Implied Setting

[Tyberious Funk]

Hmm. I don't think a single one of you get what I'm saying... *Shrugs*

Compare for a moment the D20 system to the Storytelling sytem of Vampire/Werewolf/Mage fame. Strip out the races, classes, and world specific matieral and compare the two systems. Doesn't these two systems suggest different types of game play? Do you see how these two systems could be suggestive of very different settings?

I get you... and I totally agree. It is one of the reasons why I like d20 and 3E, but don't *love* them. D&D is often touted as a game system for playing in the fantasy genre. In reality, D&D is a game system with it's *own* genre. It has its own mish-mash of idiosynchratic rules designed to create a relatively specific style of game... even going to the basics of 3E, the d20 game mechanism still results in a certain style of game. Consequently, it is a bit frustrating when d20 is used for particular campaigns when I don't think it is quite appropriate (ie, d20 modern and Star Wars).

Having said that, most game mechanics are designed with a particular genre in mind. Only a handful of genre-less games have had any success (eg GURPS, FUDGE). *shrug* not much we can do about it really.

 

[tsadkiel]

And that's fine if you prefer power gaming (or something similar) over depth role-playing. My point is that D+D encourages power gaming whether or not that is your preference.

Good roleplaying shoudl eb its own reward - make friends with the King's vizier and you've a) had more fun, and b) made friends with the King's vizier. It shouldn't make you a better swordsman.

Honestly, though, the thing that really bugs me is the behaviorist mentality that "xp-for-acting" encourages. I hate the notion that players must be "conditioned" in order to "play right" with a rigorous schedule of positive reinforcers. My players aren't my dogs, they're not my children, they're not my students, and they're not pigeons. They're my friends, and they can play their characters in whatever way is most fun for them.

 

[Frostmarrow]

CoC discourages power-gaming by providing a setting in which the characters are wildly outmatched, thus rendering relative power levels indistinguishable. D&D encourages power-gaming by providing a setting in which the characters are carefully matched so that small changes in relative power levels translate into large game effects.

A power-gamer in CoC get the following for his character: Dodge 50%, Spot hidden 50%, Library Use 50%.

"My guy spent his youth dodging thrown books in a library whilst reading book titles off of the spine."

A Role-player in CoC get something quite different: Revolver 30%, Mechanical Repair 30%, Intimidate 30%, Drive 30%, Law 30%.

"I'm Sgt. Rowdy MacTaggart with the highway patrol - Where is the fire?"

 

[Desdichado]

Do you think the good people at WotC have even thought of this? Sure, the D20 gaming system is smooth running and streamlined, but something tells me that it will never be the end all and be all of all games.

Considering that Monte Cook wrote the original books, it seems strange to think the WotC may not be aware of that. Of course, they were trying to follow in the same vein as prior editions of D&D, having a game that in most ways played the same way and had the same feel but was much easier and more consistent.

That said, I think the changes to get a different feel are very minor and easily implimented. A few examples:

• Magic: a number of alternate magic systems are available in print, including Sovereign Stone's system, the Rokugan system, several Shaman systems, psionics, CoC d20, Elements of Magic, etc. for a wide variety of flavors and mechanical differences. Changing this immediately makes the game not be D&D anymore, IMO. Of course, this also means eliminating most of the base classes. But since classes are a dime a dozen (and easily improvised anyway -- I kinda like just using the d20 Modern classes from the SRD though, or the WoT classes.)
• Levelling: even in the DMG it talks about various alternates for levelling. Personally I prefer the DM fiat option -- you level when I say you do, rather than based on XP. Get rid of that as an effective carrot and you get rid of much of the hack-n-slash inherent in DnD.
• Races: this is obvious, but so many races have been published that getting rid of elves and dwarves etc. and replacing them with a variety just as rich is easy.