True 20 - Is it really Simpler?

[ValhallaGH]

On the roles: I dislike balancing classes on the whole "warrior, expert, spellcaster" model. It strikes me as a bad model that lends itself to cliche characters. I agree that, with open, and encouraged, multiclassing, True 20 does it better than standard D&D. However, you can still end up with a character that's a combat monkey with no appreciable skills, or a skill monkey who sucks at combat.

Normally I agree with you, but True 20 actually tries to avoid this. You can have a party of six warriors and they will be almost as varried as an IH party. They all fight but they do it in different ways. On the flip side, they could all learn the same tricks and fight in identicle ways with equal ease. It's a matter of choosing which feats you want. Not quite as varried as IH but it's still pretty good.

I don't know precisely how skills work in True 20.

All skills are class skills. Warriors and Adepts get 4 + Int skills per level, Experts get 8+. The skill list contains about 50 skills, including the 15 knowledges and 8 performs. Crafts are infinite and there are no Profession skills. Many on the True20 forums think that there are too many skill points, at least for Experts, but you and I would both think them crazed.
I haven't felt the need for introducing skill groups, though I have been tempted with some of my Warrior/Adept Jedi builds.
My only real complaint is that there is no point in having 153 ranks in a skill. Once you can achieve everything on the chart by taking 10, the only reason to put a few more ranks into it is so that you can either take a fast completion challenge or take 5 when under stress. Other than opposed skills (Notice, Stealth, Bluff, Sense Motive and maybe Intimidate), there aren't really any skills that you need many ranks in. Thus, mid to high level characters tend towards low to moderate ranks in almost every skill rather than a few specializations.

"Interesting Options covered by the rules" - I have a basic dislike of on-the-fly DM ruling - as a DM! I like having rules to cover unusual situations so that I don't end up having to create them myself. For example, Iron Heroes allows characters to perform stunts for extra bonuses, or accept a penalty to one thing for a benefit to something else, or whatever. I find it makes combat and task resolution more interesting.

I hear you. True20 tries to cover everything you'll need, and expands nicely over d20 (they have throwing rules! Not IH's throwing rules but still...), but some further guidance would be nice. The Extra Effort system is a little clunky but does remove the need for a skill-based stunt system in most instances.

Power System - From what I understand, a lot of the magical abilities in True 20 are kinda..."handwavey" in their effects. Basically, they do something...GM judgement call.

You have been misinformed. The powers are generally very well defined, but it's a skill-like check to cast a power, so you don't know just how well you'll do until you roll the bone. Probably not something that would bother you, given the various magic systems you've worked with before and tried to build.

If there's a phrase that makes me wince, it's "GM judgement call." I've usually had good DMs, so this isn't fear of a bad call. It's twofold. As a DM, I see players not trying things because they have no idea how I'll rule. As a player, I often won't try anything "creative" because I have no way of gauging my chance of success in advance.

Some people call that metagaming. I call it "weighing tactical options." It's something the character would do, and something, as a player, that I find entertaining.

Word.

 

[king_ghidorah]

Those were actually more "suggestions to improve D&D" as I haven't actually played True 20.

On the roles: I dislike balancing classes on the whole "warrior, expert, spellcaster" model. It strikes me as a bad model that lends itself to cliche characters. I agree that, with open, and encouraged, multiclassing, True 20 does it better than standard D&D. However, you can still end up with a character that's a combat monkey with no appreciable skills, or a skill monkey who sucks at combat.

I guess I'm a bit confused by this -- I find the standard d20 classes much more cliche than the True20 classes because the classes have very little definition. No cross-class skills, almost all class abilities eliminated. All that really is different from class to class aside from a single, general ability is the speed of BAB increases, strong and weak saves, number of skill points and the ability to use supernatural powers (for adepts.) But each class starts with 4 feats and gains bonus feats rapidly, which (in combination with open skills) makes each player heavily customized, more so than any d20 game I have seen, and thus less likely to be a narrow cliche.

The only thing that would make True20 less narrowly restrictive would be to eliminate class abilities altogether, create a single glass, and have a point-allocation system for ability scores, BAB, feats, saves and skills. And then it starts looking like, say, Mutants and Masterminds instead.

 

[ValhallaGH]

I guess I'm a bit confused by this -- I find the standard d20 classes much more cliche than the True20 classes because the classes have very little definition.

JohnSnow will almost certainly agree with this.

The thing is, he's been playing a lot of Iron Heroes which has a very, very different class design philosophy than standard d20. Esentially, the class defines how you fight, while skill, feat and trait selection define everything else about the character (or enhance the definitions found in the backstory).
Coming from that background, where each class does basically the same thing but in a very different way, returning to a generic 'warrior' class feels like jumping back inside a cookie cutter (a.k.a. the 3.0 Monk). As I mentioned above, True20 manages to avoid this by having a very wide array of feats to customize your character with, including ones that mimic traditional class features such as sneak attack or rage.


JS, think of the Warrior role as a Man At Arms if Rage and Mobile Assault were feat masteries. That should give you an idea of just how flexible the class can be.

 

[JohnSnow]

JS, think of the Warrior role as a Man At Arms if Rage and Mobile Assault were feat masteries. That should give you an idea of just how flexible the class can be.

Gotcha.

Okay, so basically, the only tweaky thing about True 20 is its insistence that attacks of opportunity are too complicated to game with. Sounds like I'd actually enjoy the system.

I admit my impression of the magic system was based on the True 20 fast play rules. I've since picked up the real system and am glad to see it has a better and more complete system for powers. On first read, the powers still seem a bit "wide open"...but maybe that's just a pre-play impression.

I DO like the balancing effect of powers causing fatigue. But then, I've always hated spell slots.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Gotcha.

Okay, so basically, the only tweaky thing about True 20 is its insistence that attacks of opportunity are too complicated to game with. Sounds like I'd actually enjoy the system.

Don't forget that there are no multiple attacks for high BAB on full attack either

 

[The_Warlock]

On first read, the powers still seem a bit "wide open"...but maybe that's just a pre-play impression.

I have a feeling that that is somewhat by design. The specifics of the powers allow people who want their magic rules defined to just play with those. In my usage of the system however, I add in the GM adjudication by allowing PCs to think up creative uses and assigning a DC for them to do things not covered by the specifics. Thus, since it is a skill roll mechanic, the wide openness allows, at the same time, play groups who want that "possibility", alongside groups who want structure, without having to completely excise the the other group from utilizing the base system.

 

[iwatt]

It's called "beggars can't be choosers."

So, umm...iwatt, you planning to use stunts, challenges, or zones in True 20? I personally don't think I'll be able to game without 'em again...ever.

sorry about not getting back to you guys before. ENWorld was unreachable for a couple of weeks now for a lot of South American dummies without advanced proxy rerouting trchniques. .

I can't give up on stunts, challenges and zones. In the true20 boards I hongified* feinting already into a simple skill use.

Feint

You can exploit your skills to take your opponent at unawares in combat. To use this challenge, make a skill check as a standard action in melee. Your foe opposes your result with a base attack check; alternatively, if your skill would normally be opposed by another skill or saving throw, they may roll that instead. If you win the opposed roll, your foe loses their dodge or parry bonus to defense against the next attack that targets them, provided it is made before the end of your next turn.

At a minimum, you can use this challenge with the Acrobatics, Jump, Intimidate, Bluff and Sleight of Hand skills. You can also use this with any other skill you have, provided you can come up with a suitably plausible description of its use, and the skill would normally take a standard action to complete. What counts as plausible is left to the narrator's discretion.

Special: This replaces the skill uses found in various places that deny an opponent their dodge or parry defense bonus (bluff, acrobatics, sleight of hand).

Still trying to think of a way to use Villain classes in True20 though.

 

[The_Warlock]

Still trying to think of a way to use Villain classes in True20 though.

Simple, make a new Role, Villain.

A Villain Role counts it's total level for Adept Powers, can take Feats from any category as if in Role, and may choose to have either the Warrior Role Combat/Saves or the Expert Role Combat/Saves at creation. Initial skill selection is as Warrior or Adept.

Come up with a Core Role conviction benefit, and you are good to go.

See, wasn't that easy. (chuckle)

 

[The_Warlock]

Oooh, ooh, here's Role benefit for use with conviction:

A Villain may spend conviction during any scene/encounter to improve the capabilities of his minions. The Villain grants, through planning (a la Master Plan), charisma or special training, a benefit to those who call him Master. A Villain may spend as many conviction as he wants when he uses this ability. For each conviction so spent, all minions (ie, real minions, those guys who fall over dead with a single hit) present in the encounter gains either a +1 to combat and saves (to a maximum equal to 1/4 the PC's highest level), or may shrug off one strike (ie, the minion takes a hit, and rather than falling, is considered wounded, but can still stand and fight for his master). The bonus must be chosen by the Villain when the conviction is used, and must be the same benefit for all minions present.

The benefit lasts until the end of the encounter, the Villain's level in rounds, or until the Villain leaves the encounter area, whichever comes first.

Cheesy perhaps, but it feels villainee...

 

[Raven Crowking]

I intend on using True20 for Doctor Who....