Would you be satisifed with d20 as your only RPG? [Ties into RyanD's blog entry.]

[Weylan]

So after all my babbling, the big question is are you satisifed enough with d20 that you never need to play another RPG again? (I would have made this a poll, but I wanted more then a yes or no answer.)

Not even close. I love Mutants & Masterminds and D&D will always be a nostalgic experience for me, but I would take a good rules-light game like Amber or Everway over them most days.

 

[Shroomy]

Since I pretty much only play D&D 3.5e, I will have to say yes, I am satisifed with the d20 system, and I don't particularly feel the need to go out and experiment with or use another system.

 

[DaveMage]

The only game I play is D&D.

I've tried other RPGs (Champions, Rolemaster, Feng Shui), but none of them brought enjoyment at a level anywhere near D&D for me. My thoughts were always, "so when are we going to play D&D again?"

Since I've played every incarnation of D&D, I'd have to say I'm open to other systems, but only if they are D&D, or an incarnation thereof.

 

[Ry]

d20 would have to play a LOT faster for it to be my only RPG. That said, I have no bones about all my games having

(Dice) + (Bonus or penalty due to how good the player is) vs. Target number

as their sole dice mechanic.

 

[Desdichado]

I haven't seen any threads on this, but I thought this blog entry by RyanD was a really good read. Granted it pertains to me since I fancy myself a game designer, but I think its interesting even if you're just a player.

Indeed it is. Lots more interesting points of discussion than just your question too, but I presume there's probably already another thread floating around for those.

What I really was curious about was in one of his comments Ryan said that about 80% of the player base isn't concerned with the system at all and they just want to play in a game. I never thought about that before. I've always been content with d20 being my only outlet for roleplaying, but I thought I was the exception and not the norm.

So after all my babbling, the big question is are you satisifed enough with d20 that you never need to play another RPG again? (I would have made this a poll, but I wanted more then a yes or no answer.)

Yeah, actually pretty much. I decided quite some time ago--back when the d20 Call of Cthulhu game was released, actually--that d20 could do anything I wanted it to after all, and the ability to cross-pollinate products from Star Wars, Cthulhu, D&D and any other source trumped any reservations I might have with the system.

Some of those reservations have come back over the years since, but they've largely been addressed by alternate rules that I've seen in various products. Unearthed Arcana single-handedly enabled me to bridge most of my reservations, actually. d20 Modern did a fair amount too.

So, would I play another game? Sure, absolutely. With pleasure. There are even some that I'd really like to play, such as WFRP2.

However, if I never played anything other than d20 again would I be happy? Yep, probably so.

The only exception to that is that I use a slighly modified version of The Window--because of it's bare-bones simplicity--to run games for my kids. The Window is a pretty neat system if you don't care about system really. You have to put up with a fair bit of elitist latte set gamer lectures at the beginning of the game (which even the designer appears to be embarrassed by now) but other than that, it's the only thing other than d20 I've played in a long time.

 

[Henry]

No; I enjoy lots of other systems that really can't be modelled well in just d20 alone. Feng Shui is one; Battletech is another. Admittedly, some games like warhammer 2 COULD be modelled after d20's core mechanics (you're converting d10's and d100's to d20 rolls), but there are some that just aren't modelled after a linear probability curve that wouldn't do well.

And yes, I find it perfectly plausible that 80% of the tabeltop public is perfectly happy with d20 or a variant of it; we "dedicated gamers" are the weirdoes and oddballs of the hobby, after all.

 

[drothgery]

The only games I've played for extended periods have been D&D (2e, 3e, and 3.5), d20 Modern, and Star Wars d20 (Revised), so I'm pretty sure I could get by with just d20. I've got some d20-derived OGL games (AU, True20, Mutants and Masterminds, etc.) sitting on my bookshelves unplayed, but it seems to me that if something hasn't been done well in d20/d20-derived OGL yet, it's because no one's really tried.

 

[BryonD]

Yes.

I've played plenty of other game systems before and I would not at all be opposed to them or some new system. But I was out of gaming completely for several years before 3E and have played some D20 variant exclusively since then. I've been fine so far and don't see that changing on the horizon. So, yes, I'd be satisfied.

 

[GRIMJIM]

No, I find d20 generally quite unsatisfying. You can apply fixes and swap out rules but every time you do so you introduce problems of compatability and the base assumptions in the broader d20 skeleton aren't suited to many types of play.

It isn't a generic system and its being sold as one, not that generic systems are particularly satisfying anyway.

 

[FickleGM]

Close, but since True20 is technically not d20, I have to say no.