Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spell" data-source="post: 3994820" data-attributes="member: 19718">can i remove skills and feats in their entirety? can i pick up, i don't know, OD&D skill system and put it in without too much hassle? i don't think so.you might be right on this one, i give you this.and without offering a substitute mechanic or rule?multiple published products have said: we're not gonna use feats, but the rest of the rulesets stays right there where it is? multiple products have said: in this game world you ain't getting a +1 magic sword not even if you're a level 20 paladin blessed by the gods, but you can run a D&D game by the book with no pain nor sweat?if these products do exist, please point me at them.as far as i know, the only ones that do something fancy with the ruleset (arcana evolved, iron heroes, midnight campaign setting, iron kingdoms, the nitty n gritty bad axe games book that is supposed to works with the d20 system... sorry, can't remember the name!, and so on) have a consistent section of alternative rules to "fix" the system.i might be wrong, but at least i cite my "multiple products" <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />i can certainly care and i will certainly do. you see, i meant taking out of the system something i don't like, and replace it with nothing. or, if i really want something, with anything that pleases my tastes.i could do that in OD&D. i could ignore the skill system given in the rules cyclopedia and run a very enjoyable game. i could pick up runequest skill system (or any skill system i happened to like and consider balanced) and hammer it on without spending hours on ends to think about how this skill might trigger an attack of opportunity if player X has feat Y. i also could do that in AD&D.in fct, i could do whatever i wanted, because it was my game, and the ruleset was open enough to accomodate my style of playing and yours, maybe with some additions or modifications that were not *necessarily* too complicate to make.not so in your examples. iron heroes doesn't like magical items. so they "fixed" the system assumption that you have to have a + x attack bonus at level Y by simply giving (from what i have read on these boards) a +x class bonus to the character. it's perfectly good game designing. and it is. but it's fixing the system. and it does so, incidentally, in a way that further disrupt my suspention of disbelief. ("so, the captain of the guard, who's been in the military for 20 years has a +1 class attack bonus and 20 hp. you started adventuring last year and have a + 5 class attack bonus and 50 hp. i guess you are *special*).now, before this escalate in another silly edition war, let me tell you one thing: i do appreciate that these are d20 boards, and i'm the minority. i do appreciate that there's nothing inherently Wrong with the d20 game design philosophy and that there are tons of people out there that know the system in and out so well that they can afford making significant changes in much less time that it would require me.what i am trying to say is that, whatever you think of the system, AD&D, *in my opinion and experience* managed to accomodate to a more diverse set of assumptions about the game, simply because, again *in my opinion and experience*, when some parts of the system clashed with what was needed at the game table, they could be easily amended or ignored.now, is there anything you can say, in all faith, that can invalidate my experience, opinions, and preferences? until now, it seems to me that you are just saying: "you're wrong, because i like 3e better". ok, fair enough. i think i got that to begin with. but that argument is not doing much to make me change my mind, if that's your goal. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />if i have misread you, or i explained myself in a way that still leads to misunderstandings, feel free to offer? ask for clarifications.ps: if you are about to say that OD&D and AD&D are simplistic systems, or that they are old dinosaurs, or that they are pretty much freeform rulesets, and that today's games are not built to please different styles of gaming, please don't.one example: GURPS. it's not simplistic, it's certainly not rule light (unless you want to just run the basic combat and create human characters with GURPS light, that is, and ignore rules like "how long should you dig to create a hole of X cubic feet of volume"), it's not a dinosaur (it had a new edition some years ago, and it's going ok, given that it never sold million of copies), and it's built not only to accomodate different styles of gaming, but different types of games, too.why do i not stop yapping and switch to GURPS? simple: i have no time nor desire to convert 20/30 year worth of game material that i have spend hundreds of dollars to buy into a completely different system. universal or not.</blockquote>

Verification