True 20 - Is it really Simpler?

[Blastin]

well...not to do another thread-jack but.....
Reading through this thread (which is all I know about True 20) makes me wonder if this might be a good system to use to convert Shadowrun to a D20 type system...

 

[barsoomcore]

iwatt: A True20-ized Hot Pursuit is definitely on my list of things to do. Stay tuned.

Elodan: Certainly monster conversions are DEAD easy. It takes no more time to "convert" them than it does to copy down the stat block. I didn't try to convert any very complex NPCs but there again I wouldn't expect it to be much work. Stuff like traps and magic items convert almost as easily as creatures. Really, you could run a d20 adventure with True20 rules almost without doing ANY conversion ahead of time.

trilobite: all I can say is my experiences have been free-wheeling all the way.

The Damage Track is NOT simpler, and people shouldn't pretend that it is. It's MORE complicated than hit points, definitely. What it does do is require less set-up time by the DM, and creates HIGHER variability in terms of combat effects. In addition, it's far easier to get knocked out rather than killed in True20, so character lethality is lower. In d20, if you get knocked out by lethal damage, your death is reasonably likely unless somebody helps you (you'll typically have 5-6 chances to roll 10%). In True20, once you're disabled, you're out of combat and only by your own choice (or an especially savage and determined NPC) can you be sent to dying. And even then, you can automatically stabilize with a Conviction point.

So what you have is a system that requires less set-up, provides greater variability during play, and reduced character lethality, at the expense of needing to track a fairly complex set of interacting numbers and states. If you don't like keeping track of a lot of data during play, you probably won't like the Damage Track. For me, the benefits are well worth the expense.

 

[Wasgo]

A True20-ized Hot Pursuit is definitely on my list of things to do. Stay tuned.

How high on the list? I'd really like to buy that.

 

[Jack Morgan]

iwatt: A True20-ized Hot Pursuit


The Damage Track is NOT simpler, and people shouldn't pretend that it is. It's MORE complicated than hit points, definitely..

I think, as your post somewhat indicates- that it is simpler during prep- and that is really what I meant when I said it was simpler. If I'm statting a monster/advasary (especailly on the fly) I don't need to figure/roll hit dice. I just assign a resonable toughness save and I'm done. But it is not simpler in combat, although we haven't found it to be THAT much more complicated. I never play; I only GM so I tend to see things from that perspective only.

edit: btw, we've been using your pc/npc sheets for since our second section. They rock. Thanks!

 

[Animus]

My group uses poker chips to track wounds. White for Hurt, red for wounded or greater, and blue for fatigue levels. It's a great help.

 

[DnDChick]

Our only real complaints is in fact with the damage track. In my opinion, Hit Points were simply replaced by two other less predictable resources: damage ticks on the track and conviction. The reliance on conviction is actually a drawback in my opinion. We found that players horded their conviction because of essentially role they play in combat longevity. So, instead of using conviction to perform dramatic actions with flare and gusto, they were all saved for the crucial toughness save. To a lesser extent, another complaint is with the status effects built into the damage track. My players felt that many of these effects (e.g., stunning) just weren't very fun at the frequency they occurred. Sitting around watching your friends play, while you loose a turn may be realistic, but it isn't very entertaining.

My group sees Conviction as the "new" hit points in True20. Since the number you have are level based, higher-level characters will have more to spend during those long and dangerous combats. Ergo, higher level characters have a higher survivability factor by virtue of their Conviction. This also demonstrates the utility of the warrior core ability. Once you get a few Hurt conditions and your Toughness saves get harder and harder to make, one Conviction point can wipe them all out and start you over again fresh. This is quite an edge in combat against experts, adepts, and warriors that are lower in level than you can therefore can't do that as often.

 

[Brad Hindman]

My group sees Conviction as the "new" hit points in True20. Since the number you have are level based, higher-level characters will have more to spend during those long and dangerous combats. Ergo, higher level characters have a higher survivability factor by virtue of their Conviction. This also demonstrates the utility of the warrior core ability. Once you get a few Hurt conditions and your Toughness saves get harder and harder to make, one Conviction point can wipe them all out and start you over again fresh. This is quite an edge in combat against experts, adepts, and warriors that are lower in level than you can therefore can't do that as often.

I think this is a very fair way to think about it. The big difference is that the expenditure of the Conviction is much less predictable than the expenditure of Hit Points, thus, the higher variability of combat outcome that some have already mentioned in this thread.

 

[DnDChick]

True, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I rather like the fact that a player can't automatically assume that they will succeed in a fight against a given opponent because they know the opponent can only do X damage per round, and they have X number of hit points. That certainty can lead to metagaming, conscious or otherwise. Not knowing whether or not that orc will actually be able to hurt you leads to a little more drama in combat. It's the lack of predictability that my group and I have come to like about True20. Granted, they didn't like the idea that they didn't get to roll damage against their opponent at first but when the learned that they had some measure of control over how badly their opponent hurt them they changed their minds.

 

[Brad Hindman]

True, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

I apologize if I appeared to be saying that less predictability is a bad thing. No value judgement was intended.

 

[DnDChick]

No harm done, and no offense taken. I'm just having a discussion. I'm not the type to let online discussions get personal. You don't like the damage track, and I do. You explained why you don't like it, and I explained why I do. You have nothing to apologize for.