Anyone else moving away from D20?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Wow, that's rather bland of you. Feats are the biggest way to distinguish two characters who'd otherwise be indistiguishable; discount them at your peril.

indistinguishable in game terms for a lot of part it's correct. Two 10th level fighters in 1e have the same abilities for the most part, specialization and proficiencies are the main area where you will get differences. But I know Flexor and Amalrick were two fighters who were vastly different.

I guess we just roleplayed it more back then....

 

[mmadsen]

No ? Well I take that one back... When I looked at the RttTOEE and saw a fish monk I was stunned.

Know your heritage, Flexor! By the way, from the smiley in the original post, I couldn't tell just how aware you were of the irony. Now I know: not very.

 

[mmadsen]

I'm dead serious about this - as are my players: GURPS only *looks* heavy on numbers, but in play you really don't notice any of it.

I also depends heavily on how many optional rules you're using. Most people seem convinced that the only way to play GURPS is with the complexity/detail level dialed up to 11.

In truth, most combat is an attack roll against a fixed DC, followed by a defense roll against a fixed DC, followed by a damage roll minus armor. If you house-ruled a switch from 3d6 to 1d20, you wouldn't even have to add up the pips, and it could go even more quickly.

OTOH D&D3e: you have to constantly keep track of charges in various wands/rings/staffs/etc., people hate the spell-preparation stuff (more bookkeeping), tons of special abilities work on a x per day for y+z rounds principle (so you have to keep track of that too)...

And that's why a low-magic d20 can go very quickly and smoothly, where high-level, high-magic D&D might not.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

After playing in a (mostly) poor campaign for one year, then DMing for another year, I was ready to play anyhing just about....

One of the guys in my group mentioned Hell on Earth (HoE) and brought in the books. He was going to run a campaign this, but had to move away. However, beforehand he ran a couple games for us and we really enjoyed the system.

I know there is a d20 version of HoE, but it just doesn't feel right to us. HoE is pretty much a classless system with a pretty neat way of handling "XP" (the "Marshal" awards chips/bounty points).

So it looks like 3E/d20 will sit on the bookcases for about a year as we play HoE.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

I have to agree that 3e requires a lot of bookkeeping and supposedly "quick" calculations. It's especially bad for DM's who run for novice players, and have to help them make characters, run every combat, remember every modifier, etc... it's a huge chore.

Even something as simple as the dodge feat (no prerequisites, BTW), or the haste spell's bonus to AC, all the buffs, etc., ... trying to remember all that little stuff is very taxing when you're trying to run an adventure.

 

[Ace]

well, I've never played 1e - but GURPS I've played and run for years and found it *much* lighter on bookkeeping...

As have I. GURPS also isn't driven by leveling up or getting treasure pardigms.

That suits me better but as with anything YMMV

 

[barsoomcore]

On 3E's "tactical" systems (needing a grid and minis and all that):

I'm finding more and more I don't need a grid. It goes easier with some sort of visual reference but by and large we don't get the battlemat out every time there's a fight. If a guy runs by you you get an Attack of Opportunity. If you want to trip somebody you make opposed rolls. I'm getting more and more comfortable with the rules and finding everything moves much smoother the more I just relax and let it slide.

Sure, there's feats that can get all complicated and stuff. But in my experience, the players who take those WANT to be doing some crunchy work. And even then, something like Power Attack or Expertise -- it's just not that complicated.

What I really like about 3E is the way there's all these supplements of all different genres and styles -- and I can use anything I want from any of them. No fudging, no mussing. Drag and drop rules. I love it.

Oh, that, and the muckiness of it. 3E is just so muckable-about-in -- I house-rule like a madman and just never seem to really break the system. Like 1E -- the system's very forgiving of all sorts of abuse. So my druids get spells like sorcerers and my fighters don't get heavy armour and max dex bonusses are doubled and.... it's still all playable.

There's no such thing as a perfect system, obviously. But the next best thing is a system I can browbeat into MY idea of perfection. And 3E comes pretty close to that. I'm sticking around.

 

[Wormwood]

Oh, that, and the muckiness of it. 3E is just so muckable-about-in -- I house-rule like a madman and just never seem to really break the system.

I'm gonna definitely aggree with you here. 3e is *very* easy to tailor.

Our group spends a lot of time "under the hood", tinkering with some fairly fundimental and far-reaching 3e components, yet the system just keeps purring along.

That's pretty impressive.

 

[The Sigil]

Ye gads...

I hope my players never read this but here goes...

I have run two 3e campaigns so far. Both have been run on "Core Rules" with a very few minor additions on a case-by-case basis by myself.

First campaign - I spent tons of time lovingly detailing every monster, every NPC, and every treasure. It was completely balanced by the DMG - the PCs had exactly the amount of treasure and XP they "should." The group loved it.

Second campaign - I have absolutely zero prep time. 100% of opponents stats are made up "on the spot" (I pick an AC and BAB out of the air, maybe throw on some special ability that may or may not correspond to one found in the MM). Opponents' hit points are done on a "let 'em slug away at it until I feel the critter should drop" basis. Treasure is done entirely via Jamis Buck's generators on the fly. XP is handed out by feel with no real bearing on the CRs of the foes defeated (since I'm making up the foes, I figure I may as well make up the CRs). The PCs track the minutiae on each of their characters, but behind my DM's screen, I just have a few sheets of scratch paper that I use for tracking initiative in combat. I fudge Trap DCs. I fudge skill checks. Basically, I fudge everything. The group loves it.

And you know what, I bet they couldn't tell the difference without peeking at my notes.

That tells me how flexible the system is. If I can whip an entire campaign out of my arse and fudge it the whole way - and by knowing the system well enough that the ACs, Hp, and BAB "seem" about right - to the point where the players can't tell the difference, well, hey, that's a flexible system.

I personally prefer to be well-prepared, but I am continually amazed at how little preparation is REALLY needed. If you simply assume that an average creature's AC is 15 plus the PCs' level and give it a special ability or two with a Save DC of about 15 plus the PCs' level, you're in pretty good shape.

In fact, my rule of thumb is now:

A DC or AC of 12+PC level = easy, 15+PC level = normal, 18+PC level = hard, 21+PC level = near-impossible.

An attack/save bonus of PC level - 2 is easy, PC level+1 is normal, PC level +4 is hard, and PC level +7 is near-impossible.

Those two sentences have pretty much gotten me through four months of campaigning so far.

--The Sigil

 

[Davelozzi]

I haven't had any problems with d20 yet. D&D is going good and I'm dying to get a few Spycraft or Omega World sessions in.

Still, I am finding that with each passing day, my Alternity books call out to me a little more loudly from their place on my shelf. I had been toying with playing some d20 Star Wars for a while (the revised rules are great) but now I think that if I was going to take my game into orbit I'd prefer Alternity/Star*Drive.