Topic: D&D 5E and similarities with RM and HARP

[Zut]

I've just read it from EnWorld
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showwiki.php?title=D+and+D+Next:+Mechanics:
brainstorming is on for the fifth edition of D&D and some "new" features looks like some of RM ones. Especially in the Equipment section:

Moving from gold to silver standard.
Accuracy and damage changes by weapon. Also damage types (slashing/piercing, etc.).
"There have been many times since the inception of 4E where we'd wished we had some kind of damage type for physical damage, a point that was driven home especially well when we did the design and development of the Gamma World game, which does have a physical damage type. I think the step that previous editions could have taken, but didn't, is to treat slashing, bludgeoning, and piercing damage types just like acid, cold, fire, etc. damage. That way, weapon users get a few more interesting choices in the weapons they wield, just like spellcasters have when making spell selection"

Note: emphasis is mine.

What a change! I don't know if there are many RPGs with those kind of features. (?) They are aiming at a less rigid structure for PCs with more options for creation (themes or "packages" --> training packages?  ).

Next thing they will announce is... scalable spells? (hope not!)

[markc]

Zut,
 I think most people who play RPG's have or play a number of them and they pick up games as time progresses to see what they are like.
   I also think that when they find something right they tend to copy it. {not always but a lot of the time}
MDC

[John @ ICE]

Plagiarization in the creative industries (from impressionists copying old world masters, to writers, to cinema and of course, games!) has been going on…well, forever.  In a way, it’s the only way we really advance as a species. 

Now specifically with RM, let’s face it, RM would not exist without D&D.  It was created as an improvement to D&D.  Not a copy, new intellectual property for sure, but one that relied on D&D much like zynga relies on facebook. Until it became its own stand-alone game with all of the attendant support product. 

Then look no further when the great Monty Cook who grew into his own at ICE, went to work on D&D 3.0 era.  A number of changes were drawn from ICE (skill system which became a front and centre emphasis similar to ICE a big one). It’s annoying, but legally, not much we can do about it.  In a way, it’s a form of flattery and proof that WE have the better system.

So it does not surprise me to hear they may do it again.

What I would say is that when you see these suggestions being made, that’s you chance to chime in and recite this history and say “Rolemaster has all that, you should check it out”.

[vroomfogle]

All of us RM fans I think have similar reactions to hearing this kind of news....it's like a "well RM is so awesome and D&D so weak that they are taking all of RM's ideas!"   And it is annoying.   However John raises a good point...RM would not exist without D&D.   But even more than that, RM took many ideas from D&D for good or for bad.  There are many mechanics in RM that are like holdover legacy from D&D such as Prime Requisites that really exist in the system only because they were part of D&D.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

All of us RM fans I think have similar reactions to hearing this kind of news....it's like a "well RM is so awesome and D&D so weak that they are taking all of RM's ideas!"   And it is annoying.   However John raises a good point...RM would not exist without D&D.   But even more than that, RM took many ideas from D&D for good or for bad.  There are many mechanics in RM that are like holdover legacy from D&D such as Prime Requisites that really exist in the system only because they were part of D&D.

Since D&D was the very first RPG at all, every single RPG "stole" the idea of merely existing from D&D. And any that use dice "stole" the idea of using dice. Same with stats. Or classes. Or using rounds. Etc.
So, yeah, complaining about D&D "stealing" ideas is complaining that your grandfather "steals" your ideas when he wears the same kind of clothes you do, whilst forgetting you wouldn't even know the concept of clothes (not to say exist) if not for him.

[Kristen Mork]

Plagiarization in the creative industries (from impressionists copying old world masters, to writers, to cinema and of course, games!) has been going on…well, forever.

Hey, I invented plagiarism!  (At least that was what the God of Invention claimed at our last game.)

[arakish]

And it only took about 30 years of resistance for the folks at D&D to realize their system would eventually die if they didn't steal ideas from others.

rmfr

[rdanhenry]

And it only took about 30 years of resistance for the folks at D&D to realize their system would eventually die if they didn't steal ideas from others.

rmfr

? - When in the past thirty years did D&D innovate? It has been "stealing" ideas from other games for a very long time.

[jdale]

Silver standard has been proposed many times over the years. GURPS uses it, and also has distinct rules for slashing, piercing, and crushing attacks. I doubt it's the only one.

Of course people are going to suggest good ideas from other games. But these examples aren't core RM ideas by any means.

[yammahoper]

And it only took about 30 years of resistance for the folks at D&D to realize their system would eventually die if they didn't steal ideas from others.

rmfr

? - When in the past thirty years did D&D innovate? It has been "stealing" ideas from other games for a very long time.

DnD WAS the innovation.  All others have built on that innovation. 

Early model cars were hand built and pretty basic. They also cost a fortune.  Henry Ford built on the innovation with an assembly line and mass production, making the car affordable to many.  The big three came to dominate the auto market, especially GM.  Their lack of continued innnovation caught up with them in the 70's and other automakers, who continued to add new innovations, seized the market.  Being the original does not guarantee longevity nor dominance of the market, but it does give you the opportunity to seize it, which DnD did very well for many years.  Like the big three, a chink in the armor has developed, but that dragon ain't dead yet and still has the best brand name recognition in table top gaming.

   

[rdanhenry]

And it only took about 30 years of resistance for the folks at D&D to realize their system would eventually die if they didn't steal ideas from others.

rmfr

? - When in the past thirty years did D&D innovate? It has been "stealing" ideas from other games for a very long time.

DnD WAS the innovation.  All others have built on that innovation. 

That was more than 30 years ago.

[intothatdarkness]

The innovation wasn't so much D&D (IMO) as it was the world(s) that supported it. Greyhawk was a pretty fantastic thing for its day, and so much of AD&D was based on Gary's Greyhawk campaign that it's difficult to separate the two. Then came Wicks & Hickman with DragonLance, followed eventually by Forgotten Realms. As far as I'm concerned, most of D&D's punch came from its settings, not from the system itself. Setting is a potent component of any game (just look at the whole Warhammer franchise). Experienced gamers may do their own settings, but for folks just coming in the setting can be a big selling point.

There were also a slew of games that came out during roughly the same period (Traveller, Morrow Project, Tunnels & Trolls, and others).

[yammahoper]

And it only took about 30 years of resistance for the folks at D&D to realize their system would eventually die if they didn't steal ideas from others.

rmfr

? - When in the past thirty years did D&D innovate? It has been "stealing" ideas from other games for a very long time.

DnD WAS the innovation.  All others have built on that innovation. 

That was more than 30 years ago.

D20 was very innovative, and excellent.  I say excellent because it delivered exactly what it was designed to; a super heroic fantasy game with romantic play.  Reality is low on the list of such systems, which works very well.  Look how popular WoW is.  Besides, most gamers are casual players, looking for some fun and escape with limited game time.  DnD delivers in spades.  Modern computer rpgs with save points are original DnD ressurection/raise dead spells manifested digitally.

Now, I prefer a game that attempts simulation of reality, were no one is imune to death by dagger strike until max damge at the 28th blow.  Hee hee, you should have seen some of the faces of DnD players, while I was GMing DnD, when I announced they were dead after trying to break free from a dagger at their throat.  Some gamers just don't get what makes a game like RM great.  A dose of reality makes games better.  The threat of instant death is perfect for building tension. 

Accepting limitations is a sign of maturity, and while there are mature DND players, systems like RM tend to draw the most mature of players.  Death and loss and bad luck (!) are understood to be part of the equation.  As long as RM retains these features, it will remain my favorite system.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

That was more than 30 years ago.

As yammahoper said, D20 was quite good. OTOH, IMO, the best innovative idea was... OGL. Making D20 an OGL was an excellent idea, that boosted both the popularity of D&D and of RPGs in general, especially with the possibility it gave for people to develop/create their own world using the D20 system.

Turning the table around, what did RM do in matters of innovation for the past 30 years, anyway?

[yammahoper]

I think the most innovative materials from RM have been the Channeling Companion and Martial Arts Companion, with the Channeling Companion the hands down winner.

Prof as templates with a group of spell list to draw from that allows every priest to be very unique was a major innovation for RM.  However, considering the ADnD school and spheres, it is not totally new, but it was for RM.  And awesome.  After that companion, I wanted every realm, i.e. arms, essence, mentalism, arcane and channeling, to be reworked in simular fashion.  Templates with training packages provides endless flexibility in character design.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Templates with training packages provides endless flexibility in character design.

Training packages were a good idea. However, as far as innovation goes, the first idea that came to my mind when I first saw them (in the AC, IIRC) was the careers in Warhammer RPG; a RM version of what they are, in fact, IMO.

As for the MAC, I remember Ninja & superspies from Palladium getting the idea of offering plenty of different combat "styles" (aka different martial arts) and rules to make yours being done before the MAC existed. As for the Channeling companion, as you wrote, D&D already had something similar with its schools and spheres.

Don't get me wrong: I play RM2 more often than I play any other system, but throwing stones at D&D (or any other system) for using ideas from RM is just... shortseeing? It's called "progress": getting ideas from elsewhere to create a new and different product. As long as D&D 5th Ed. doesn't become a clone of RM, there's nothing wrong with it and, IMO, inevitable anyway if progress has to be made, as there's probably not many possible concepts or ideas that never were exploited a way or another by a game system or another.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Ever notice how all aircraft look pretty much alike, regardless of the company that makes them?

Proposed function and the nature of its operating environment control design, in anything anyone has ever created since the dawn of time. Given the same proposed function and the same target market using the product under the same conditions, over time RPGs can be expected to resemble one another more and more... just like aircraft.

[Zut]

Very interesting replies here. I didn't thought that subject would have so many posts!

I'm not against D&D. I think each of its incarnation has good things in it, even though the mecanics (character creation and advancement) are different from one another.

At first, I was worried that some of the concepts pointed above were deemed as novelties by some D&D fans and that it could overshadow the release of the new RM edition. Like: "template (TP) is an idea stolen from D&D by RM".

I've been wondering for a while about the different mecanics in RPG, and where they come from, in which game they were first introduced. As anyone any information on that? I don't follow other forum as regularly as this one, so I may have missed something elsewhere.

[providence13]

Zut-I've been wondering for a while about the different mecanics in RPG, and where they come from, in which game they were first introduced.

Paraphrasing wiki:

Before Dungeons & Dragons there was a set of medieval miniature rules written by Jeff Perren. Expanded by Gary Gygax, whose additions included a fantasy supplement, before the game was published as Chainmail. In 1970, Dave Wesely's military friend, Napoleonics wargamer Dave Arneson made a medieval variation of Wesely's Braunstein games; players control individuals instead of armies. Arneson used Chainmail to resolve combats. Later, Arneson added character classes, xp, level advancement, armor class.. Having partnered previously with Gygax on Don't Give Up the Ship!, Arneson introduced Gygax to his Blackmoor game and the two then collaborated on developing "The Fantasy Game", the role-playing game (RPG) that became Dungeons & Dragons, the final writing was all Gygax.

[Cory Magel]

DnD WAS the innovation.  All others have built on that innovation.

DnD kicked the RPG world into gear, but as you say they stagnated at some point.  I don't know if they ran out of ideas or just plain got lazy, but TSR was going down already when M:TG card game hastened their demise (at which point WotC snatched them  up).  I think WotC was taking things in a positive direction until Hasbro bought them and the all mighty short-term dollar became the main motivation (too many editions too fast and not enough sense to see the longer picture).  So, the key word is "WAS".

DnD become more and more like RM as new editions came out.  Makes some sense when you consider one of the main driving forces behind old RM was Monte Cook.  Not giving him any guff over it... if a system is better you emulate it.

As for the Channeling companion, as you wrote, D&D already had something similar with its schools and spheres.

I don't toot my own horn very often, but I think saying that the Priest Template idea is akin to Schools and Spheres in D&D is a bit like saying Poker is like Go Fish.  However, that's mainly due to how Rolemaster base lists work, not necessarily the Priest Template idea itself.  RM is very much about uniqueness in characters... a enormous gap from what DnD characters are like.