D&D Settings but not D&D

[Doug McCrae]

Ravenloft is probably better outside of 3.5/4e.

I don't think any edition of D&D does horror well. The system requires lots and lots of fights to balance fighters against wizards, and you simply can't have that in horrror.

Even Clark Ashton Smith-style 'greedy treasure hunters getting their comeuppance' requires far fewer monsters than traditional D&D, and a slower pace. Lurking menace, not 5 goblins in a room.

Does D&D do anything well apart from D&D? I'm not sure that it does.

 

[Argyle King]

I've found Dark Sun to fit into GURPS 4th Edition very well. Depending upon which aspects of Eberron you want to highlight, I also find that it fits in GURPS very well.


For something which mimics D&D a little more, GURPS now also offers the Dungeon Fantasy line. GURPS Dungeon Fantasy

 

[Desdichado]

But alignment, cosmology, and creatures are not part of the rules and mechanics. They coexist with the rules system, but neither depends on the other.

I don't disagree with you, I'm just pointing out that I think with Planescape in particular, it begs the question, "why bother?" The "milieu" is so specifically D&D, why not use D&D rules? It could be done, certainly. It could even work. I certainly wouldn't put it anywhere near the top of my list of settings to convert to another system, though. I think I'd go with the apparent little consensus here that Dark Sun and Eberron make the more obvious candidates.

 

[VariSami]

Like people have mentioned, most of the conversion work has been done for me (I own both Manual of the Planes and Planar Handbook, and a lot of other good supplements). The factions are the only thing I need to personally attend to simply because I find their previous conversions to affiliations lacking. I've done the Athar, the Bleak Cabal and the Godsmen thus far (I did Doomguard but it was lost due to a failure with Chrome). Oh, besides the two books I mentioned earlier, what are the best supplements for Planescape in 3.x?

Oh, and I heard earlier today that the idea that Planescape be done without using D&D as the base might have been motivated by something said by the creators of Planescape: Torment. If I recall correctly, they have supposedly said that if they ever make a successor to the game, it will not follow D&D mechanics. Which the original one did only loosely anyway.

It's actually quite funny how Eberron is clearly thought of as the setting that best befits use with other sets of rules. Especially since it's the setting that was designed to accommodate everything 3.x (kind of like Planescape accommodated everything AD&D, I suppose). I haven't played it yet (though I own the Campaign Setting) but I see no clear gap between it and D&D 3.x. I've played Savage Worlds myself and that system has seemed a bit iffy, to be honest. Though I admit it's simple enough.

 

[Yora]

I don't disagree with you, I'm just pointing out that I think with Planescape in particular, it begs the question, "why bother?" The "milieu" is so specifically D&D, why not use D&D rules? It could be done, certainly. It could even work. I certainly wouldn't put it anywhere near the top of my list of settings to convert to another system, though. I think I'd go with the apparent little consensus here that Dark Sun and Eberron make the more obvious candidates.

I think the question applies to all settings. In Planescape, creatures unique to D&D play a very major role, so there would be a lot of work converting them to other systems.
While Eberron and Dark Sun probably require less of that, it's still quite substential. With Quori, Daelkyr, Warforged, Shifters, Changelings, Rakshasa, Inspired, Kalashtar, Dragonmarks, and Artificers, there is still considerable work to do.

The main reason to still do it would be "I don't like 3rd and 4th Edition and 2nd Edition is needlessly complicated". ^^

 

[S'mon]

Ravenloft is probably better outside of 3.5/4e. Horror gets diminished the more you use a battlemat (once you start throwing in 5' steps, the mood gets lost), and those versions of D&D work best with a Battlemat (I know some people say you can live without it under 3/4, but at that point one might as well use a rule set that does not rely on it).

I think all level-based systems and horror go together like fish and bicycles. Ravenloft would probably best suit a system like GURPS, BRP or (I guess) Chill. Possibly Unisystem, but I wasn't too impressed when I played a session of All Flesh Must Be Eaten. Level-based systems are great for "I'm Gandalf, You're Conan, We Fight Dracula", but are terrible for actually being _afraid_ of Dracula. I think the best systems for inculcating fear are the you-are-there Simulationist ones.

 

[S'mon]

I've played Savage Worlds myself and that system has seemed a bit iffy, to be honest. Though I admit it's simple enough.

I was just reading over my Explorer's Edition this morning - and yes, it does seem pretty iffy! I think for a certain sort of minis/battlegrid based light action movie pulp gaming, it's a good system. Attempts to treat it as a generic system, for eg the grim & gritty survival horror SW campaign I played in, are unwise.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Well, if you wanted to keep things fairly close to the AD&D chest, Castles & Crusades would provide a cleaner system that wouldn't require much -if any- conversion. On the opposite end of the spectrum, FATE's aspects and fate points would be fantastic for portraying the idea that belief is power.

For a laugh, maybe try Mutants & Masterminds.

 

[Desdichado]

It's actually quite funny how Eberron is clearly thought of as the setting that best befits use with other sets of rules. Especially since it's the setting that was designed to accommodate everything 3.x (kind of like Planescape accommodated everything AD&D, I suppose). I haven't played it yet (though I own the Campaign Setting) but I see no clear gap between it and D&D 3.x. I've played Savage Worlds myself and that system has seemed a bit iffy, to be honest. Though I admit it's simple enough.

I agree that that is kind of funny. Ironic, even. Despite the fact that Eberron was the only setting for the post 2e world designed specifically to be an official setting for the D&D rules, it doesn't seem to feel particularly D&Dish in many ways. This probably also explains the polarized response to it; some people really love it, and many really hate it. Among the haters, the fact that it "doesn't feel like D&D" seems to be a commonly repeated refrain.

That said; Savage Worlds if iffy? In what respect? That seems an odd blanket condemnation. I think it's in many ways less iffy than 3.5.

The main reason to still do it would be "I don't like 3rd and 4th Edition and 2nd Edition is needlessly complicated". ^^

The only reason, I'd think. But you've really got to love the setting and really dislike the mechanics to do that, I believe.

 

[VariSami]

Since some responses seem confusing, let me make this clear once again: I'm not looking for a system to take over D&D 3.x for this. I'm all for using D&D. I'm just interested in people's takes on the matter.

Oh, and Savage Worlds being iffy? Well, you could say that the dice mechanic seems a tad bit imbalanced. I haven't calculated the odds but you have a better chance to re-roll with low skill levels and the update of a die only adds +1 to your average roll. The flaws also seem quite unbalanced, and some descriptions for them are a bit odd in my opinion. Like if you're arrogant but a weenie, it adds up to being suicidal. You might feel that way about things other than your combat prowess. There were some other things I discussed with the GM the last time we played but I don't recall them at the moment. You could say it's just a feeling I've had when playing. It's enjoyable and quite fast-paced but there's just this nagging feeling of wrong.