System Free Scenarios and Settings: Curse or Cure?

[Lanefan]

Systemless *settings* would be excellent, in that if I found one I liked it could in effect do a lot of the heavy lifting for me in terms of world design. All I'd have to do would be fill in the people and tweak the history and-or cultures to suit the story and-or theme I want to build around. 1-2 years of work could shrink down to 1-3 months if I was really lucky!

Systemless *adventures* would be a bloody pain. It's as much if not more work to convert an adventure as it is to design one from scratch; the heavy lifting is the number crunching (i.e. system-specific), the not-so-heavy stuff is the layout and design - which I can do myself. About the only use I could see for these would be as a source of ready-made maps I could then pillage for my own use.

Lanefan

 

[Pramas]

Isn't this what was done with the various Freeport books? I coulda sworn there were a few Freeport books that were systemless. (Cults of Freeport for instance).

That's right. The Pirate's Guide to Freeport was a systemless sourcebook. 256 pages of background, locations, characters, and adventure seeds with nary a stat block in sight. We simply noted that each NPC was either an apprentice, journeyman, or master to give GMs a rough approximation of their skill level. And I'm afraid I'm going to have to contradict a previous poster when I say the Pirate's Guide was certainly a success, though it had the advantage of being a well-known setting from its previous d20 iteration.

We then did rules companions to complement the Pirate's Guide. Each one had new rules material for the system in question, along with NPC stats, and an introductory adventure. We've published Freeport Companions for True20, d20, Castles & Crusades, and Savage Worlds. Expeditious Retreat just published one for 4E under license from us. We also two follow-up sourcebooks, also systemless: Cults of Freeport and Buccaneers of Freeport.

 

[S'mon]

Systemless *adventures* would be a bloody pain. It's as much if not more work to convert an adventure as it is to design one from scratch; the heavy lifting is the number crunching (i.e. system-specific), the not-so-heavy stuff is the layout and design - which I can do myself.

Different strokes I guess - that's not my experience. I had so many appalling experiences running 3e D&D adventures 'out of the box': Lost City of Gaxmoor and Necropolis (among others I can't recall) both had terrible stat problems with overpowered and underpowered enemies. Lost City of Barakus was the closest I've seen to a balanced adventure, though the lower levels needed considerable powering-up. Eventually I realised that it was easier to run adventures not written for 3e and assign/convert the stats myself.

With 4e I'm running a 3e adventure, but the stats come out of my 4e Monster Manuals I & II. Knowing that it won't inherently be balanced, I know to level up or down if I want a 'fair' fight. No risk that I'll assume the designer has already done the heavy lifting for me.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Lost City of Gaxmoor and Necropolis…both had terrible stat problems with overpowered and underpowered enemies…Eventually I realised that it was easier to run adventures not written for 3e and assign/convert the stats myself.

I don't know for certain, but I suspect that Luke and Ernie Gygax were not that familiar with 3e when they wrote Gaxmoor. In fact, if it followed form with other Troll Lord products written by recognized names from the early days of D&D (e.g. Gary Gygax, Rob Kuntz), it was probably written in AD&D terms and then converted. (I know that's what TLG did with Gary and Rob's stuff: converted from AD&D to the target system.) In the case of Necropolis, it was an adventure that was converted to 3e from Mythus/Dangerous Journeys.

Other "conversion" adventures, like Necromancer Games's original release of Rappan Athuk (the upper levels of which were originally written for AD&D), also suffered from stat and d20-rules problems. (Although some of that was also the bleeding edge newness of the system, at the time; Necromancer Games later put out some 3e products that followed the d20 rules/stats very well, like the Lost City of Barakus adventure you mentioned.)

I think that adventures written specifically for d20/3e by authors who were familiar with, played, and liked the system were much less likely to suffer from this problem.

 

[S'mon]

I think that adventures written specifically for d20/3e by authors who were familiar with, played, and liked the system were much less likely to suffer from this problem.

Well, I've seen it with plenty of WoTC adventures too; I think it was "An Icy Heart" with a supposedly CR 20 White dragon, created by adding something like 8 class levels to a CR 12 White. It had lots of hit points, but its offensive power was still that of a CR 12, not a CR 20.

The thing about 3e was, it did not have an official monster design system, getting the stats right was hard, and following the RAW themselves often gave very poor results. High level NPCs very rarely were an effective challenge to match their level; I remember ambushing the PCs with a bunch of high level Fighters and the players gleefully harvesting the free XP. Whereas melee brute monsters like the 'CR 5' Ettin & Troll would kill a PC of that level in 1 round of attacks.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

That's right. The Pirate's Guide to Freeport was a systemless sourcebook. 256 pages of background, locations, characters, and adventure seeds with nary a stat block in sight. We simply noted that each NPC was either an apprentice, journeyman, or master to give GMs a rough approximation of their skill level. And I'm afraid I'm going to have to contradict a previous poster when I say the Pirate's Guide was certainly a success, though it had the advantage of being a well-known setting from its previous d20 iteration.

We then did rules companions to complement the Pirate's Guide. Each one had new rules material for the system in question, along with NPC stats, and an introductory adventure. We've published Freeport Companions for True20, d20, Castles & Crusades, and Savage Worlds. Expeditious Retreat just published one for 4E under license from us. We also two follow-up sourcebooks, also systemless: Cults of Freeport and Buccaneers of Freeport.

How did the rules companion model work out for you? I remember thinking, at the time, that it sounded like a very bad idea, but in all honesty this would be a case where I would be quite happy with being wrong. (One of the joys of pessimism - surprises tend to be happy one.)

Hell, I have considered getting the man book and the True20 Freeport expansion. I would very much like to see a Fantasy Craft version as well, if the experiment was successful, and promise that if one came out I would buy the setting book and both the True20 and Fantasy Craft rules expansions. (Plus, I think that Fantasy Craft could use a bit of work in regards to the age of sail.)

I had a lot of fun with the Anniversary edition.

The Auld Grump

 

[catsclaw227]

That's right. The Pirate's Guide to Freeport was a systemless sourcebook. 256 pages of background, locations, characters, and adventure seeds with nary a stat block in sight. We simply noted that each NPC was either an apprentice, journeyman, or master to give GMs a rough approximation of their skill level. And I'm afraid I'm going to have to contradict a previous poster when I say the Pirate's Guide was certainly a success, though it had the advantage of being a well-known setting from its previous d20 iteration.

I have the Pirate's Guide and its awesome. I have already placed it in a 4e sandbox I am planning and the systemless nature lets me be creative and adjust for things on the fly.

 

[Lanefan]

Different strokes I guess - that's not my experience. I had so many appalling experiences running 3e D&D adventures 'out of the box': Lost City of Gaxmoor and Necropolis (among others I can't recall) both had terrible stat problems with overpowered and underpowered enemies. Lost City of Barakus was the closest I've seen to a balanced adventure, though the lower levels needed considerable powering-up. Eventually I realised that it was easier to run adventures not written for 3e and assign/convert the stats myself.

With 4e I'm running a 3e adventure, but the stats come out of my 4e Monster Manuals I & II. Knowing that it won't inherently be balanced, I know to level up or down if I want a 'fair' fight. No risk that I'll assume the designer has already done the heavy lifting for me.

Most of the adventures I run these days are more or less out-of-system, except those I'm writing myself; so I know of what you speak. At least it sounds like you were in-system when running 3e, and only had to tweak things.

From what little I know of 4e, I can imagine converting a 3e adventure would be messy. I've converted a 4e to 1e; that was bad enough.

Lanefan

 

[S'mon]

From what little I know of 4e, I can imagine converting a 3e adventure would be messy.

Well, it's a 'sandbox' (Vault of Larin Karr) so the PCs don't have to win every fight. Actually I think if I'd used VoLK's listed 3e level distribution (4-9) it would have gone very smoothly; my problems have come from starting at 1st level in 4e. I was taken in by the easy (in 3e) Hobgoblin Fort section; most of VoLK really would suit higher level PCs better.

 

[nedjer]

So, is there a time factor here? Are those who are dead set on system specific those who don't have the time to prep? Equally, are those who expect to hack and patch a scenario in a position to spend more time planning games?