What is D20 Missing?

[Jraynack]

What is missing from d20? There has been little talk in the 2d6 String System forum that an effective mass combat system doesn't exist in RPGs.

But, what else is missing - one thing that we at Alea Publishing Group have discussed is the silliness of the spell regenerate in 3.0/3.5. There really isn't any rules about severing limbs, making the spell lacking, except for its secondary functions.

 

[Alzrius]

In all honesty, there's no provisions for exceptionally high-level abilities.

The current epic system basically allows for epic uses for skills and feats, and if you're a spellcaster, epic spells. That's all well and good to about 30th level or so, but beyond that, power increases but doesn't expand.

For example, there's no way for a level 100 character to raise, let alone control, an entire nation of dead people, or cast a spell strong enough to blow up a planet.

I know that's probably higher level than almost anyone wants, but it's worth mentioning.

 

[mythusmage]

You get right down to it, d20 does a marvelous job of modeling the legendary, the heroic. Hoever, it does a lousy job of modeling the ordinary, the mundane. You can start with Joe Blow, but he must per force become someone out of legend if he does not die. And even in death he can still become legend. But there is no way Joe Blow can stay Joe Blow after even a short time adventuring.

Is d20 flexible enough to allow for the ordinary? Can it be changed in that direction and remain d20?

 

[Alzrius]

You get right down to it, d20 does a marvelous job of modeling the legendary, the heroic. Hoever, it does a lousy job of modeling the ordinary, the mundane. You can start with Joe Blow, but he must per force become someone out of legend if he does not die. And even in death he can still become legend. But there is no way Joe Blow can stay Joe Blow after even a short time adventuring.

Is d20 flexible enough to allow for the ordinary? Can it be changed in that direction and remain d20?

Actually, I reviewed some products that handled this really well. Check out Character Options: Commoners by Emerald Press, and the other is Minigame Magazine #2: The Book of Guilds by Valent Games. Both have rules for playing "common" characters, usually by having you play NPC-classed PCs (with a few twists). Check them out!

 

[Jraynack]

For example, there's no way for a level 100 character to raise, let alone control, an entire nation of dead people, or cast a spell strong enough to blow up a planet.

Your exactly right - that is really why I loved the Dark Sun setting - when a character reached 15th level, you were someone not to take likely. If you were 40th level, you could indeed raise an entire nation of the dead to lead or raze a city and then reanimate them.

Though I didn't mind the epic rules (I DMed a few epic characters), I have heard overall that many were disatisfied - I think my APG partner, Cameron, was as well.

To tell you the truth - I think WoTC was traveling in unknown waters and pulled some punches when creating the book. I remember the old Dungeon and Dragons gold box set (Immortals) where characters could actually become an immortal and possibly a demigod.

The point being is that you shouldn't have to wait until your 100th level to be able to raise a nation of dead - 30th, 40th or even 50th (max) maybe. Your right, the epic rules should be epic and make your character feel that way - but a good campaign can also make you feel that way when your 20th or 25th as well.

Thanks for the comment - we will see what we can do in a future Poor Gamer's Almanac.

 

[Jraynack]

You can start with Joe Blow, but he must per force become someone out of legend if he does not die.

That is also something to consider - one of the things that I really enjoy doing as a DM is have adventures investigate something mudane then it slowly builds into something - not legendary - but a good story that, in the end, the characters might have had an impact of some sort (not necessarily a nation or a region, but maybe for the few NPCs that they were involved with).

Also, I think adventures need to be toned down a bit, or it becomes a bit stale. What I mean is - there is always a breif moment or two that someone does something legendary that they are remembered for - but to be every adventure is a bit much and brings down the reality factor of the campaign world.

I also suggest - when a group of character are summoned by the lord to do something - when they get there they actually speak to the reeve or someone else of less import. Its just not the rules that need twisting to get the effect you want but the storyteeling as well.

I really like d20 Call of Cthulhu, because every character begins mudane and after a few adventures wants to be mundane and forget all that they have seen - else they are insane. Those rules can easily be adapted into a fantasy setting.

 

[mythusmage]

Actually, I reviewed some products that handled this really well. Check out Character Options: Commoners by Emerald Press, and the other is Minigame Magazine #2: The Book of Guilds by Valent Games. Both have rules for playing "common" characters, usually by having you play NPC-classed PCs (with a few twists). Check them out!

It's not just the type of character you play, but the mechanics of advancement. While a commoner or adept doesn't gain powers to the same degree as he advances as a fighter or wizard, by 10th even an expert is going to be someone of renown.

Can the d20 system be tweaked to restrain power advancement and remain d20?

 

[HalWhitewyrm]

Social situations are severely underdeveloped in d20. Though there have been some products to address the situation, the fact still remains that d20 is a combat-focused system with social interaction added as an afterthought. I'd like to see this changed so that each is, at least, equal.

 

[Jraynack]

Social situations are severely underdeveloped in d20. Though there have been some products to address the situation, the fact still remains that d20 is a combat-focused system with social interaction added as an afterthought. I'd like to see this changed so that each is, at least, equal.

I completely agree. I have run entire sessions that had no combat, only to discover - what exactly do I give out for XP? I don't want my players to feel that combat is forced just to earn XP.

I usually assign a basic XP on discovering clues or learning important information. But I also usually give them XP as if they fought there ECL a various amount of times if it is just a role-playing session depending on the nature of the session - was there a risk at combat? Was the information or the social connections gained helpful? and so forth. But all of this is pretty much Ad Hoc.

It would be nice to have a solid guideline. It would actually put Role-playing back into Roll-playing.

 

[DragonSword]

I completely agree. I have run entire sessions that had no combat, only to discover - what exactly do I give out for XP? I don't want my players to feel that combat is forced just to earn XP.

Slightly off-topic, but as a reply to this post I partly use an adapted version of the 2E AD&D experience system where characters gain experience for using certain skills, spells and other abilities to get them out of trouble - this takes the focus off combat-based XP a little.