So what exactly is the root cause of the D&D rules' staying power?

Shasarak said:

Oh Gawd I hope not. When you roll dice to see if you succeed or not, the answer you get should never be Triangle.

Click to expand...

It's not a significant difference from "7+". The only viable reason for considering it objectively worse is that you must have the correct dice - but note that FFG always includes the conversion table in the rulebooks for converting the dice.

Triangle = failure, BTW.

Thing is, the SW/Genesys dice provide 2 axis - S/F and Advantage/Threat. Unlike most uses of standard dice.

innerdude said:

how does a system bridge the gap between "how it reads" and "how it plays"? Or is this simply too nebulous? For example, I've seen in some forums where some defenders of Savage Worlds try to convince people to play it by saying "it plays much better than it reads." This totally blew my mind, because to me Savage Worlds pretty much played EXACTLY the way I expected when I read it---it was one of the reasons I was willing to give it a shot in the first place.

Click to expand...

What someone sees when s/he reads a rulebook is likely to be heavily conditioned by what s/he is familiar with in relation to those sorts of rules.

As a bit of autobiography - I bought the HeroWars rulebooks around the time they came out (early 2000s), and read them, but found it very hard to envisage what sort of game they were intended to support. I'd had the same experience decades earlier reading the Classic Traveller rulebooks.

I still find the HeroWars books pretty heavy going - the HeroQuest revised rewrite I think does a much better job of explaining the game. Traveller is now pretty clear to me, but those books could definitely benefit from a Moldvay-style rewrite, making all the subsystems and the basic structure of play clearer. It's not quite as hard to extract Traveller the game from those books as it is, say, to extract AD&D the game from Gygax's PHB and DMG - but it's in that neighbourhood.

The two systems I play regularly that I personally have found to have the clearest rules-to-play correlation are 4e and Burning Wheel. Each plays just like it said it would on the tin.

Rygar said:

1. Familiarity - Pretty much all of video gaming is built on the D&D foundation. It's easy to get into because most people have already experienced its rules in some form. Its setting is also very accessible since it is a relatively unspecialized fantasy world until you get into settings. If you try playing Numenera you have to learn everything from the ground up, if you play generic D&D then all you need to know is what you've seen/read in various media your whole life.

Click to expand...

That, and generic D&D is flexible enough to be able to mirror whichever fantasy setting(s) from other media you're familiar with, at least enough to maintain the familiarity long enough to get you started.

Middle Earth? No problem. Westeros? Piece of cake. Shannara? Colour it done. And so on...

2. Roleplaying - D&D makes roleplaying completely optional and largely unnecessary.

Click to expand...

If true (and I don't agree that it is), I see this as a crash-inducing bug rather than any sort of feature.

Many alternative systems try to force roleplaying.

Click to expand...

While others avoid it, instead turning what would otherwise be roleplayed into game-mechanical dice rolls. There's a whole spectrum; D&D's probably about in the middle.

Most people aren't comfortable with dedicated roleplaying. They get self-conscious and nervous.

Click to expand...

Then maybe RPGs, in which the R stands for Role and the P stands for Playing, aren't for them?

3. Lack of material - D&D has 40 years worth of material. Anything you can think of has rules, you can pull out material written for 1st edition and adapt it easily. People don't need to write their own material or come up with world concepts, they can just grab something pre-written and run it.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. And as D&D - yes, even including 4e and for these purposes including PF - has been in some ways vaguely similar all along, it's easier to adapt things from one D&D edition to another than it is to adapt something from/to another system.

No. It's never been anything other than a vanishingly small microcosm. LARPs focuses on wearing costumes, safety props, and demands strict roleplaying. From an outsider's point of view it gives the impression of being extremely childish since you generally end up dressed like a kid on Halloween. Then, to throw gas on that fire are the hardcore roleplayers who flip out if anyone doesn't meet their expectations of roleplaying since they are trying to self-insert themselves into a fantasy world instead of playing a game. Then you have the problem of localized rules, generally driven by those trying to act out a desire to be in an idealized fantasy world, which make sense only to the core group in a region. So the whole thing starts out with making people extremely uncomfortable and then devolves into a small group of participants demanding everyone else fulfill their need to act out a escapist fantasy.

LARPs has always been its own worst enemy. The concept of an organic alternative community is something that could work, but since its all largely driven by people trying to self-insert into some fantasy media instead of people who are growing an alternative lifestyle it generally drives out anyone who might be interested in the best case.

Click to expand...

Medieval fantasy LARP, which would be the closest analogy to bog-standard D&D, also faces heavy competition for participants from the SCA and similar groups. I think that's why V:tM did so well for a while as a LARP - it didn't have any real competition in the genre.

Lanefan

aramis erak said:

It's not a significant difference from "7+". The only viable reason for considering it objectively worse is that you must have the correct dice - but note that FFG always includes the conversion table in the rulebooks for converting the dice.

Triangle = failure, BTW.

Thing is, the SW/Genesys dice provide 2 axis - S/F and Advantage/Threat. Unlike most uses of standard dice.

Click to expand...

I think that "roll high" on a D20 is significantly different to rolling a dice pool of assorted symbols that may or may not cancel each other out and then trying to remember if remaining triangle is good or not.

Or indeed having to look up the number on a separate chart to find out what you did.

Quick comment on the Fantasy Flight narrative dice system---

It took me a couple of times of reading through the Genesys core mechanic section to fully grasp it, but once I understood the basic concept, it actually seemed quite elegant.

In truth, it's no more complex than d20---"Okay, so, I have +3 from proficiency, +3 from Strength, +1 from my magic sword, +1 for weapon focus, -1 because the enemy has some nifty defensive ability, oh, and I'm going to to a Power Attack for another -2, so, what's my bonus now? Oh, and I'm rolling with Advantage? . . . Okay, and my total is.....?"

Whereas in Genesys the conversation would be, "Okay, so I've got three ability dice and I've upgraded two to proficiency dice, against a Difficulty 2 maneuver (2 difficulty dice in the pool), with one Advantage die and one Disadvantage die." *rolls* "Okay cool, so I have a total of two success and and one threat."

The difference with the narrative dice system, the difficulty is already calculated in to the dice pool. You're never adding fiddly modifiers, you just adjust the dice pool and roll. When finished, check the success/failure and advantage/threat. I've not actually played with the Genesys system yet (though I'm planning to as soon as is viable), but I have the sense that the dice mechanic really won't be a problem after a session or two to get used to it.

innerdude said:

Quick comment on the Fantasy Flight narrative dice system---

It took me a couple of times of reading through the Genesys core mechanic section to fully grasp it, but once I understood the basic concept, it actually seemed quite elegant.

In truth, it's no more complex than d20---"Okay, so, I have +3 from proficiency, +3 from Strength, +1 from my magic sword, +1 for weapon focus, -1 because the enemy has some nifty defensive ability, oh, and I'm going to to a Power Attack for another -2, so, what's my bonus now? Oh, and I'm rolling with Advantage? . . . Okay, and my total is.....?"

Whereas in Genesys the conversation would be, "Okay, so I've got three ability dice and I've upgraded two to proficiency dice, against a Difficulty 2 maneuver (2 difficulty dice in the pool), with one Advantage die and one Disadvantage die." *rolls* "Okay cool, so I have a total of two success and and one threat."

The difference with the narrative dice system, the difficulty is already calculated in to the dice pool. You're never adding fiddly modifiers, you just adjust the dice pool and roll. When finished, check the success/failure and advantage/threat. I've not actually played with the Genesys system yet (though I'm planning to as soon as is viable), but I have the sense that the dice mechanic really won't be a problem after a session or two to get used to it.

Click to expand...

Genesys is the same mechanics as FFG Star Wars except for Character Generation/Advancement, vehicle combat target numbers, and handling of supernatural powers.

The dice mechanic works well and smoothly. It's drawback is the price of the dice, and a slight handling time as people cancel dice with other dice. Using a dice mat to convert is doable, but slower. I say this having run about 4-5 campaign-years of FFG Star Wars (including credited playtester on 3 products). The dice app is usually no faster than physical dice - what it makes up in autocancelation, it loses in dice selection.

@aramis erak --- how often do the rules mandate adding/removing or upgrading/downgrading dice? Is this something commonly done in play? Is it primarily when applying the effect of a talent? This does seem to be a point where gameplay slowdown could happen, if the players and GM aren't "on the spot."

As far as cost, I had already assumed that I was going to get at least one set of dice as part of my purchase of the system, and ended up just buying two. That way when I finally start using it, I'll never have to worry about having enough dice to add to the pool.

I do sometimes get frustrated with FFG's approach of nickle-and-dime-ing their players on every little thing. And this coming from a guy who's easily invested $500+ on Fantasy Flight's Lord of the Rings co-operative card game. I love that game, but the way FFG set up the initial "base" game set is basically a slap in the face. The core box gives you basically two playable game scenarios (the third one is just too hard without investing another $60+ in expansions), they only include 1 or 2 copies of certain cards that are essentially mandatory for good deck building. Players many, many times asked them to just release a core set "booster" that only included additional cards, without forcing them to pay for ANOTHER copy of the scenario decks and resource tokens which they would never need, and they flat out refused. "Want more cards? Buy another core set."

It's their right to do it, obviously, but it still irks me if I think about it for too long. LOL

innerdude said:

@aramis erak --- how often do the rules mandate adding/removing or upgrading/downgrading dice? Is this something commonly done in play? Is it primarily when applying the effect of a talent? This does seem to be a point where gameplay slowdown could happen, if the players and GM aren't "on the spot."

As far as cost, I had already assumed that I was going to get at least one set of dice as part of my purchase of the system, and ended up just buying two. That way when I finally start using it, I'll never have to worry about having enough dice to add to the pool.

Click to expand...

Basic skill pool pool building is expressed as upgrading dice. Every skilled attempt uses the upgrade. Base: Greens equal to higher of skill or attribute; upgrades equal the other, for a net result of lower of skill or attribute yellow, and difference of the two in green.

Non-skill upgrades? about 1 in 5 checks for experienced characters, 1 in 20 for inexperienced. Why? many talents work by providing extra upgrades. Upgrades can also be purchased with Destiny flips.

Blacks and blues: largest pile was about 12 each... and that was exceptionally special due to circumstances. (They were hacking the tables at Bespin Casino.) Tools are +1 to +2 blue. Conditional +0 to +3 black. Setups of correct secondary rolls: -1 difficulty and/or +1 blue. Spends of advantage +1 per player.

Downgrading: bloody rare. Usually, IME, a destiny flip. None of my recent players have taken the DG granting talents. Prior groups used the difficulty DG talents.

Note that all dice manipulations (removal of X dice, UG/DG of Y Dice) is done before the roll, and is part of the dice-handling I've mentioned.

Buying two sets is a good start; a 3rd is nice for GMing with a shared pool; generally, I'd say you need 3 sets per 2 people for starting, and it helps to have 2 per person.