How much can you drop from d20,and still be d20?

[Starman]

xp- have to have it. I don't like the idea of GM whim dictating when characters advance. If your not going to give out xp based on encounters, then do a fixed amount of xp per scale of the adventure.

As was pointed out by another poster, giving out a fixed amount per scale of the adventure is still GM fiat. The GM can decide that he wants the party to level up every 8 sessions and then simply divide up the amount of experience needed for the next level into eight parts and hand it out every week like that.

Technically, I suppose, XP based on encounters is still GM fiat because the GM decides how many encounters the party faces, how often, and how tough. The GM can decide when he wants you to level up and plan encounters accordingly.

Starman

 

[Dismas]

I believe you mean Unearthed Arcana. Urban Arcana is a suplement for d20 Modern.

Opps, that is what comes of trying to do three things at once.

 

[Desdichado]

Well, I'm sure you noticed that actually Blue Rose isn't going to be d20, so it's a bit of a moot point...

But I also think you're confusing d20 with D&D in several of these specific line items you came up with.
"-no ability scores, just ability modifiers"
Not a big deal, since you don't actually use the ability scores for much of anything other than to figure the modifier. Actually keeping the score is a relic from older versions, not a really functional aspect of the system.

"-no character classes."
Mutants & Masterminds already doesn't have classes. Neither does d20 Call of Cthulhu. Although the Heroic Roles sound suspiciously similar in concept to a generic class, so I'm not sure that's really a substantive change anyway.

"-no class abilities, just feats"
Also not really substantive, in my opinion. Class abilities are typically just class-exclusive feats anyway, in practical terms. Or maybe I just have a bad habit of glossing over details and looking at "the big picture." I can't see how this is all that big a deal. A lot of recent d20 alternate core classes (especially thinking of the classes of Midnight and Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed here) are already between these two extremes with large a la carte class abilities lists to choose from.

"-no hit points"
That's a pretty substantive change, but it was in Mutants and Masterminds already, and is even in an official D&D book already (Unearthed Arcana) so it's not exactly earth-shaking.

"-totally different magic system"
Plenty of d20 games have totally different magic systems. Heck, plenty of D&D settings have totally different magic systems (Rokugan and Sovereign Stone immediately come to mind.) That's a non-issue.

"-no experience points"
d20 Wheel of Time and d20 Call of Cthulhu did this years ago as d20 games, put out by Wizards of the Coast, no less.

"-no miniature based combat"
First edition d20 Star Wars and d20 Call of Cthulhu didn't have Attacks of Opportunity except as an option, and without that, miniature-based combat is hardly a necessity. I wouldn't call this a core aspect of d20, but rather an evolving business strategy specific to D&D, based around selling D&D Minis.

"-different alignment system"
Again, every other d20 game other than D&D has that.

I think most of these changes are certainly not core to d20, and are D&D specific. And the others that are more substantive have already mostly been done anyway.

But to answer your real question, certainly none of those changes on their own come close to making the game "not d20". Even in aggregate, those changes aren't enough to make it not-d20, especially since many of those concepts are not core to d20 anyway.

 

[diaglo]

i drop the whole d02 logo from my games.

 

[jmucchiello]

With this many different changes to the basic d20 system, is it still fare to call it d20? If so, what defines d20 as d20 for you? Where would you drawl the line and say that a system is no longer d20?

No I wouldn't. To be a d20 game, it should be "usefully compatible" with other d20 games. Afterall, I can adapt stuff in the listed system to my d20 game, but I can also adapt GURPS stuff to my d20 games. That doesn't make GURPS a d20 game.

In my spare time (as if!) I've been working on a system I call OGL MicroLite. It (uncomfortably) shares a lot of these elements:

-no ability scores, just ability modifiers
-no class abilities, just feats
-totally different magic system

With the caveat that classes exist only to limit what feats go with archetypes. I think archetype systems make it easier to get that first visualization of your character. But classes are so light in the system that they don't restrict what you can do. In fact, all race and monster abilities are just feats.

-no hit points

Mine has hits and then degrading levels of awareness/effectiveness before unconsciousness and death. Sort of a combined hit point and M&M system.

-no miniature based combat

I have two combat systems. One with movement in feet and one with engagement levels (not engaged, far, near, close, grappled). The system with moment has no rules for where you can and cannot move, it is left to GM to say, "you can't run past that guy without him getting a whack at you. Both combat systems are simultaneous (no initiative).

-different alignment system

No alignment system.

-different magic system

Mine makes all spellcasters wizard/sorcerer hybrids similar to Monte's AU system.

-no experience points

xp for a critter is equal to the number of feats it has and # of hits.

I'm nearly ready to playtest the silly system and then I find someone is doing something similar. (sigh) I may end up filing this away with my superhero d20 game.

 

[Arnwyn]

No I wouldn't. To be a d20 game, it should be "usefully compatible" with other d20 games. Afterall, I can adapt stuff in the listed system to my d20 game, but I can also adapt GURPS stuff to my d20 games. That doesn't make GURPS a d20 game.

I absolutely agree with this sentiment.

 

[rangerjohn]

There is three things I can think of, that use ability scores, instead of the bonuses. One is carrying capacity, the second is feat prerequisites, and the other is stat level ups. I guess they could get rid of the in-between scores, but how does that affect level ups? Do you go from +2 to +3 at 4th level, or at 8th level? Not at all?

 

[Aaron2]

There is three things I can think of, that use ability scores, instead of the bonuses. One is carrying capacity, the second is feat prerequisites, and the other is stat level ups.

The raw stats are also used in calculating ability damage. But you can get around that by using a smaller die. Forex, a shadow drains 1d3 modifiers rather than 1d6 points. Stat boosting spells and item are already always even numbers so they can convert over without loss.

I wouldn't mind get a +1 modifier bonus each four levels instead of +1 point. They are kinda worthless as it is now.

Aaron

 

[Ranger REG]

No I wouldn't. To be a d20 game, it should be "usefully compatible" with other d20 games. Afterall, I can adapt stuff in the listed system to my d20 game, but I can also adapt GURPS stuff to my d20 games. That doesn't make GURPS a d20 game.

Should you be able to use a 1st-level superhero character with your 1st-level D&D fighter character in a game? Or 4th-level tranformable robot PC (from Mechamorphosis) with a d20 Modern 4th-level Tough Soldier PC?

If you want a game to crossover to many other games, then that's your preference, but it is not necessarily the canon. After all, other than what terms and mandatory guidelines stated in the d20 System Trademark Usage Guide that you need to follow, you -- a game designer and/or publisher -- can do pretty much do with the ruleset any way you like it for your game. Any more restrictions would put more game publishers off. I mean, if you think the reaction about the decency clause in the Usage Guide is bad, wait 'til they decided to make stricter guideline regarding game design.

I'm an advocate for tweaking the rules to fit the setting, not tweaking the setting to fit the rules.

But I also believe in letting the third-party publishers decide how to market their game, with the d20 logo or without. If they do badly, then it will show in their sales report and their ability to keep their publishing business afloat.

 

[takyris]

FWIW, I agree with the "As long as you're rolling d20+something against a target number or opposed roll, it's d20" statement. As the d20 system gets more options in different areas, you increasingly see cases where systems are both descended from the d20 SRD but are going to be difficult to use together. Putting aside the legal qualifications, an M&M character, a Babylon 5 character, a Spycraft character, and a d20 Modern character built using the corebook and Blood & Vigilance might all be descended from d20, but certainly can't be used together without some extensive tweaking.

I don't consider "could pop it over without too much work" to be the most useful definition, since I might be able to pop my M&M character over into Blue Rose without trouble, while my d20 Modern character would have a hard time making the transition, and that d20 Transformers game-character is gonna have a much harder row to hoe. Look at GURPS. As I recall, depending on how many campaign-specific rules you adopted, you could build GURPS characters who would require hours of modification to move from a lighthearted wire-fu action hero game into a military simulationist ideal game with incredibly detailed rules and point classifications -- even if both games took place in a common setting (modern day America, for example). It'd still be GURPS in either case.

And I personally love the Damage Save. I don't feel the need to never play anything else again, but it's working well for me right now, and it gets across the feel I like and speeds up game play a fair amount.