What's the difference between D20 Fantasy and D&D?

[Hussar]

I admit that I'm a little confused by the lines drawn here. I've seen more than a few mentions that if someone prefers D&D without the fluff from the core books, it's somehow not D&D anymore, but, rather, it's now d20 Fantasy.

At least, that seems to be the distinction made.

I think that's entirely arbitrary though. I've never really paid much attention to the fluff that came with D&D in any edition. The names in front of the spells are just that - names. They have no particular resonance to me, nor did they ever. The monsters and other elements that have been deemed IP really were never much part of my gaming experience. Mind Flayers were kinda cool I suppose, but, I've never seen one in play. Tenser to me is a kind of bandage.

So, why is there a distinction made? If I played 1e in Dragonlance, using the DL modules and the DL sourcebook, was I somehow not playing D&D? In 2e, since I never got into FR, does that mean that my homebrew world wasn't D&D? Were my players somehow not playing D&D in my Scarred Lands campaigns? Even in my current World's Largest Dungeon campaign, since the WLD only contains SRD elements, am I not playing D&D? Since my players have drawn from a number of WOTC sources for their characters, does that mean that they are playing D&D, but, I'm not? Or, is the guy playing that Assaathi ranger playing d20 Fantasy, while, in the same game, the guy playing the Githzerai monk is playing D&D?

What distinguishes D&D from D20 Fantasy?

 

[Psion]

I admit that I'm a little confused by the lines drawn here. I've seen more than a few mentions that if someone prefers D&D without the fluff from the core books, it's somehow not D&D anymore, but, rather, it's now d20 Fantasy.

At least, that seems to be the distinction made.
(...)
What distinguishes D&D from D20 Fantasy?

Who was stating it?

The context I have seen it used in both typically and lately is by Dragonsfoot natives, as their stand of defiance and getting in a "zing" on Dungeons & Dragons 3e, because they believe that it's not worthy of the name "Dungeons & Dragons".


I'll occasionally use it to refer to third party d20 products targeted at D&D, because it does not, in fact, bear the D&D trademark. But I see/use that less often on this board so much as in reviews.

 

[el-remmen]

It's all D&D.

The only difference is for people who see labels and codification as the defining factor, and not a broader "D&D experience", which includes a myriad of different rules, sources and outlooks.

 

[Aus_Snow]

A system that is d20 - or close enough to it - and has fantasy as its base genre, yet is distant enough from D&D's rules to warrant a more 'neutral' designation.

That's what *I've* meant when using that term, here and elsewhere, anyway.

 

[howandwhy99]

In my experience Psion is right. The distinction is system related. D&D used variations of one system until d20 came along. For many who still play D&D under the older system d20 D&D is not D&D. It's something more akin to:
GURPS: D&D, or
Rolemaster: D&D
An emulation of the original game, not the actual D&D game.

Because the system is so fundamentally different from what it is was before, 3rd edition is considered d20 fantasy and not D&D.

 

[Umbran]

There are folks who like to draw lines between things. Sometimes this is a useful exercise, sometimes it is not. The difference is reasonably well-defined, in terms of copyright or marketing. But in terms of play? Or in terms of historical development?

D&D3.x uses D20 Fantasy as it's base ruleset. So the one is an example of the other. Rather as pistachio is an example of an ice cream. It is possible to like pistachio ice cream without liking ice cream in general. Or vice versa. It is also possible to like other foods flavored with pistachio without liking pistachio ice cream.

The trick is to know when you should be talking about ice cream, and when you should be talking about pistachio nuts.

 

[Hussar]

A system that is d20 - or close enough to it - and has fantasy as its base genre, yet is distant enough from D&D's rules to warrant a more 'neutral' designation.

That's what *I've* meant when using that term, here and elsewhere, anyway.

You mean something like Iron Heroes or Arcana Unearthed?

 

[Morrus]

I admit that I'm a little confused by the lines drawn here. I've seen more than a few mentions that if someone prefers D&D without the fluff from the core books, it's somehow not D&D anymore, but, rather, it's now d20 Fantasy.

At least, that seems to be the distinction made.

I've never seen that distinction made, except for folks on the WotC boards who won't use anything that's not "official". But that's a different subject entirely.

 

[Aus_Snow]

You mean something like Iron Heroes or Arcana Unearthed?

Exactly! That kind of thing, or a really, really out there (and voluminous) house rules collection.

 

[thedungeondelver]

To quote a local talk radio personality, "Let me just say this about that.":

"3.x" or "3rd edition" is a bit of a non-starter for me. The game isn't AD&D by any stretch, and it's not "D&D" in the sense that it is not a direct follow on to D&D (1974 Boxed Set, J.Eric Holmes edited "Basic" from '77, the Tom Moldvay edit from '81, the Frank Mentzer edit from '83 and it's follow-ons, or the D&D of the RULES CYCLOPEDIA of 1992). It is something wholly different.

(I'm not going to take the snarky, "bad loser" attitude that it "isn't D&D" (at least, not any more...new leaf and all of that) because frankly Hasbro now owns the name D&D and they could release a box of checkers and a checkerboard and call it D&D because they're legally entitled to.)

The appearance of things to myself and some other folk is that d20 was created, a game named D&D was laid over the top of that, and WotC went forth and said, "Here, here is d20. Go and create with it. We created a new D&D with it, see? You can do anything with it."

I mean, from a purely pedantic numbering standpoint, "3" doesn't make any sense at all. It is decidedly not a follow on to AD&D in any real sense other than chronological (for which most of you have expressed your near orgasmic happiness about), and in terms of being a game named "D&D", it is the...let me calculate this here...ninth major - or at least "meriting a new release" - edition of the game to be released, to wit:

D&D (1974)
(B)D&D (1977)
AD&D (1978-'79)
(B)D&D (1981)
(B)D&D (1983)
AD&D2 (1989)
(B)D&D (1992)
AD&D "2.5" (1995ish, whenever the new revision of AD&D2 was released)
D&D "d20" (1999)

...