d20 backlash??


log in or register to remove this ad

:confused: Well, you lost me on that one.
What's confusing? d20 dosen't need to have levels. I wouldn't say they're easy to remove, but thay can be removed and it's not as hard as it seems at first. (Basicly you just make saves, hitpoints, and BAB another skill and distribute skill points as x acordingly.)

I don't think any rules system can say it "simply doesn't work for genre x". How well, of course, is the real question.
I'm curious, do you think think d20 is unsuited for the horror genre? (Sence we're talking about CoC.) And, if so, what is it spicificly that you don't think works for horror?
 

Piratecat said:
Personally, I'd rather have the creativity funneled into the setting instead of the game mechanics.

I agree with you 100%. That's the main reason why we choose to use d20 instead of engineer our own system.
 

fanboy2000 said:
I wouldn't say they're easy to remove,
And there you go. You bothered to quote me why?
I'm curious, do you think think d20 is unsuited for the horror genre? (Sence we're talking about CoC.) And, if so, what is it spicificly that you don't think works for horror?
I think it's suitable. The reduction of the massive damage save, for example, was an easy mod for CoC and works well (I think).
 


arnwyn said:
You bothered to quote me why?

I bothered to quote you because I didn't know where you got lost. I asked a question about something you said, and I got an answer.

And see, you have a question about something I said, you quoted me, and now you have an answer.

Everybody wins.
 



mearls said:
The staggering majority of d20 stuff expects you to junk your current campaign, or at least radically change it, or even start playing a new RPG, to make use of it. Nobody aside from WotC does a good job of providing support for a DM who's running a standard Greyhawk game. Most d20 publishers assume that you want to add lots of detail to one small subsystem or you're interested in a new game.

Great point Mike. Another thing everyone needs to consider is the marketing dollars behind the bigger companies. There are a lot of products out that there now that are good solid books in their own right, but buried beneath all of the other d20 stuff. You can have the best product in the world, but if no one knows about it, it really doesn't do you any good.

We personally can't afford to take out ads in Dragon or Dungeon Magazine to promote Violet Dawn or any of our other upcoming products. We're just too small at this point. Our time and budget affords us the ability to release maybe one or two solid products per year. But that hurts us in distribution because no one wants to carry a company that does only one or two products a year. Secondly, it doesn't help us with name recognition.

It sucks, but there isn't any other alternative for us that I can see while trying to raise a family, work 50 hours a week, and run an RPG company on top of that all.
 

mossfoot said:
I'm a firm believer in "The Rules Should Fit The Setting". Chaosiums' Basic Role Playing system is perfect for Cthulhu... nothing else comes close I think. West End Games' d6 system suited Star Wars perfectly well.

Given that the BRP was, essentially, Chaosium's attempt at a universal system (long before d20), it's hard to see exactly why BRP is perfectly suited for CoC. After all, it was also perfectly suited (apparently) for both Runequest and Pendragon, and neither of those games are anything like CoC in mood or feel. The differences between those three games (and others, like the long-gone Ringworld) are about as great as the differences between the various d20 and OGL games that cover various genres. I'm not saying the BRP is bad - not at all. It's just that it's a great example of how a universal system can be well-suited for just about any genre, if preconceived notions on the part of potential gamers are dispensed with, and the core system is tweaked to fit a particular genre.
 

Remove ads

Top