Trend of Companies heading away from d20

[Treebore]

I disagree with that. L5R RnK gives you limited tools to define a character, whereas the d20 system gave you the tools to add texture and variety to your character.

You and I played different games. I liked the clearly defined focus and role of my characters. Societies like Rokugan are based on are very restrictive, their rules put that across very well. Part of the challenge of the setting is to succeed despite the societal and class restrictions. Something d20 Rokugan doesn't even really touch on.


So my characters were clearly defined by their place and role in the society. Which is something I thought was very cool, challenging, and realistic.

 

[RFisher]

For me, it's I don't want to see new and different systems when the current system could be used. Saw some fantasy setting with it's own rules that had elves, dwarves and dragons and I thought, "Why the hell didn't they use d20?"

Because once you've swapped out the magic system, swapped out the damage system, developed a different set of classes, made changes to how XP is awarded, made changes to the XP progression, modified the races, &c.--you might as well have started from scratch.

Seriously, I have a list of options from UA & other sources--along with a couple of my own house rules--for the fantasy d20 variant I'd like to play, & it'd be nigh all variant rules with only a little of the SRD left.

There are d20 or OGL (based on the SRD) games out there that are harder for a D&D player to learn than games that have no d20 connection whatsoever.

I wish I could believe that... but alas, it appears that the bog standard player doesn't really understand what the OGL is.

But publishers do. Publishers didn't care whether the "bog standard player" understood the OGL when they jumped on the d20 bandwagon, & they won't care when they decide to jump off either.

Castles & Crusades (which arguably is d20).

The flip side of which is that it arguably is not. (^_^)

In the end, it's all pretty fuzzy. You have companies that weathered the d20 storm without getting caught up in it. You have companies that put out some d20 products but never wholeheartedly embraced it. You have once exclusively d20 companies that still have d20 products, but that are now quite diverse. &c, &c. That's not even touching on the straddle-the-line products like True20 & C&C.

There's no doubt (to me at least) when looking at the whole picture that publishers are tending towards less d20 rather than more.

Which is unsurprising. When the OGL/d20L thing happened, how could it not have had the effect it did. As WotC shows signs of moving away from OGL/d20L, how could that not have 3rd party publishers reconsidering the value of them?

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

Is Savage Worlds still being supported? Had a soft spot for that system, but not had a chance to run any yet? It's got the license for Deadlands now, not sure about any other settings though.


On a minor tangent, I wonder how many non D20 games have been influenced by D20?

Ex - Ars Magica - a great system and one I've played over several editions. The current edition is really nicely done - they went through and unified many of the mechanics. Combat and magic systems are now far more consistent. I felt like it'd had the 'D20 treatment', despite being a totally different game (without a D20 in sight).

In particular, wondering if world of darkness got the same treatment?

 

[Charwoman Gene]

In particular, wondering if world of darkness got the same treatment?

Yes. The "Storytelling" system is way more sane mathematically than the "Storyteller" System.

 

[jdrakeh]

Is Savage Worlds still being supported?

Yes.

Had a soft spot for that system, but not had a chance to run any yet? It's got the license for Deadlands now. . .

Well, Great White Games doesn't actually license Deadlands. . . they own it. GWG is an imprint of PEG (Pinnacle Entertainment Group).

. . . not sure about any other settings though.

GWG obtained the license for Solomon Kane last year.

Ex - Ars Magica - a great system and one I've played over several editions. The current edition is really nicely done - they went through and unified many of the mechanics. Combat and magic systems are now far more consistent. I felt like it'd had the 'D20 treatment', despite being a totally different game (without a D20 in sight).

I"m not sure if Ars got the d20 treatment -- it's always had the Stat Modifier + Skill + 1d10 core mechanic. In fact, Jonathan Tweet mentions on his personal website that this is actually where the core mechanic for d20 came from. . .

"Ars Magica (1987, Lion Rampant): Designed this RPG with Mark Rein•Hagen. It's about wizards in a mythic version of the Middle Ages, with a remarkable magic system and a ton of good roleplaying content. If you want to see where the core system for the current edition of D&D comes from, pick up Ars Magica."

Here's a Link

There are a lot of fans here who claim that this is an "old rumor" but there you have it in the man's own words. Ars Magica influenced d20. That said, I'm 100% certain that D&D did influence the 4th Edition of Ars Magica, which really loaded up on the rules options -- but Ars 5th veered away from d20 in that it pared the core book down to roughly 1/3 the size of the 4th Edition book (and about 1/2 of the D&D PHB) by dropping options.

 

[rgard]

Great White Games is doing Solomon Kane using their Savage Worlds system. They aren't moving away from d20 because they never did d20.

Too bad they aren't doing this in D20. I really doubt I'll pick it up.

Thanks,
Rich