done, which beyond helps tremendously with. i can still play a ton of other settings, as long as they follow 5e mechanics. i'm never really using those pre made adventures. i make my own. so i'm not sure what you are asking here... but again if you are asking for other mechanics... i think the only real suggestion they can give you, would be to see other sites for that. the two i mentionned a direct competitors to Beyond and they have much more then D&D in their arsenal... they have deadlands, they have world of darkness, they have gurps.... so if you seek other mechanics, i sugest you go on their site for it. here they speciale only in what WotC gives them, that's 5E for now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
A Low Fantasy setting is, more tethered to reality and as such will lean far more heavily on the element of Role Playing. Contrastingly, High Fantasy settings almost entire exclude the element of role playing;
While I can understand the power-fantasy associated with the traditional high-fantasy setting, it is not for everyone, and many players prefer games tethered more strongly to narrative elements and personal relationship that are, simply put, not possible in the aforementioned setting.
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil I think why there was some animosity here is that you seem to be saying that playing in a "high fantasy" setting can only include "hack'n slash" gameplay wherein almost no roleplaying can take place, which is blatantly false. There is no evidence that supports the claim that games "more tethered to reality" will have more roleplaying, I'm actually more inclined to believe the opposite. For example, if there was a tabletop game that somehow perfectly simulated reality, why would anyone play it? Certainly not for the roleplay, because at that point you could just go play your role in real life, and quite frankly, it would be boring. I think there is certainly a point where both ends of the spectrum can hinder roleplay, such as having absolute control over everything in game because of "magic", and the aforementioned reality simulator; too much power in-game and there's no point in playing, and too little power and you might as well just sit on the couch and talk.
Put simply, there's just no reason why "high fantasy" can't have the same amount of roleplay and character development that "low fantasy" can.
Also, you claim that the "Sword and Sorcery" flavor of fantasy is synonymous with a "high fantasy" setting, which is wrong. By taking the two words "high" and "fantasy" out of context, you mushed them together and called it a "high fantasy" flavor. If you actually read the Sword and Sorcery play style from the DMG, it actually states:
Fighter, rogue, and barbarian characters tend to be far more common than wizards, clerics, or paladins. In such a pulp fantasy setting, those who wield magic often symbolize the decadence and corruption of civilization, and wizards are the classic villains of these settings. Magic items are therefore rare and often dangerous.
As per the DMG, the core set of D&D rules actually assumes a "Heroic Fantasy" flavor. Based on the description of the "Heroic Fantasy" flavor, it is somewhere between high and low fantasy. In the modern iteration of the Forgotten Realms, the world is inhabited by powerful magic users, but they are rare. Some villages might know or have stories about such folk, and towns may have harbored a few in their time, but they are overall rare. Settlements have to get by on their own, with little to no magical assistance in a somewhat medieval world.
The exception to the guidelines above are the player characters. As the name of the flavor suggests, the player characters are heroic. They are exceptional people who can wield powerful magics and gain extraordinary abilities, but that doesn't mean that every farmer can cast Plant Growth at will. A major city might harbor a powerful cleric or a court wizard, and a few towns may host a few less-powerful magic users, but that's about it. The world is certainly filled with a lot of magic, but that magic tends to belong to dangerous monsters, is buried deep underground, or is otherwise not available to the public at large.
WotC and Paizo seem to be refocusing their efforts and engaging in marketing that reaches an increasingly younger demographic. Like MTG, there is a larger market for the power-fantasy narrative in younger age brackets.
I think what you perceive as an increase in their marketing for "younger demographics" is actually just you getting older and/or your tastes changing. D&D has always been a game about magical fantasy, just read the name. "Dungeons" is a reference to the cliche of the "dungeon delving" fantasy, such as to retrieve some magical artifact or clear out whatever threat may be there. "Dragons" is a reference to the magical creatures that inhabit the fantastical world and are often found in the aforementioned dungeons. If you think you're "getting too old" for D&D, then perhaps you should find another, more suitable game for distinguished people such as yourself (just a suggestion).
Aside from your unsupported claim that high fantasy can't have roleplaying elements, and taking words out of context, and misinterpreting what was written in the rule books, I agree that your feature request would be neat, but that's just it, neat. D&D is inherently a game with magic, and while the rules do provide some ways you can make it be lower magic, magic will still be at its core. It's a fantasy game, and what you claim to be a "power-fantasy" is actually just people having a good time playing a fantasy game. Also, I have no hatred or animosity against you, but I just really disagree with the things you said. The feature swapping/editing for base classes sounds like a cool idea for the future when D&D Beyond has done some more important stuff.
I think that the primary reason that this back and forth continues is that we are all attempting to add our perspective to a conversation about something specific, without first defining the terms.
It is true that at the core of my complaint is the observation that no meaningful role play can occur within the confines of the High Fantasy setting. You clearly disagree with this assertion and are perfectly within your rights to do so. However, I would hazard a guess that he reason you disagree with me is not because you know something I don't - rather, it's because we are each quite probably defining what it means to role play in different ways.
If all that is meant by role play is assuming the role of a character other than yourself, than Call of Duty is every bit as much of a role playing game as Dungeons & Dragons. I think we can both see the differences there and would probably agree that one would contain meaningful role play and the other is strictly definitional.
Sadly, my use of the word meaningful makes it difficult for us to reach an agreed upon definition of terms. I would instead like to point out that while there is a great diversity of fantasy in the literary world, there is an actual science to it. Words have definitions, and when strung together they create narratives that follow carefully curated arcs that all exist as part of the overarching science of literature. There are imperical rights and wrongs in this science.
You'll have to forgive me since I don't have my copy of The Abolition of Man handy and so my quote may not be verbatim, but C. S. Lewis made a very clear point therein; it is very bad form if, in writing a story you paint your hero (or heroin) into a corner and can find no suitable way to get them out of it, and so, in a lazy stroke of the pend you suddenly have them inherit a great deal of money to solve the problem. On the other hand, there is nothing at all wrong with writing an entire story which, from the offset follows the adventures of a man who suddenly inherits that wealth.
A very important concept in writing is managing your audience's (in this case, your players') suspense of disbelief. Because reality is complex, it is genuinely impossible for us to create a new reality for the sake of playing games. Therefore, every game, even those that take place in High Fantasy settings, inherit parts of our reality that we simply assume are part of it. For example; gravity. I don't think very many DMs take the time to point out to their players that gravity is an option house rule and definitely exists in their game. It's simply assumed. But there is more to managing the narrative than explaining the presence of gravity - again, that's assumed. The fantasy elements all require the audience (players) to suspend their belief for a time, in order to accommodate the fantastical elements of the game. And this is natural. A good fantasy should require this at times.
But the suspense of disbelief has limits. If you create a world so full of fantastical elements that it overrides too much of the expected or assumed reality, it prevents immersion or role play. Playing in the High Fantasy setting to me is like trying to both have your cake and eat it too. On the one hand you want your players to form bonds of friendship - to worry when they are danger and to celebrate their shared triumphs. On the other hand, you place those players in a world where everything is immaterial and the vast majority of their actions have no meaningful consequences that cannot be undone by magic or narrative mumbo jumbo. These two things are at odds
So, can players role-play in High Fantasy settings. Sure, if by role play you mean, the players show up at the table, answer to the names of their characters, and roll dice when requested by the DM, than sure. That sort of role playing is very much present in High Fantasy. But no other type can be. Why would your players form attachments to their peers - what reason is there for a ranger to form a loving bond between them than their companion if it's nothing more than a few gold coins and a ritual to conjure a new one from the wilds? Why would any dungeon delving party ever attempt stealth or secrecy when brute force is just as reliable. What is the value in checking for traps to avoid injury when your bard can literally play a tune and speak a healing word and magically stitch any wound.
If you want you players to role play - to actually put themselves in the mindset of their characters, than you are at odds with the default setting. That setting not only encourages the 'brute force' approach to everything, it actively devalues other approaches.
I feel like I am just repeating myself here but, while I clearly do not like the default setting, I am not at all saying it is bad. Nor am I saying that people who play that way are bad. I happen to very much dislike sour cream as well, that doesn't mean I think it is bad or that any one who eats it is bad - I just don't like it. The point of my post was to explain that there is a reason I wanted more from the online toolset, in the hopes that it can encompass the default setting AND others, not just the one. If you like the High Fantasy life, great, keeping having fun, but stop trying to dismiss other perspectives. Let me ask you this - if the team was able to add this feature, would it make the game you play - the way you play it - any worse? No. And frankly it has every bit as much use for others as it does for me. Arguably more so.
Finally, I am in now way attempting to diminish the existing game. I own most of the books and have already gone to the trouble to write a narrative and house rules that my players and I quite enjoy. We have weekly games that have run on for years and will likely continue to run into the foreseeable future. It would be great if the dndbeyond toolset expanded to make our lives a tad easier (well, the player's anyway) by allowing for homebrew stuff - it's neither urgent nor required. It's a feature request. Nothing more.
I would instead like to point out that while there is a great diversity of fantasy in the literary world, there is an actual science to it. Words have definitions, and when strung together they create narratives that follow carefully curated arcs that all exist as part of the overarching science of literature. There are imperical rights and wrongs in this science.
So, how is this relevant in any way other than saying that words have definitions?
So, can players role-play in High Fantasy settings. Sure, if by role play you mean, the players show up at the table, answer to the names of their characters, and roll dice when requested by the DM, than sure. That sort of role playing is very much present in High Fantasy. But no other type can be.
Yet again, you are making a baseless claim that no "meaningful" roleplay can happen in a high fantasy game, and as someone who has played in a high fantasy game, this is blatantly false. You cannot just make this blanket statement for every high fantasy game, because you have no evidence of this being true for all high fantasy games. Perhaps the high fantasy games that you play in don't have what you refer to as "meaningful" roleplay, but mine and others certainly do.
...C. S. Lewis made a very clear point therein; it is very bad form if, in writing a story you paint your hero (or heroin) into a corner and can find no suitable way to get them out of it, and so, in a lazy stroke of the pend you suddenly have them inherit a great deal of money to solve the problem.
So, in essence, are you claiming that high fantasy is only able to provide character and story plots that revolve around all of their problems suddenly being solved by the DM just outright giving them the solution? Or are you claiming that magic in high fantasy just automatically solves every problem? Your point isn't clear here, but those things have nothing to do with the a high fantasy setting and everything to do with how the adventure is written or how the DM runs it. The DM of a low fantasy setting could just as easily give the players the solution or an adventure in such a setting could provide such little challenge.
But the suspense of disbelief has limits. If you create a world so full of fantastical elements that it overrides too much of the expected or assumed reality, it prevents immersion or role play.
I said the same thing in my first response to you. The way I see it, the flavors of fantasy are in a spectrum, where both extremes are unsatisfactory, and somewhere between is the sweet spot that people have different tastes for.
Playing in the High Fantasy setting to me is like trying to both have your cake and eat it too. On the one hand you want your players to form bonds of friendship - to worry when they are danger and to celebrate their shared triumphs. On the other hand, you place those players in a world where everything is immaterial and the vast majority of their actions have no meaningful consequences that cannot be undone by magic or narrative mumbo jumbo. These two things are at odds.
I certainly don't do this as a DM in my high fantasy setting, and the high fantasy settings I have played in don't do this. Always, in the games I've played, the players are challenged and aren't just given the solution through "narrative mumbo jumbo".
I feel like I am just repeating myself here but, while I clearly do not like the default setting, I am not at all saying it is bad. Nor am I saying that people who play that way are bad. I happen to very much dislike sour cream as well, that doesn't mean I think it is bad or that any one who eats it is bad - I just don't like it.
It may feel like you are repeating yourself because that's exactly what you're doing. You keep on responding with the same stuff. You are kind of saying that high fantasy is bad, or at least worse than lower fantasy, since you claim that high fantasy cannot have roleplaying, an important part of the game.
If you like the High Fantasy life, great, keeping having fun, but stop trying to dismiss other perspectives. Let me ask you this - if the team was able to add this feature, would it make the game you play - the way you play it - any worse? No. And frankly it has every bit as much use for others as it does for me. Arguably more so.
I'm not trying to dismiss your perspective, I'm refuting it. You're trying to apply blanket statements seemingly based on your own experience or presumptions, which is not a good way to analyse something that can have many different perspectives. I have already agreed that your feature request would be kind of cool, this is not about the feature, it's about your misrepresentation of a way the game is played. Perhaps you should take your own advice and stop dismissing other perspectives and see what I am saying; not everyone has the same experience. Your experience in high fantasy does not define everyone else's.
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil In fact call of duty is a role playing game, just like any movies who is trying to put you int he shoes of anybody, that is the very definition of a role playing game. your definition is the same as us, the only difference is that apparently you think there is no or next to no interactions involving characters in high fantasy games, which is false, considering that interactions with an NPC, PC or anything for that matter is what defines a role playing game to begin with. but if by role playing game you mean the act of leveling up and gearing yourself, then i am in the obligation to tell you that you fell into the pit trap that is the current video game industry.
the video game industry changed the way people look at role playing games and changed it in order for people to not care for story and thus only care for what the RPG element is. and to them the RPG element is just the act of leveling up and gaining new abilities. Role playing has never been that. it has never been about leveling up. it has always been about playing a role. and a role can be anything that you are not. so yes, by definition call of duty is a role playing game because it forces you to play as a character that is not you. you see everything from its perspective, you hear everything from its perspective. you actually play the guy/girl.
but thats the point we're trying to make and clearly you understand it, but clearly you are against the act of immersion. so my view on you is... you define role play based on things you can understand and not things you dont. like magic for exemple. it is not wrong a style. i know a guy who hates magic to a maximum. he completely refuses to play high fantasy because of magic. he likes good old down to earth modern games. with kevlar, magnums and the likes. and i am fine with this. but saying there is no role play elements in a genre just because you come from a video game industry who is trying to sell you the point that role playing is all about leveling and gearing up... that is not right, that was never the goal in TTRPG.
i'll finish by just giving you the definition from the dictionnary...
role-play·ing
ˈrōl ˌplāiNG/
noun
noun: role playing; noun: rôle playing; plural noun: rôle playings; noun: roleplaying; noun: role-playing; plural noun: role-playings
1.
the acting out of the part of a particular person or character, for example as a technique in training or psychotherapy.
Psychology
the unconscious acting out of a particular role in accordance with the perceived expectations of society.
2.
participation in a role-playing game.
so yes, call of duty is a role playing game as you actually play out a character that is not yourself.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
On a related note, I would be happy if one day Adventures in Middle Earth become available on DDB. This is fantastic example of Low Fantasy, but I understand that implementing everything on DDB would be a huge undertaking.
The problem is not about the setting, the problem is about the actual mechanics and the actual copyright. adventures in middle earth do not belongs to WotC and thus unless curse gains the liscense to make said book into this engine. there is next to nothing that can be done to gain that book you ask. also the point is that this place is about D&D 5E. so if the book hasn't been done for 5E then there is even more problems arising even if they do have the autorisation for the book.
i wouldn't expect beyond to have any real third party stuff in this place, except critical role, because they have partnership with them. but once they are all finished, maybe they will gain more. like fantasy ground and Roll20
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
As a somewhat pedantic point, a high fantasy setting is one in which the story takes place entirely in terms of a fictional world, as opposed to low fantasy or portal fantasy, where magic enters the mundane world or mundane people enter a magical world. High fantasy encompasses everything from Game of Thrones to Lord of the Rings, where magic is something extraordinary and rare, to Xanth and Codex Alera, where magic is an ordinary part of everyday life. Almost all D&D campaign settings are, by that definition, high fantasy. (Side note: I'm aware that by some definitions high fantasy also requires an epic scope, with more personal stories falling into sword & sorcery or heroic fantasy; either way, the term is not defined by the number of spellcasters per capita)
The prominence of magic in the setting can vary in different settings, but the player characters having access to extraordinary abilities is one of the core assumptions of the rules of Dungeons & Dragons. The Player's Handbook says:
Few D&D adventures end without something magical happening. Whether helpful or harmful, magic appears frequently in the life of an adventurer, and it is the focus of part 3.
In the worlds of Dungeons & Dragons, practitioners of magic are rare, set apart from the masses of people by their extraordinary talent. Common folk might see evidence of magic on a regular basis, but it’s usually minor—a fantastic monster, a visibly answered prayer, a wizard walking through the streets with an animated shield guardian as a bodyguard.
For adventurers, though, magic is key to their survival. Without the healing magic of clerics and paladins, adventurers would quickly succumb to their wounds. Without the uplifting magical support of bards and clerics, warriors might be overwhelmed by powerful foes. Without the sheer magical power and versatility of wizards and druids, every threat would be magnified tenfold.
There are, of course, exceptions to these assumptions, but the farther you move away from them, the harder it is to work within the rules of D&D, which were written with the assumption that player characters can perform extraordinary magical feats. While access to magic may be quite rare amongst the general population, a majority of most adventuring parties will be able to perform at least some kinds of magic.
I don't say this to discourage anyone from playing in whatever world they like, with whatever rules they like, but because D&D Beyond is a tool for D&D, based on the core assumptions of D&D, it's important to recognize that the more you customize the rules, the harder it's going to be for a tool like this to support it. Neither DDB nor D&D will ever be all things to all people, and we all have our personal wish lists. I'd love for everyone to get what they want, ultimately developers have finite resources and have to set their priorities.
Just to touch up what was said... The biggest problem with people playing the game is that often they only see whats in front of them and not whats further away... you are heroes, adventurers, you come to a village and defend it from a gnoll attack.
from your perspective, you now know there are gnolls in the region and they attack farmers... you defend them instinctively. From the perspective of the DM, you are just a bunch of random saviors who appeared with powers this country side has never seen before.
thats the far away perspective... those farmers haven't seen an adventurering group in years. the maximum level of the farmland might have been a sole level 3 blacksmith with a kind of adventuring background who now serves as the village elder to take decisions. the far view is... in a capital there shouldn't be more then a few dozen high level characters. in a war... a few dozen level 10 will not make a difference in an army of 10,000 soldiers. they will still need their own army to survive.
in my world, in comparision... Capitals have these... - 1 level 20 character, serving as the higher authority of the city. a king, an emperor. head of the council. thast person will never leave its post to deal with a small threat like gnolls. - 3 to 5 level 10-15 clerics and paladins. you know the generals, the high autority of a church. royal guards. - a bunch of 10 minus. serving as servants of churches or captains in the military or the knights. the rest of the capital... its all level 3 and below. and even there, out of 500,000 people... only 1/10th should be higher then level 0 (commoners). those usually serves as militia in villages and towns.
this is high fantasy to its most basic stuff. i understand as a player you dont see these... but as a DM this is pretty basic stuff. this is how you populate your world. Even in real life, in our very world... it is considered that, at some point, we had 1 cop for every 100 people. now a days its far less then that... we have about 1 cop for about 1000 people. if you must think in our worlds term. then 1 cop for every 1000 people is next to nothing and now you understand why we have so much trouble with keeping security up. this is why villages and cities have militia. we still do by todays standard. regular population that serves as eyes and ears for those cops. and if need be, take the mantle (private security agents)
this is the far picture that you dont see as a player. as a player you only care for the next adventure and the payment that comes with it. but thats not how your DM views the world. this is my personnal opinion at this point on this matter, but to me a good dm is the dm that can see farther away from the player mindset. a good dm do not concentrate on players. he will concentrate on variables that he can have control over in the bigger picture. to me, if you cannot do that as a DM. then you will not go forward and will eventually lose your group.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I apologize in advance if some of the content of this post can be found elsewhere on these forums. My intention is not to produce redundant content but to summate a few separate but relevant topics into a single topic in as cogent a manner as I am able.
Reader beware: This post will be quite long. I appreciate your patience.
The most logical place to being making my case is to explain why it is that I think ability to create custom classes should be a priority for the dev team. I'll start by referring to the Dungeon Master's Guide and how it describes the difference between Low, Middle, and High Fantasy. While those names are not used, monikers like Sword and Sorcery are;
D&D is an RPG. Shocking I know. in an RPG (Role Playing Game), the most significant element of gameplay is the adoption of a role by the players. In its most literal form, all games are RPGs. In Call of Duty, you take on the role of a soldier, in StarCraft, you take on the role of a battlefield commander in control of your military forces. In D&D however, the art of playing a role is central to the experience. It could even be said that role playing itself is the game and that the rules of combat, the casting of magic, and the value of goods and services exist in the rulebooks only as a framework for fairness should those events take place in your game. I hope that this is sufficiently self-evident that no further explanation is required.
It's worth mentioning at this point that my previous two statements are inherently connected. Certain types of games such as the Low, Middle, and High fantasy settings described above lend themselves to particular sets of rules. A Low Fantasy setting is, more tethered to reality and as such will lean far more heavily on the element of Role Playing. Contrastingly, High Fantasy settings almost entire exclude the element of role playing; after all, how emotional can you be when your adventuring companion dies if all that death means is a trip to the nearby priest for a quick resurrection. Sure it sets you back a few (thousand) gold, but it fully undercuts an emotional investment. Why be cautious at all if death is only a temporary hinderance. High Fantasy settings tend to lack in Role Playing and lean heavily on other mechanics such as combat, to forward the experience.
To quote a famous comedian; Not that there's anything wrong with that!
But back to the reason I am writing the post in the first place:
4th Edition of D&D is written and configured to accommodate only a High Fantasy setting. Obviously there is some wiggle room in terms of what a DM can do by limiting access to certain characters. Setting rules like "no wizards allowed" or some such.
The only two classes that have no High Fantasy elements backed into them are the Fighter and the Rogue. And both of them have very 'magical' subclass options. Those classes are well balanced, fit into almost any setting, and have a plethora of various playstyles available to them. But even as that is the case, a party of Fighters and Rogues does not a party make. Perhaps I want to play a Paladin-like crusader without the ability to revive the dead and cure disease - or a Barbarian that doesn't fly around like an eagle-buzz while surrounded by an retinue of his fallen clansmen.
As of right now, it is not possible to make sufficient changes to the base classes using the tools we have. I can customize some features, or the order in which it progresses, but I can't (for example) remove spellcasting from the Paladin, or add a replacement to that feature that would thematically fit.
I don't think it's reasonable to expect a tool to allow for every conceivable need a player may have, but I think that it would be quite reasonable for us to be given the power to mix and match base class features from within the existing catalogue of class features between all the classes (and new ones that may come).
Thank you for the well thought through feedback. :)
The really short answer is - there are many more features that the team will be working on first, that will benefit the majority of users the majority of the time.
As cool as homebrew classes would be, they would benefit a minority of players.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
You may want to avoid silly phrasing like “not possible”. I can understand you not encountering these aspects in high fantasy games but just because you have not does not mean it is impossible. Every single high-fantasy game I have played has these aspects and there are whole shows of these games set in high-fantasy with an abundance of these aspects with emotional scenes and development of personal relationships. Watch Critical Role – it's a perfect example of how high fantasy D&D can most definitely have these things. I actually feel sorry for you if your high fantasy has not had them. It's the mix of these elements with the high fantasy that makes D&D so compelling for those like myself and many others.
Once again you're describing something entirely possible as 'impossible'. Clerics and Paladins need not be some super abundant things going around curing everything and there can be sicknesses and diseases they cannot cure. Many plot points are centred around the magical afflictions that cannot be cured by a mere touch of a Cleric or Paladin. Take a look at Tomb of Annihilation, an officially released adventure, for this because it has an example of this. Just because something is beyond the creatvity of you or your DM does not make it impossible.
Good grief how many spellcasters with access to this do you have? You do realise these magics are exceedingly rare? Adventurers, the characters you play, are rare. A couple of spellcasters producing a few meals a day is not suddenly going to feed the millions of others. Farming is very much required to avoid mass extinction. If your games suffer an abundance of food for everyone then this is you making it out of balance, do not put your mistakes on the rest of us who keep the ratio normal – which is about one in every few million who are even capable of these magics and they are very limited in how often they can use it.
Yes. I mean ignoring how rare this is supposed to be, sure. Genuine clerics are one in a thousand, no, less and that one cleric in a thousand clerics might have some limited ability to resurrect but it requires a very pricey and rare diamond (not just gold, it must be diamond which is much, much, much more difficult to get than the gold). So, no, resurrections should not be so abundant to just mitigate the risk of death. It can be if you want it to be and that's on you but many of us do not play it that way.
What poor excuse of games have you been in to come up with this drivel? You have my deepest sympathies, whoever was your DM just had no creativity at all. I've never come across a high fantasy game that lacked lots of roleplaying. Recently I have played a session with my changeling in a bit of a spy-session and it was thrilling. The entire session was involving, heart-racing and thrilling as I tried to come up with ways to get the information I needed out of the groups of warring factions and no combat at all! High fantasy can definitely lend itself to emotional settings, drama, conflict, personal relationships and character development and you can have whole sessions filled with roleplaying, high-fantasy, fun with not a single hint of combat in them.
If high fantasy was so devoid of character do you really think high fantasy fiction novels would be so successful?
Again, death is a very real possibility. You need to realise these classes you play are very, very, rare. They are the truly exceptional individuals. Spellcasters even rarer and clerics rarer still because their power comes from a deity who has full say on what they can and cannot use their power for. There will likely be only a handful of clerics actually capable of resurrection in the whole world and would still require you to complete a quest or obtain the component which is a really pricey diamond. Again, diamond not gold. Gold is abundant – diamonds are not. They are some of the rarest non-magical substances in the world which is why they're so valuable. You may be able to get a 50 gp value diamond but a single diamond worth thousands? Based on the buying power of gold in D&D a gold coin can equate to around $150 (US) so a diamond worth thousands in gold coin would be like getting a diamond worth millions of dollars in this real world – and in D&D they cannot mine diamond as efficiently because they lack the technology. You're not going to find that at a local jewellery store. In the game these diamonds are going to be so rare you will struggle to find any. You will do, you're a powerful adventurer, but this will be limited and certainly not something the average person can get (who earn only a few silver a day, if that).
I'm going to stop the quote-reply method now. I do agree it would be nice to have custom classes but I disagree with everything else you have stated. You seem to be mistakenly thinking that just because you've played your high-fantasy games in such a poor fashion that the rest of us do. This is far from the truth. Many of us like our high fantasy games that contain risk of permanent character death, lots of non-combat storylines, arcs of character development and growth, intrigue and vast magical powers that, while fun and fantastic, don't solve any of the major problems facing the races as a whole.I would urge you to not describe these things impossible and as some justification for your personal request, when really it's just you or your DM lacking creativity and, evidently, having never read a fantasy novel before.
Despite the disagreement I do thank you for the laughs you have provided and the encouragement of discussion. We do need more of this.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Good grief. I am glad that you enjoy playing High Fantasy games and have found other players that enjoy them with you. Kudos.
I'm not sure why you have such a bad attitude or feel compelled to repeat, ad-nauseum how you 'feel sorry' for something or other. Nowhere in my suggestion did I ever imply that Low Fantasy gameplay was the only way, or even the best way to play. It is no better or worse than High Fantasy settings in so much as they are both games.
The entirely of this post was intended to provide the DNDBeyond team with compelling reasons to add functionality to their online toolset so that a wider range of players can make use of them. If they feel that Low or Mid Fantasy games represent such as minority of players as to not merit representation, that is their call to make as it is their business to run.
Regarding your defenses of High Fantasy; I can only suggest that you read some of the scholarly works of Clive Staples Lewis, or John Ronald Reuel Tolkien. Both of these authors wrote extensively on the many methods of storytelling and how important it is to create an internally consistent narrative. After this I would recommend you revisit the dungeon master's guide and revisit their descriptions of High and Low Fantasy.
In a High Fantasy setting, magic is absolutely not rare. Wizards and Clerics are not singular and the availability of their spellcasting services and crafted items are available for anyone with coin. This is explicitly stated in the book. After all, who do you think brews all those healing points your players buy at the store? Who crafts all the magic items they buy or enchants the armor they wear? Who were the wizards that created the tombs they explore and so on and so forth.
Regarding Critical Role - this is not a serviceable example of how to play D&D. I happen to enjoy watching that show but fully understand that it s a group of professional voice talents with a long history of personal relationships that happen to share the hobby of table-top gaming. I would never hold my players to that standard as it would be unreasonable and would turn a game that is intended to be fun into an acting-school device that is more challenging than enjoyable.
As it regards my initial request: I think that issue was dead even before I wrote this thread. As the moderator has stated, they are not concerned with adding features that apply to 'only a minatory of players'. Which is unfortunate for all of those players but fully justifiable from a business perspective. The only reply I can offer to that is an attempt to clarify that I am not necessarily asking for fully customizable classes, but rather 'editable' classes. If they could create objects for each of the current base class abilities and allow them to be interchanged from within a drop-down menu system, it would provide the framework that myself and many others are asking for.
And while I absolutely do represent a minority of players, that does not mean that, once implemented, these features would only be used by that minority. It's likely that even traditional players would make use of them.
There are approximately 2.3 gazamiljillion other things I want in DDB before core class homebrew.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
Please note that this has NEVER been said.
As per my post above, there are many more features for the team to work on, that will benefit the majority of users the majority of the time.
Will D&D Beyond introduce homebrew core classes? Maybe at some time in the future, but for now it is not on the roadmap of planned features.
This has nothing to do with catering for styles of play and has everything to do with introducing new features that are going to be awesome. :)
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Given that the rules of D&D (and therefore D&D Beyond) are geared toward High Fantasy and you would prefer to play Low Fantasy, does it make sense to change the rules of D&D to the point where you can play Low Fantasy?
As you've pointed out, most of the character classes are magic-using classes. Magic-using monsters would have to be changed. Magic items would have to be changed.
There are so many changes that you'd really be playing a different game, with similar mechanics.
Instead, why not just play an RPG with rules that are better suited for a Low Fantasy game? It would be easier than trying to hammer D&D's High Fantasy square peg into a Low Fantasy round slot.
There's no shortage on non-D&D RPGs to select from. I started playing 2nd edition RuneQuest in the early 80's for that very reason.
There is indeed nothing stopping me from playing any other game. As it happens I have tried many of them.
While some of the various games out there would be a better thematic fit for the games I tend to run or play, they are nowhere near the quality of the products produced by WotC or Paizo. I don't say it with any disrepect, but the fact of the matter is the tabletop RPG market is functionally a duopoly and there are only two companies producing quality products.
Secondly, D&D Beyond is a relatively unique service. It's not the only way to do what it does, but even with its relative newness, it does a great deal that other online services do not. I would rather have a better relationship with D&D Beyond: They add the services their customers (me, the only one that matters :P ), and in exchange I invest more in them, paying for additional material and services. Yay capitalism!
I think this is much more desirable than leaving this platform and playing roulette with Paizo in the hopes that they release something that may or may not meet my needs.
All this being said, both WotC and Paizo seem to be refocusing their efforts and engaging in marketing that reaches an increasingly younger demographic. Like MTG, there is a larger market for the power-fantasy narrative in younger age brackets. It's natural that their customers eventually age out of their market as new blood grows into it. Perhaps it's simply time that I bow out of the market all together and engage in other hobbies :)
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil as much as i understand your points, i have to be on the side of CyberMind... your post had a lot of good explanations, but somehow as i was reading it, it felt like you bashed in the skull of those high fantasy gaming group saying they didn't know how to play d&d. that's literally how it felt... now im not saying your way or mine are good or bad, i think all ways in d&d are good and everyone should have a prefered play setting. But yeah, look at the way he quoted you... you literally bashed in high-fantasy. that's why he acted that way.
As for my own gaming... most of the poeple i get around my table have varying ages. it ranges from 12 to 40. i ahve a rotation of people every week and believe it or not, most of the people who come at my table are all about high fantasy. and most of the kids i played with (im the oldest at the table with 37 of age). They all play cause of magics and faeries and unicorns and that kind of stuff. hard to get the next generation in on your game if all you do is make it availlable to older demographics.
now with those in mind, your arguments do make sense, but you have to understand why they are focusing on the majority here and not the small minority. it would take them a lot of time to make other settings availlable, time that can be used to make the actual engine much better as is. that's why they preffer to finish what they started and make sure the engine is finished first, which the engine is not finished. even the campaign management is far away on the road map. they have no tools, they have no real things except database stuff. that's far from a thing in this kind of thing. just saying, try to understand them before you start asking these things.
but i have to commend you, you took time to type all that, so by respect i took the time to read it, by the look of the others, the mods did it too, so im sure your suggestions have gone through. Major Respect for that one. thanks for having you around. at least we know your minority is in good hand. that's all that matters.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Thanks for the rely DnDPaladin.
To be as clear as I can be, I do not think that players with a preference for High Fantasy games are doing anything wrong. I am glad that they are able to enjoy D&D 5e and hope that they continue to enjoy many High Fantasy adventures. I think that what may have come across as my admonishment for that group is actually my earnest dislike of that setting and not the players that enjoy it.
I wrote a much longer post than this but before posting it I read it over and decided that it basically sounded like further complaints and I have no desire to complain about the game.
Ultimately, my thoughts are that the game mechanics in combination with the material available, as well as the High Fantasy setting, greatly restrict creativity without taking great pains to create your own supplemental material, or writing an entire errata of the rules to accommodate modes of player other than what is initially prescribed.
Everyone should be entitled to play the game in a manner that suits them. If that means that you want a narrative-light but combat-heavy campaign with elements of High Fantasy, that's completely okay! I don't say this with any malice at all. I understand why that sort of game has appeal. I also completely understand why this is a deviation from the majority and am perfectly happy to wait until my desired changes either manifest or don't.
I hope it is clear that my request is not at all implying that other players should abandon their methods to play in a manner like my own - this is far from what I want. I want the game to be so well designed that it can accommodate everyone's way - it seems mine is just a little too fringe to be financially viable as an investment of their developer's time. Again - no malice here. I get it :)
Here's to hoping that they may one day have some time to spare and add some features to make my life a little easier.
To me.. No offense taken... its all fine !
now you talk a lot about settings... so this leads me to think one thing that needs to be answered... are you asking Curse gaming (d&d Beyond) to make whole new settings ?
because if you are, i think you missinterpretted their websites then... they dont create settings, they only get their data from wotc and then add it to their 5e engine database. they are not here to give people their own settings, they are here to give people the settings WOTC gives them. as for adapting.. we're using 5e mechanics... if your game play is not using said mechanics then you shouldn't be in this place. there are other places with other mechanics, like Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds who have rules for many other non-D&D genre and mechanics.
here they have only D&D 5E. so if your setting do not work on that, then i feel like you should go see other venues instead.
I for one, play with my own homebrews, but they are all 5e and beyond is easily able to help me with those homebrews.
I play spelljammers, which 5E easily can do.
i play westerns which 5e can easily do.
i play gritty realism games in modern times, which 5e can easily do.
i play sci-fi (star trek or star wars), which 5e can easily do.
sure i have to create my own monsters, sure i have to create my own races, sure i have to create my own items... but once all that is done, which beyond helps tremendously with. i can still play a ton of other settings, as long as they follow 5e mechanics. i'm never really using those pre made adventures. i make my own. so i'm not sure what you are asking here... but again if you are asking for other mechanics... i think the only real suggestion they can give you, would be to see other sites for that. the two i mentionned a direct competitors to Beyond and they have much more then D&D in their arsenal... they have deadlands, they have world of darkness, they have gurps.... so if you seek other mechanics, i sugest you go on their site for it. here they speciale only in what WotC gives them, that's 5E for now.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil I think why there was some animosity here is that you seem to be saying that playing in a "high fantasy" setting can only include "hack'n slash" gameplay wherein almost no roleplaying can take place, which is blatantly false. There is no evidence that supports the claim that games "more tethered to reality" will have more roleplaying, I'm actually more inclined to believe the opposite. For example, if there was a tabletop game that somehow perfectly simulated reality, why would anyone play it? Certainly not for the roleplay, because at that point you could just go play your role in real life, and quite frankly, it would be boring. I think there is certainly a point where both ends of the spectrum can hinder roleplay, such as having absolute control over everything in game because of "magic", and the aforementioned reality simulator; too much power in-game and there's no point in playing, and too little power and you might as well just sit on the couch and talk.
Put simply, there's just no reason why "high fantasy" can't have the same amount of roleplay and character development that "low fantasy" can.
Also, you claim that the "Sword and Sorcery" flavor of fantasy is synonymous with a "high fantasy" setting, which is wrong. By taking the two words "high" and "fantasy" out of context, you mushed them together and called it a "high fantasy" flavor. If you actually read the Sword and Sorcery play style from the DMG, it actually states:
As per the DMG, the core set of D&D rules actually assumes a "Heroic Fantasy" flavor. Based on the description of the "Heroic Fantasy" flavor, it is somewhere between high and low fantasy. In the modern iteration of the Forgotten Realms, the world is inhabited by powerful magic users, but they are rare. Some villages might know or have stories about such folk, and towns may have harbored a few in their time, but they are overall rare. Settlements have to get by on their own, with little to no magical assistance in a somewhat medieval world.
The exception to the guidelines above are the player characters. As the name of the flavor suggests, the player characters are heroic. They are exceptional people who can wield powerful magics and gain extraordinary abilities, but that doesn't mean that every farmer can cast Plant Growth at will. A major city might harbor a powerful cleric or a court wizard, and a few towns may host a few less-powerful magic users, but that's about it. The world is certainly filled with a lot of magic, but that magic tends to belong to dangerous monsters, is buried deep underground, or is otherwise not available to the public at large.
I think what you perceive as an increase in their marketing for "younger demographics" is actually just you getting older and/or your tastes changing. D&D has always been a game about magical fantasy, just read the name. "Dungeons" is a reference to the cliche of the "dungeon delving" fantasy, such as to retrieve some magical artifact or clear out whatever threat may be there. "Dragons" is a reference to the magical creatures that inhabit the fantastical world and are often found in the aforementioned dungeons. If you think you're "getting too old" for D&D, then perhaps you should find another, more suitable game for distinguished people such as yourself (just a suggestion).
Aside from your unsupported claim that high fantasy can't have roleplaying elements, and taking words out of context, and misinterpreting what was written in the rule books, I agree that your feature request would be neat, but that's just it, neat. D&D is inherently a game with magic, and while the rules do provide some ways you can make it be lower magic, magic will still be at its core. It's a fantasy game, and what you claim to be a "power-fantasy" is actually just people having a good time playing a fantasy game. Also, I have no hatred or animosity against you, but I just really disagree with the things you said. The feature swapping/editing for base classes sounds like a cool idea for the future when D&D Beyond has done some more important stuff.
A surprise, to be sure, but a welcome one.
@Taonos:
I think that the primary reason that this back and forth continues is that we are all attempting to add our perspective to a conversation about something specific, without first defining the terms.
It is true that at the core of my complaint is the observation that no meaningful role play can occur within the confines of the High Fantasy setting. You clearly disagree with this assertion and are perfectly within your rights to do so. However, I would hazard a guess that he reason you disagree with me is not because you know something I don't - rather, it's because we are each quite probably defining what it means to role play in different ways.
If all that is meant by role play is assuming the role of a character other than yourself, than Call of Duty is every bit as much of a role playing game as Dungeons & Dragons. I think we can both see the differences there and would probably agree that one would contain meaningful role play and the other is strictly definitional.
Sadly, my use of the word meaningful makes it difficult for us to reach an agreed upon definition of terms. I would instead like to point out that while there is a great diversity of fantasy in the literary world, there is an actual science to it. Words have definitions, and when strung together they create narratives that follow carefully curated arcs that all exist as part of the overarching science of literature. There are imperical rights and wrongs in this science.
You'll have to forgive me since I don't have my copy of The Abolition of Man handy and so my quote may not be verbatim, but C. S. Lewis made a very clear point therein; it is very bad form if, in writing a story you paint your hero (or heroin) into a corner and can find no suitable way to get them out of it, and so, in a lazy stroke of the pend you suddenly have them inherit a great deal of money to solve the problem. On the other hand, there is nothing at all wrong with writing an entire story which, from the offset follows the adventures of a man who suddenly inherits that wealth.
A very important concept in writing is managing your audience's (in this case, your players') suspense of disbelief. Because reality is complex, it is genuinely impossible for us to create a new reality for the sake of playing games. Therefore, every game, even those that take place in High Fantasy settings, inherit parts of our reality that we simply assume are part of it. For example; gravity. I don't think very many DMs take the time to point out to their players that gravity is an option house rule and definitely exists in their game. It's simply assumed. But there is more to managing the narrative than explaining the presence of gravity - again, that's assumed. The fantasy elements all require the audience (players) to suspend their belief for a time, in order to accommodate the fantastical elements of the game. And this is natural. A good fantasy should require this at times.
But the suspense of disbelief has limits. If you create a world so full of fantastical elements that it overrides too much of the expected or assumed reality, it prevents immersion or role play. Playing in the High Fantasy setting to me is like trying to both have your cake and eat it too. On the one hand you want your players to form bonds of friendship - to worry when they are danger and to celebrate their shared triumphs. On the other hand, you place those players in a world where everything is immaterial and the vast majority of their actions have no meaningful consequences that cannot be undone by magic or narrative mumbo jumbo. These two things are at odds
So, can players role-play in High Fantasy settings. Sure, if by role play you mean, the players show up at the table, answer to the names of their characters, and roll dice when requested by the DM, than sure. That sort of role playing is very much present in High Fantasy. But no other type can be. Why would your players form attachments to their peers - what reason is there for a ranger to form a loving bond between them than their companion if it's nothing more than a few gold coins and a ritual to conjure a new one from the wilds? Why would any dungeon delving party ever attempt stealth or secrecy when brute force is just as reliable. What is the value in checking for traps to avoid injury when your bard can literally play a tune and speak a healing word and magically stitch any wound.
If you want you players to role play - to actually put themselves in the mindset of their characters, than you are at odds with the default setting. That setting not only encourages the 'brute force' approach to everything, it actively devalues other approaches.
I feel like I am just repeating myself here but, while I clearly do not like the default setting, I am not at all saying it is bad. Nor am I saying that people who play that way are bad. I happen to very much dislike sour cream as well, that doesn't mean I think it is bad or that any one who eats it is bad - I just don't like it. The point of my post was to explain that there is a reason I wanted more from the online toolset, in the hopes that it can encompass the default setting AND others, not just the one. If you like the High Fantasy life, great, keeping having fun, but stop trying to dismiss other perspectives. Let me ask you this - if the team was able to add this feature, would it make the game you play - the way you play it - any worse? No. And frankly it has every bit as much use for others as it does for me. Arguably more so.
Finally, I am in now way attempting to diminish the existing game. I own most of the books and have already gone to the trouble to write a narrative and house rules that my players and I quite enjoy. We have weekly games that have run on for years and will likely continue to run into the foreseeable future. It would be great if the dndbeyond toolset expanded to make our lives a tad easier (well, the player's anyway) by allowing for homebrew stuff - it's neither urgent nor required. It's a feature request. Nothing more.
So, how is this relevant in any way other than saying that words have definitions?
Yet again, you are making a baseless claim that no "meaningful" roleplay can happen in a high fantasy game, and as someone who has played in a high fantasy game, this is blatantly false. You cannot just make this blanket statement for every high fantasy game, because you have no evidence of this being true for all high fantasy games. Perhaps the high fantasy games that you play in don't have what you refer to as "meaningful" roleplay, but mine and others certainly do.
So, in essence, are you claiming that high fantasy is only able to provide character and story plots that revolve around all of their problems suddenly being solved by the DM just outright giving them the solution? Or are you claiming that magic in high fantasy just automatically solves every problem? Your point isn't clear here, but those things have nothing to do with the a high fantasy setting and everything to do with how the adventure is written or how the DM runs it. The DM of a low fantasy setting could just as easily give the players the solution or an adventure in such a setting could provide such little challenge.
I said the same thing in my first response to you. The way I see it, the flavors of fantasy are in a spectrum, where both extremes are unsatisfactory, and somewhere between is the sweet spot that people have different tastes for.
I certainly don't do this as a DM in my high fantasy setting, and the high fantasy settings I have played in don't do this. Always, in the games I've played, the players are challenged and aren't just given the solution through "narrative mumbo jumbo".
It may feel like you are repeating yourself because that's exactly what you're doing. You keep on responding with the same stuff. You are kind of saying that high fantasy is bad, or at least worse than lower fantasy, since you claim that high fantasy cannot have roleplaying, an important part of the game.
I'm not trying to dismiss your perspective, I'm refuting it. You're trying to apply blanket statements seemingly based on your own experience or presumptions, which is not a good way to analyse something that can have many different perspectives. I have already agreed that your feature request would be kind of cool, this is not about the feature, it's about your misrepresentation of a way the game is played. Perhaps you should take your own advice and stop dismissing other perspectives and see what I am saying; not everyone has the same experience. Your experience in high fantasy does not define everyone else's.
A surprise, to be sure, but a welcome one.
@ExtraOrdinaryPhil In fact call of duty is a role playing game, just like any movies who is trying to put you int he shoes of anybody, that is the very definition of a role playing game. your definition is the same as us, the only difference is that apparently you think there is no or next to no interactions involving characters in high fantasy games, which is false, considering that interactions with an NPC, PC or anything for that matter is what defines a role playing game to begin with. but if by role playing game you mean the act of leveling up and gearing yourself, then i am in the obligation to tell you that you fell into the pit trap that is the current video game industry.
the video game industry changed the way people look at role playing games and changed it in order for people to not care for story and thus only care for what the RPG element is. and to them the RPG element is just the act of leveling up and gaining new abilities. Role playing has never been that. it has never been about leveling up. it has always been about playing a role. and a role can be anything that you are not. so yes, by definition call of duty is a role playing game because it forces you to play as a character that is not you. you see everything from its perspective, you hear everything from its perspective. you actually play the guy/girl.
but thats the point we're trying to make and clearly you understand it, but clearly you are against the act of immersion. so my view on you is... you define role play based on things you can understand and not things you dont. like magic for exemple. it is not wrong a style. i know a guy who hates magic to a maximum. he completely refuses to play high fantasy because of magic. he likes good old down to earth modern games. with kevlar, magnums and the likes. and i am fine with this. but saying there is no role play elements in a genre just because you come from a video game industry who is trying to sell you the point that role playing is all about leveling and gearing up... that is not right, that was never the goal in TTRPG.
i'll finish by just giving you the definition from the dictionnary...
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
On a related note, I would be happy if one day Adventures in Middle Earth become available on DDB. This is fantastic example of Low Fantasy, but I understand that implementing everything on DDB would be a huge undertaking.
The problem is not about the setting, the problem is about the actual mechanics and the actual copyright.
adventures in middle earth do not belongs to WotC and thus unless curse gains the liscense to make said book into this engine. there is next to nothing that can be done to gain that book you ask. also the point is that this place is about D&D 5E. so if the book hasn't been done for 5E then there is even more problems arising even if they do have the autorisation for the book.
i wouldn't expect beyond to have any real third party stuff in this place, except critical role, because they have partnership with them.
but once they are all finished, maybe they will gain more. like fantasy ground and Roll20
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
As a somewhat pedantic point, a high fantasy setting is one in which the story takes place entirely in terms of a fictional world, as opposed to low fantasy or portal fantasy, where magic enters the mundane world or mundane people enter a magical world. High fantasy encompasses everything from Game of Thrones to Lord of the Rings, where magic is something extraordinary and rare, to Xanth and Codex Alera, where magic is an ordinary part of everyday life. Almost all D&D campaign settings are, by that definition, high fantasy. (Side note: I'm aware that by some definitions high fantasy also requires an epic scope, with more personal stories falling into sword & sorcery or heroic fantasy; either way, the term is not defined by the number of spellcasters per capita)
The prominence of magic in the setting can vary in different settings, but the player characters having access to extraordinary abilities is one of the core assumptions of the rules of Dungeons & Dragons. The Player's Handbook says:
There are, of course, exceptions to these assumptions, but the farther you move away from them, the harder it is to work within the rules of D&D, which were written with the assumption that player characters can perform extraordinary magical feats. While access to magic may be quite rare amongst the general population, a majority of most adventuring parties will be able to perform at least some kinds of magic.
I don't say this to discourage anyone from playing in whatever world they like, with whatever rules they like, but because D&D Beyond is a tool for D&D, based on the core assumptions of D&D, it's important to recognize that the more you customize the rules, the harder it's going to be for a tool like this to support it. Neither DDB nor D&D will ever be all things to all people, and we all have our personal wish lists. I'd love for everyone to get what they want, ultimately developers have finite resources and have to set their priorities.
Just to touch up what was said...
The biggest problem with people playing the game is that often they only see whats in front of them and not whats further away...
you are heroes, adventurers, you come to a village and defend it from a gnoll attack.
from your perspective, you now know there are gnolls in the region and they attack farmers... you defend them instinctively.
From the perspective of the DM, you are just a bunch of random saviors who appeared with powers this country side has never seen before.
thats the far away perspective... those farmers haven't seen an adventurering group in years. the maximum level of the farmland might have been a sole level 3 blacksmith with a kind of adventuring background who now serves as the village elder to take decisions. the far view is... in a capital there shouldn't be more then a few dozen high level characters. in a war... a few dozen level 10 will not make a difference in an army of 10,000 soldiers. they will still need their own army to survive.
in my world, in comparision...
Capitals have these...
- 1 level 20 character, serving as the higher authority of the city. a king, an emperor. head of the council. thast person will never leave its post to deal with a small threat like gnolls.
- 3 to 5 level 10-15 clerics and paladins. you know the generals, the high autority of a church. royal guards.
- a bunch of 10 minus. serving as servants of churches or captains in the military or the knights.
the rest of the capital... its all level 3 and below. and even there, out of 500,000 people... only 1/10th should be higher then level 0 (commoners). those usually serves as militia in villages and towns.
this is high fantasy to its most basic stuff. i understand as a player you dont see these... but as a DM this is pretty basic stuff. this is how you populate your world.
Even in real life, in our very world... it is considered that, at some point, we had 1 cop for every 100 people. now a days its far less then that... we have about 1 cop for about 1000 people. if you must think in our worlds term. then 1 cop for every 1000 people is next to nothing and now you understand why we have so much trouble with keeping security up. this is why villages and cities have militia. we still do by todays standard. regular population that serves as eyes and ears for those cops. and if need be, take the mantle (private security agents)
this is the far picture that you dont see as a player.
as a player you only care for the next adventure and the payment that comes with it. but thats not how your DM views the world.
this is my personnal opinion at this point on this matter, but to me a good dm is the dm that can see farther away from the player mindset. a good dm do not concentrate on players. he will concentrate on variables that he can have control over in the bigger picture. to me, if you cannot do that as a DM. then you will not go forward and will eventually lose your group.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)