d20 Hatred near you?

[Geoff Watson]

For example, I loved the show Firefly. One of the episodes (Out of Gas) dealt with how the captain was wounded pretty bad and was struggling to fix the ship so he would live. That was a great and dramatic episode and I think it is a good example of what I would like to see my RPG do for me.

d20 cannot do that. DND cannot do that. d20 Modern can't do that! Anything dealing with hit points, that I have seen, cannot do that. I have yet to see a system that accounts for levels of damage within a hit point system. Now, d20 or DND, might be able to do that if it is "patched" but the core rules cannot do it. Is this bad? Nope. Not at all. I am merely saying that, for me, I have now found something that DND can't do but it is something that I want the possibility of in my games. So, I don't use it anymore.
edg

There are several ways of doing a 'slow death' type of thing in D&D; eg: poison, disease, geas/quest, curses, etc.

You can do the 'dying but struggling' bit with the natural healing/stabilisation rules. It is possible to become stable, and then become concious, but still losing hit points hourly (assuming no healing is available).

D&D CAN do it.

It is really annoying when the anti-D&D-ers use outright lies to 'bash' D&D.

Geoff.

 

[woodelf]

That's a very good point. So even more product lines are out there that are not d20.

The reason I compiled the list was the fact that I got into a lot of discussions where people claimed that all that was produced was d20 and that d20 was killing creativity.

After I repeatedly asked for some sort of data to back that up, and never getting any data, I compiled the list.

So if anyone's got any data that'll prove me wrong, bring it on!

Sorry, most of my data is, likewise, anecdotal. Here's one piece of it: I've been going to GenCon every year since, um, '91? Anyway, every year, i make it a specific point to take the better part of a day just to do the dealer room, slow and methodical-like. I stop at every RPG booth, and talk to most of them. Even the ones that i suspect right from the get-go won't have anything to interest me. And, for the period from about '94 to '02, i even took notes. Specifically, i made notes of every new RPG i could find, focusing on those from small-press companies--not just the name, but a quick capsule summary of the rules and setting, and mini-review of same. A couple of years in tehre, i even wrote the whole thing up for UseNet (then i got burned out on the effort of doing it right, and busy with other projects, and the notes became once again just for me--plus, Ken Hite started doing pretty much the same thing).

Now, the trends: # of new games ["new" defined as "i haven't seen it at my FLGS yet"--and Pegasus is *very* good about getting in almost everything in the small-press RPG world] was pretty steady most of the way through the '90s--up and down from year to year, but similar numbers. Late '90s (as in '98 or maybe not 'til '99) was when there was a precipitous decline in the number of new games at GenCon. IIRC, '00 [it might have been '99--i don't have my notes handy] was the nadir, with so few new RPGs that i could've bought them all if they'd all been to my taste, and the year that i actually ran out of new things to buy at GenCon, and blew the rest of my money on used [usually, there're a few more-obscure used RPGs that i look for at GenCon, don't find them, and spend all my money on new stuff--we've got great used-RPG stores around here, plus i don't mind shopping online for that stuff]. In '01, there was a distinct dirth of new RPGs at GenCon. In '02, the numbers were back to about where they'd been in the mid-'90s, but more than half of the new games were D20 System. Ergo, the number of new not-D20-System RPGs was significantly lower than the number of new not-D&D RPGs in, say, '97. In '03, things were finally starting to diversify again, with as many or more new RPGs at GenCon than i'd seen in the mid-'90s, and a significantly smaller portion were D20 System than the year before. If the trend continues, this year will probably be the year that sees new non-D20 System games at GenCon returning to good levels, *plus* a whole bunch of new D20 System games--so more new games than ni the past.

All the way through, some of them were crap, some of them were pure genius, most were good. IMHO, more of the D20 System games were crap, or merely good, and the %age that were pure genius was lower. And not *because* they were D20 System. Rather, as someone else observed, there've been D&D-clone RPGs out there for years. Most of them have always been crap. Some of them were really just a cool idea or two, but "needed" an entire game built around them to make them go. Now, those same sorts of games actually *are* D&D-based (well, D20 System--same difference in this case), and some are just as crappy, while a few are less crappy, because they only invent their cool new idea, and just let the core D20 System handle the rest. And some of them just get turned into d20 System supplements, rather than building a new game (Elements of Magic instead of Ars Magica). Those who had a comprehensive vision for a truly new game (not just "D&D, only better" usually produced a pretty good game. Nowadays, some of those use D20 System. But many do not, because, well, they stem from a vision for a whole new game, not just tweaking an existing game, so often this vision includes a new system. However, a lot of really good, and some downright-awesome, new games *are* D20 System--more recently, this is probably because D20 System is part of the mental landscape, and thus gets incorprated into the evolution of the new game, but it could also come about because the new vision isn't about mechanics, or is vague enough in that area that it doesn't demand a specific system. I've never denied this. I love it--especially when someone takes a system i don't like and manages to make a game i nonetheless adore (Spycraft is an excellent example of this--and, heck, i don't even like the espionage genre, either, and i'm dying to play the game).

oh, another bit of anecdotal evidence: I wander into the FLGS on a pretty regular basis (and have for going on 20 yrs, since i lived 150mi away, and it was a special treat when i came to Madison). Pegasus has always been great about stocking small-press stuff. There was no dearth of new, interesting stuff in the '90s. It was '00-'02 where there was a significant drop in new stuff, in my impression. And it was '02-'03 where "all" the new stuff was D20 System. In the last 6mo-1yr, it has finally gotten back to the point where i can walk in and almost always see something new and non-D20 System. And, just for the record, there's a fair bit of non-D20 System chaff out there, too. I'm hardly a "D20 System bad, others good" sort of person. I've cringed at quite a few games recently, and several of them weren't D20 System.

Because the critics most often don't look at what's being done with the games or the supplements. They see the "d20" logo and tell themselves "this is bad because it's d20. I will never read this, that's how bad it is!"

And when I ask for data to back up the ideas that d20 is destroying the market and creativity, I never get any. Not once have I got any hard data to back up the notion that d20 has destroyed the market for non-d20 games, or that it has stifled creativity within the hobby.

I hope i haven't come across as saying that [the creativity-destroying part]. I fear that D20 System may cut down on creativity in the long run, but mostly i'm just worried that it provides an incentive towards compatibility--it's not D20 System that's hard on creativity, it's D&D not participating in the feedback loop of open-content development that i see as the potential obstacle to creative evolution. D20 System doesn't stifle creativity, it promotes it. It makes it even easier to take an idea and evolve it, and then evolve it some more. What might hinder this feedback is the desire to be seen as compatible with D&D of the current edition. Since WotC isn't using the cool ideas out there, and letting them evolve D&D, you have to choose between using your Cool New Idea and remaining compatible with D&D. Now, in the long run, this'll probably not be a problem--either D20 System will establish a sufficient independent identity that D&D compatibility is no longer an issue, or D&D will start to incorporate OGC advancements. I think we're seeing the former start to happen, with Mongoose's "OGL" games leading the way.

And keep in mind, i am most definitely *not* part of the "i won't look at it 'cause it's D20 System" crowd. Right from the start, i've been looking at D20 System products same as any other. And i've been buying D20 System products just as much as non-. However, it wasn't until Dynasties & Demagogues came out that a D20 System product was sufficiently compelling for me to buy it. Despite how much i love Nyambe, Spycraft, M&MM, and some other D20 System products, i didn't love any of them enough for them to make it to the top of my "to buy" list--there was always something "better" out there, and it was always non-D20. [For anyone who's keeping score, my 2nd D20 System purchase was Arcana Unearthed--i loved playing D&D, but gave up on it for mechanical reasons a decade ago; D&D3E did nothing to re-ignite my passion for D&D, but AU made me want to play D&D again. So my next mini-campaign will be D&D, and i'll be using AU, the Net Book of Feats, and Book of Distinctions & Drawbacks for the rules.]

IOW, i don't say "D20 System--no point in looking 'cause i won't like it". Rather, I've consistently looked at D20 System products, and have consistently been underwhelmed. I've been dissatisfied with literally hundreds of products over the course of, what, 4 years now, and a great many of them have the same logo on the cover--is it *really* that unreasonable to conclude that there's a connection between that logo and my dissatisfaction? Don't get me wrong, there're some really great D20 System products out there. But, setting system compatibility aside, very few of them are "best". M&MM is one of the best D20 System games out there to date, with some really great innovations, and is probably the best D20 System supers game out there, and i like supers RPGs. But what's it got over Champions/Hero 4th, TMNT, Godsend Agenda, Heroes Unlimited, Marvel Universe, or DC Heroes? [OK, trick question: the main advantage it has over Heroes Unlimited is that it doesn't suck. But for the rest of those?] To me, it doesn't matter if it's better than Silver Age Sentinels D20, Four Colors to Fantasy, The Foundation, and Deeds Not Words (and i'm not convinced it actually is better than all of those; but for sake of argument), because my scope is a lot bigger than D20 System. You wanna sell me on a product, you need to be the best product in that niche to date--not just the best D20 System product. Spycraft is an excellent example of this--it might be the best action/espionage RPG i've ever read (somehow, MS&PE, Top Secret, and James Bond 007 never really 'clicked' with me) [only reason i don't have a copy is that my funds are limited, and a friend has one so i can just borrow it].

In short, i most definitely do look at what's being done with D20 System. And i see some pretty god stuff, along with a lot of crap. But most of the "pretty good stuff" that is new to D20 System is old to RPGs. Frex, Unearthed Arcana, has a lot of "new" stuff in it. However, when i read through it, there was almost noting i hadn't seen before. To take a specific example: recharge magic. Seems well-done, but i've got at least a dozen RPGs on my shelves already that do the same thing, in some cases better (and in some cases worse). It just doesn't matter to me that it's new to D&D, because my scope is a lot bigger than that--if i wanted to play a game like that, i've got a lot of choices, and even if i specifically want that option in my D&D game, i can just grab a system like that that i already have (such as Ars Magica, which has the added bonus of compatible number ranges).

OK, enough for one post.

 

[Gundark]

well if you have ever been to the iron kingdoms forums they love to bash the d20 system....kind of annoying....I can't stand d20 haters on d20 boards.....oh and yes DEATH TO ICE TEA!!!!!!!! grrrrr my hate of ice teasknow no limit

 

[woodelf]

Right, but when I buy a novel, I'm investing purely in "ideas". One hundred percent of the word count is ideas. When I buy an RPG supplement, I'm investing a considerable amount in the game stats in that supplement. That is, some percentage of the word count is going to be statistics which, if they're meant for some system I'm not going to use, are useless to me as anything other than a gauge of relative ability. Which I probably got from the novel anyway. Unless, of course, I'm running a d20-based game and purchasing a d20-based supplement, in which case regardless of the actual system most of the game stats will be useful for me.

"regardless of the actual system"?? You just said it's a D20 System game and D20 System supplement--they're the same system*; of course the game stats are mostly useful.

As for unfamiliar stats vice fiction: no, they're not equivalent. In general, the novel might tell you that A is stronger than B--though it might not, depending on the plot and writing style. Game stats will not only tell you that A is stronger than B, but that A is 60% stronger than B--easily and accurately translated into your game system of choice. For gaming, you often need a fair bit of info that just doesn't show up in typical fiction (supers being the most notable exception). OTOH, you don't necessarily need game stats to provide that info--things like The Dragonlovers Guide to Pern, The World of the Dark Crystal, and the Star Wars Technical Manual all provide the level of detail and precision an RPG expects, without any actual game stats. So it's perfectly possible to write an actual RPG supplement with sufficient detail but without game stats. And if you use some game stats, they can still be sufficiently generic to translate to the system of your choice--take a look at the Citybook series for an excellent example.

A supplement designed for a system that is TOO different will be of lesser value, all other things being equal, than either a supplement designed for a similar system, or some product entirely devoid of game stats.

On the one hand i agree. But my whole point is that there are *very* few RPGs out there that are "too different" from one another, and thus become of lesser value. Off the top of my head, the only ones that come to mind as being sufficiently different from D&D3E to potentially present a diminished value are Everway, Over the Edge, Psychosis, Nobilis, Heaven & Earth, Story Engine ,Universalis, Epiphany, Amber DRP, & maybe Castle Falkenstein. Give me a supplement for pretty much any other RPG out there, and i'll get "full value" out of it for my D&D game (or my W:tA game, or my Star Wars [D6] game, or...).

And i agree with you that "incompatible" stats are worse than no stats. Which is precisely *why* i'd rather see a generic RPG supplement than a D20 System RPG supplement--the generic supplement is useful to the D20 System player and every other RPer out there. The D20 System supplement is most useful to the D20 System player. To be clear--it's not that the other can't use it, and it's not inherent to D20 System. It's the way most are written, and i have the same problem with some GURPS supplements. The more crunch there is, the trickier it becomes to extract the content. If you give me a paragraph quantifyinga character's abilities with some precision, i can put her into whatever game a want, with or without statting her up, with no problem. If you give me the same character as a statblock, i can reflect the character only to the degree that i'm familiar with the system the statblock is done in--the more the character is conveyed numerically, and the less narratively, the less accurate translating becomes.

But, and here's the important part: this is true whether they use the same system, or different systems. Most RPG supplements make assumptions of setting, playstyle, power level, magic, and/or other elements that make them less than fully-compatible with one another. This goes as much for D20 System products as non-. IME, to use almost *any* RPG supplement in a game, i have to tweak it. And i don't have to tweak it any less just because it happens to use the same system. So, if no matter what, i'm gonna have to make adjustments, it may as well have the maximal useful content (narrative) and as little content that i'll have to rewrite (crunch) as possible. Now, i'll grant that this is partly a playstyle issue, and partly a cognitive issue (some people probably "digest" crunch better than fluff). But i also claim that it's partly a matter of belief: if you believe that it is "difficult" to use content with gamestats for one system in a game using a different system, you'll focus on the difficulty; if you believe that it is "easy" to use content with the same system, you'll think of it as easy even if you have to put in just as much effort for your particular campaign. And since i think it's partly a matter of self-fulfilling prophecy, i decry anything that propagates the myth [IMHO] that RPG systems are sufficiently divergent to hinder cross-compatibility.

* And i'll stick by that until someone actually releases a D20 System product that is sufficiently derivative/evolved to *not* be compatible.

 

[woodelf]

Well, surely an instable market is preferably to a stably-declining market? I mean, if last year you were starving to death and this year your diet changes every day, you're still better off, right? Or at least if you're going to complain about that, don't expect much sympathy.

I'm not convinced it was stably-declining. I think it was mildly unstable, and not gettnig bigger, but not getting smaller, either. I think that now it's very unstable, and bigger--so if it implodes, it'll do so much more badlier(TM).

Boo frickin hoo. So things are tougher. The market's gotten more competitive. This is a GOOD thing. Why should RPG publishers be getting a free ride? It's a tough industry and only smart companies that build a reputation for good products, manage their businesses intelligently, market their products agressively and learn to finangle the distribution end of things are going to survive. Good. I'm glad of that.

I'm not talking about the market getting tougher. I'm talking about the accellerated cycle of the market. Part of the problem is that it doesn't make RPG products better, it makes them worse. Look at it like this:
Old market:
a good product will sell, say, a thousand units a month for 18 months
a bad product will sell a thousand units the first month, and then maybe another thousand, total, and take a long time to do that
New market:
a good product will sell two thousand units the first month, a thousand units the 2nd, 500 the 3rd, and another 500 total over the next 9mo
a bad product will sell two thousand units the first month, and then essentially zero after that.
[all numbers invented to make the point]

Now in the old market there's a huge incentive to make a good product--it'll sell a *lot* more, and you'll probabyl take a bath if it's crap. In the new market, total lifetime sales (and thus printruns) are small enough, and initial sales are brisk enough, that even if you make something awesome you won't get that much more return, and if you make something craptastic you'll probably at least break even. I've exaggerated to make a point (at least, i hope i have--i'm not privy to detailed sales numbers for anyone, but have heard quite a few ballpark figures from RPG company owners), but the basic idea is sound: when sales are booming and products die off so fast that they really only sell when new anyway, the difference in sales performance between good products and bad goes down, because it's precisely exposure to the product that helsp drive or kill later sales--a lot of the right-when-it-comes-out sales are to people that won't be radically influenced by the quality of the product because their decision to buy (or not) isn't based on the product's reputation (because it doesn't have one yet).

For another example of this, look at movie boxoffice totals: crap and genius alike can have really awesome opening weekends. Where you see the money reflect the quality of the film is in staying power.

And, just for the record, my belief system is such that i look at all this stuff from the standpointo f the consumer. If i say something is bad, it's because i think it's bad for the consumer (or general public)--i don't care about the companies. This is not to say that i can't be wrong, but i'm certainly not wrong because i believe in coddling the producers.

Your data for this is? Let's consider Privateer Press -- surely you're not going to suggest that they are ramping up their production schedules; how far behind is the IK Campaign Guide now? Two years? So that's two data points (assuming yours IS a data point; do you have a source for that information?) which directly contradict one another.

Data point for D&D3.5E being pushed up: Monte Cook, and i think possibly Skip Williams and Ryan Dancey (i'm not sure on my recollection of either of the last two) said that they'd planned from before the release of D&D3E to release a revision in about 5 years, based on their projections of sales. And Ryan has mentioned that initial sales [of D&D3E] were higher than expected.

And the fact that one small company, which is probably having trouble making ends meet, is behind on its production schedule isn't a data point at all. Instead, look at the release schedules of somebody like Mongoose, which is doing reasonably well, and probably has the cash flow to print a product more or less as soon as its finished.

What we're seeing in RPGs IS as a result of d20, sure, but it's by no means evidence that d20 is bad for the industry. It's a normal "bubble" reaction to sudden market expansion. It's now settling out and post-bubble times are always hard for people who were making money without actually being very good. Or people who didn't structure their business with an eye for the rainy day. d20 brought a big influx of cash into the RPG market and for a while just about anyone could grab a piece of it.

Unless you were producing non-d20 System products, according to a lot of such producers who couldn't get distributors to touch their stuff.

Not so easy now. And of course, D&D being the center of the industry, anything that effects it effects everything else to some degree. Oh well. You don't want to deal with Dungeons and Dragons, don't publish RPGs.

 

[woodelf]

All I have besides this is anecdotal evidence of myself and my friends. A good chunk of them were drawn back to the hobby becuase of d20, and now spend a good chunk of change on gaming products (of various systems) every month.

And i'll admit that my impressions are certainly colored by my participation in the GPA (where most of the vocal posters on the mailing list seem to be non-D20 System companies) and my personal experiences:

I have not, personally, met a single RPer who was "brought back" by D&D3E or D20 System. Every gamer that i personally know was going strong before D20 System. Every gamer i personally know who is playing D&D3E was playing AD&D2 right up until the release of 3E. I also don't know anybody who left gaming "because of " AD&D2--they all simply went to other RPGs. And of those i know who'd given up D&D during the AD&D2 era, i don't think any of them have come back to D&D during the D20 System era. Moreover, i'm starting to see people burn out on D20 System. Just in the last 6mo or so, i've seen several die-hard D20 System-loving gamers decide they're sick of it (and they've said as much--i'm not just inferring). Most of them have simply gone to other RPGs, but a few of them have stopped gaming. Now, some of these are just taking a breather, and they'll be gaming again in a few weeks or months--and maybe even playing D20 System, despite their claims. But some of them haven't gamed for, oh, a year or more now, and have turned down repeated opportunities to do so. So, i haven't seen any 1st-hand evidence that D20 System or D&D3E brought back lapsed gamers or created new gamers, and i have seen 1st-hand evidence that both have driven away gamers (admittedly, in very small numbers). Oh, and i've been creating new gamers right along, for 20 years now, at a pretty steady rate. Some portion of those who try out RPGs don't care for them, or can't afford the time, and never get hooked. But the portion that does seems to vary somewhat with system: the crunchier the system, the smaller the %age of those who're hooked. And i don't think it's purely coincidental, because i've had a fair number of people who were interested in RPGs conceptually but then scared off by the complexity [of something like AD&D2 or D&D3E]--i've never had someone interested in RPGs and then give up on them because their first exposure was too wishy-washy [such as Everway or Dread]. And i've met a fair number of people who like RPing but think they don't like RPGs, again because of the complexity of the only RPGs they've been exposed to (usually D20 System of some flavor, but sometimes Storyteller/WoD)--once i give them a shot at something a lot less crunchy, they love them.

To be clear, i'm not disputing the claim that there has been i significant influx of RPG buyers in the last 4 years--not only have i seen it, but i know someone's keeping all those companies afloat, and the FLGS (and it's two relatively-new-yet-apparently-healthy competitors). But i do question the notion that all those new buyers are also new players--i think a lot of them were playing already, just not buying--or that a lot of them are "returning" players--as i've said, my observation is that those who gave up RPGs were unfazed by D20 System.

Now, the question of spending is an interesting one. I really have no idea. I suspect that those who play D&D3E [among my friends/acquaintances] *do* spend more on RPGs than those who play other RPGs, and more than those who played AD&D2, back in the day. But i'm not actually sure of this, and of those i know the spending habits for, myself and one friend buy tons of RPG stuff, very little of it D20 System, and always have; two friends buy tons of D&D stuff, and always have (AD&D2, then D&D3E); and most of the rest are the sorts that might own a book or three, total--but maybe that's become a book or five--i just don't know.

 

[woodelf]

Is it? I remember times when the situation was worse than this. Like 1996, when rpg's just ablut disappeared as a hobby*.

Yep. I actually agree that things are pretty good now. Thankfully, my worst fears of the effects of D20 System haven't yet come to pass. The short-term effects were bad (IMHO, 2001 was a heck of a lot worse for RPGs than '96), the middle-term effects appear to be shaking out as mostly-good; i hope i'm equally wrong about the long-term effects [as i appear to have been about the middle-term effects].

And when I look at what's coming out, I see a lot of creativity and offerings from non-d20 companies (as well as new editions). Just look at what is talked about on the net (some might be d20/OGL, please correct me if that is the case):

1492: Conquista del Mágico (FFE)
A Game of Thrones (GOO)
Amber Diceless Roleplaying (GOO)
A/State (Contested Ground)
Aces&Eights (KenzerCo)
Army of Darkness (Eden)
Ars Magica 5.0 (Atlas)
BESM 3.0 (GOO)
Beyond Human (Eden)
Beyond the Supernatural™ 2.0 (Palladium)
Call of Cthulhu 6.0 (Chaosium)
Capcom World Tournament (Living Room)
Chill 3 (Otherworld)
Conspiracy X 2.0 (Eden)
Creation A.D. (Key 20)
Cthulhu Dark Ages (Chaosium)
Cthulhutech (EOS)
Cyberpunk v3 (Talsorian)
d6 2.0 (WEG)
Dead Inside (Atomic Sock Monkey Press)
Deadlands Reloaded
Dead of Night: the Little Book of Horrors (Steampower)
Deryni Adventure Game (Grey Ghost)
Dominion: Modern Feudal Roleplaying (Wildside Press)
Dragon Fist (GRR)
Eldritch Ass Kicking (Key 20)
eNigma (Intiative)
Eon 3.0 (NeoGames)
Fudge New Edition (Grey Ghost)
Girl Genius (SJG)
Ghosts of Albion (Eden)
Gunslingers: Wild West Action! (Gold Rush)
GURPS 4.0 (SJG)
JAGS 2.0 (JAGS)
Justifiers OMEGA (Key 20)
Lejendary Adventures (Troll Lord)
Mythic Russia (Firebird)
Modern Myths (Key 20)
Nebuleon (HinterWelt)
Paranoia XP (Mongoose)
Phobia (NeoGames)
Splicers RPG (Palladium)
Tekumel: Empire of the Petal Throne RPG (GOO)
TORG 2.0 (WEG)
Tribe 8 2.0 (DP9)
Weapons of the Gods (EOS)
Wild Talents (Arc Dream)
World of Darkness 2.0 (WW)
Wraeththu (Immanion Press)
Wyrd is Bond (Key 20)

I believe that 1492 is D20 System. As for the rest of the list: if you're accepting my premise that innovation in RPG mechanics is good, then trying to refute the claim that it's not occurring really requires showing new game systems. Of those above, 1 is essentially a reprint (of something that was never out of print to begin with); 13 are new editions with, AFAIK, no radical mechanical changes; and 6 or 7 use existing systems (i'm gonna guess the Palladium ones will, too, but i wouldn't know). So, in terms of evidence of RPG mechanical innovation, that list of 50 becomes a list of 30 or fewer. Still, i'll grant you, a pretty decent list. And you missed a lot (our own Four Colors al Fresco and Dread, for example ). Though, on the gripping hand, Cyberpunk v.3 is hardly the only one on the list that may or may not ever actually exist.

50 new/revised non d20 games in the pipeline (of course a few, I think 3 or 4, are not english). To me that is an indication that the non-d20 side of things is still out there doing stuff, and that they are trusting the market to buy their games. Why else put anything out?

And the continued--or possibly resurging--strength of Hero System and GURPS and BESM also point to this. I don't question that the RPG market has a lot of innovation right now. And some of it is directly attributable to D20 System--both innovative D20 System games, and people overreacting against D20 System. Nonetheless, i suspect that we'd have even *more* innovation if D20 System didn't exist (or, more specifically, if the market-warping muscle of the D&D trademark weren't tied to a specific instantiation of the D20 System).

Actually, i think the real tragedy of this is the possibility of the bubble bursting. Only now, after around 4 years, do i finally see D20 System really producing the surge of innovation that open-content development promises. And it's happening at about the same time that i'm starting to hear from retailers, publishers, and gamers that they're getting sick of D20 System. It'd be a horrible shame if the bubble actual burst, just as D20 System was really starting to flower, because it took the producers so long to get around to branching away from D&D (as a group--obviously there were a few people doing it right from the start). Not to mention the possibility of a burst right now taking a fair number of producers, distributors, and retailers with it, much as the bursting of the CCG bubble did.

 

[woodelf]

For example, I loved the show Firefly. One of the episodes (Out of Gas) dealt with how the captain was wounded pretty bad and was struggling to fix the ship so he would live. That was a great and dramatic episode and I think it is a good example of what I would like to see my RPG do for me.

d20 cannot do that. DND cannot do that. d20 Modern can't do that! Anything dealing with hit points, that I have seen, cannot do that. I have yet to see a system that accounts for levels of damage within a hit point system. Now, d20 or DND, might be able to do that if it is "patched" but the core rules cannot do it.

BTW, in addition to working on rules that can model that [within D&D] myself, i just gave OGL Ancients a look, and they seem to have been reading th same Dragon magazine i was in the mid-'80s, because they have a wound system that'll handle that pretty well within the D20 System paradigm (and while still maintaining hit points).

 

[Liquidsabre]

I have not, personally, met a single RPer who was "brought back" by D&D3E or D20 System. Every gamer that i personally know was going strong before D20 System. Every gamer i personally know who is playing D&D3E was playing AD&D2 right up until the release of 3E. I also don't know anybody who left gaming "because of " AD&D2--they all simply went to other RPGs.

That's interesting. I left gaming because of the old highschool group of AD&D players had had enough, and as an unfortunate result spent the next 4-5 years in college languishing with out any sort of gaming habit.

Then 3E came out, the new PHB hit the stores. Myself and our entire gaming group coalesced over the remaining part of the year, each and everyone of us having gamed in the past at some point and most having dropped gaming right around the AD&D time frame. My current group still consists of 100% gamers that stopped gaming with AD&D and started when 3e came out. I don't think it's entirely proper allowing our personal experiences to alter a perceptions to the point of generalizations however.

But i do question the notion that all those new buyers are also new players--i think a lot of them were playing already, just not buying--or that a lot of them are "returning" players--as i've said, my observation is that those who gave up RPGs were unfazed by D20 System.

Does this include on the "new" young folk that have recently entered the gaming arena thanks to D&D3e and the numerous d20 products?

Now, the question of spending is an interesting one. I really have no idea. I suspect that those who play D&D3E [among my friends/acquaintances] *do* spend more on RPGs than those who play other RPGs, and more than those who played AD&D2, back in the day. But i'm not actually sure of this, and of those i know the spending habits for, myself and one friend buy tons of RPG stuff, very little of it D20 System, and always have; two friends buy tons of D&D stuff, and always have (AD&D2, then D&D3E); and most of the rest are the sorts that might own a book or three, total--but maybe that's become a book or five--i just don't know.

this is quite the interesting topic. I completely agree that it is hard to tell. I have friends who run/play paladium games and have spent quite alot on all the books, I also have spent quite the sum in the past of WoD game books as well. With d20 books I tend to pick and choose among them since som nay hardbound books (at equally weighty prices) keep coming out. But then again with pre-orders and online discounts these can be had at quite cheap price as well due to their availability.

 

[SSquirrel]

Sorry, most of my data is, likewise, anecdotal. Here's one piece of it: I've been going to GenCon every year since, um, '91? Anyway, every year, i make it a specific point to take the better part of a day just to do the dealer room, slow and methodical-like. I stop at every RPG booth, and talk to most of them. Even the ones that i suspect right from the get-go won't have anything to interest me. And, for the period from about '94 to '02, i even took notes.

Now, the trends: # of new games ["new" defined as "i haven't seen it at my FLGS yet"--and Pegasus is *very* good about getting in almost everything in the small-press RPG world] was pretty steady most of the way through the '90s--up and down from year to year, but similar numbers. Late '90s (as in '98 or maybe not 'til '99) was when there was a precipitous decline in the number of new games at GenCon. IIRC, '00 [it might have been '99--i don't have my notes handy] was the nadir, with so few new RPGs that i could've bought them all if they'd all been to my taste, and the year that i actually ran out of new things to buy at GenCon, and blew the rest of my money on used [usually, there're a few more-obscure used RPGs that i look for at GenCon, don't find them, and spend all my money on new stuff--we've got great used-RPG stores around here, plus i don't mind shopping online for that stuff]. In '01, there was a distinct dirth of new RPGs at GenCon. In '02, the numbers were back to about where they'd been in the mid-'90s, but more than half of the new games were D20 System. Ergo, the number of new not-D20-System RPGs was significantly lower than the number of new not-D&D RPGs in, say, '97. In '03, things were finally starting to diversify again, with as many or more new RPGs at GenCon than i'd seen in the mid-'90s, and a significantly smaller portion were D20 System than the year before. If the trend continues, this year will probably be the year that sees new non-D20 System games at GenCon returning to good levels, *plus* a whole bunch of new D20 System games--so more new games than ni the past.

My take on no one having new games in 2000. Like the big Hollywood blockbuster, no one wanted to go up against 3E. debut your game a month on either side and have people actually show interest in it and not get swallowed in the hysterical hype of GenCon and the actual appearance of a new version of D&D. Bet when 2E was released (maybe even 2.5) if they debuted at GenCon people avoided timing releases for the same period.

What you saw in 01-03 was the bandwagon and people falling off of it. Some companies were staunchly against it the whole time, but many said hey why not and jumped on the d20 wagon. Many crap games sold that might not have even managed to make it to production if it wasn't for the fact that they could ride on d20 coat tails.

I know there's tons and tons of systems out there, but eventually you look at enough sytems and say "oh yeah that looks like so and so, cmon think up something NEW" which is a very odd thing. WHY did we think for so long that we need to havea new system all the time? Oh yeah, we'd get sued if we used anotehr company's system.

Now what you're seeing is people who take the time (usually) with their products, and really look thru the SRD and see exactly what they really need for their game and how it needs to be tweaked to fit their world. Conan and Midnight aren't my cup of tea, but they fit their setting perfectly. Mutants & Masterminds is amazingly cool. and I've heard only good things of Spycraft as well (v2.0 coming soon). Arcana Unearthed has lit a real fire up under me and that is exactly what I've come to expect from Monte as he has been producing quality work for a long time now. The shakeout was bound to come eventually and it is happening as it SHOULD. It's been expected for awhile and game companies really have to make sure they are putting out quality products that are well balanced, good looking and interesting. The boring look of everything produced by Fantasy Flight is an instant "no thanks" to me. heck, Midnight looks quite nice artwise and such, but like I said the setting isn't me really.

All the way through, some of them were crap, some of them were pure genius, most were good. IMHO, more of the D20 System games were crap, or merely good, and the %age that were pure genius was lower. And not *because* they were D20 System. Rather, as someone else observed, there've been D&D-clone RPGs out there for years. Most of them have always been crap. Some of them were really just a cool idea or two, but "needed" an entire game built around them to make them go. Now, those same sorts of games actually *are* D&D-based (well, D20 System--same difference in this case), and some are just as crappy, while a few are less crappy, because they only invent their cool new idea, and just let the core D20 System handle the rest. And some of them just get turned into d20 System supplements, rather than building a new game (Elements of Magic instead of Ars Magica). Those who had a comprehensive vision for a truly new game (not just "D&D, only better" usually produced a pretty good game.

Now personally I think that any game that needs an entirely new system just to make the 1 or 2 core ideas work has something wrong with it. yes I seriously doubt you would see things like Over the Edge d20, but cmon. Something like Palladium would be pretty easy to do but Simbieda is SO anti-d20 its not even funny.

I mean yes you MAY be sitting on the best thing since sliced bread, but is this system you're spending time working on going to be as fully thought out as it should be? Will you forget to handle X Y and Z? The beauty of the d20 system is that you can take as much or as little as you want. There have always been and will ALWAYS be crap games that come out. Mark Rosewater (one of the head Magic:the Gathering guys) is of the opinion that we really need bad Magic cards to know the good cards. If everything were Hypnotic Specter level of cool, we wouldn't know which were really "best" for different things really. Apply the same logic to RPGs.

Nowadays, some of those use D20 System. But many do not, because, well, they stem from a vision for a whole new game, not just tweaking an existing game, so often this vision includes a new system. However, a lot of really good, and some downright-awesome, new games *are* D20 System--more recently, this is probably because D20 System is part of the mental landscape, and thus gets incorprated into the evolution of the new game, but it could also come about because the new vision isn't about mechanics, or is vague enough in that area that it doesn't demand a specific system. I've never denied this. I love it--especially when someone takes a system i don't like and manages to make a game i nonetheless adore (Spycraft is an excellent example of this--and, heck, i don't even like the espionage genre, either, and i'm dying to play the game).

oh, another bit of anecdotal evidence: I wander into the FLGS on a pretty regular basis (and have for going on 20 yrs, since i lived 150mi away, and it was a special treat when i came to Madison). Pegasus has always been great about stocking small-press stuff. There was no dearth of new, interesting stuff in the '90s. It was '00-'02 where there was a significant drop in new stuff, in my impression. And it was '02-'03 where "all" the new stuff was D20 System. In the last 6mo-1yr, it has finally gotten back to the point where i can walk in and almost always see something new and non-D20 System. And, just for the record, there's a fair bit of non-D20 System chaff out there, too. I'm hardly a "D20 System bad, others good" sort of person. I've cringed at quite a few games recently, and several of them weren't D20 System.

As stated, its my opinion that sometimes the need for a new system is more ego stroking than actual need. You are finally seeing more people experiment with the d20 system and create things like Spycraft, AU and M&M or Midnight and Conan and this is GOOD. It was also bound to happen. I'm glad that there's great stores in Madison...I just wish that all the gaming stores in Iowa City and Cedar Rapids IA didn't close within a year of each other. Nearest game stores anymore are in Davenport, Des Moines and Ames. I think we'll see the transition of more of the market to the internet and pdfs specifically wwhich is also a good move. Allows for more profit and you can use some of that profit on advertising on gaming sites.

I hope i haven't come across as saying that [the creativity-destroying part]. I fear that D20 System may cut down on creativity in the long run, but mostly i'm just worried that it provides an incentive towards compatibility--it's not D20 System that's hard on creativity, it's D&D not participating in the feedback loop of open-content development that i see as the potential obstacle to creative evolution. D20 System doesn't stifle creativity, it promotes it. It makes it even easier to take an idea and evolve it, and then evolve it some more. What might hinder this feedback is the desire to be seen as compatible with D&D of the current edition. Since WotC isn't using the cool ideas out there, and letting them evolve D&D, you have to choose between using your Cool New Idea and remaining compatible with D&D. Now, in the long run, this'll probably not be a problem--either D20 System will establish a sufficient independent identity that D&D compatibility is no longer an issue, or D&D will start to incorporate OGC advancements. I think we're seeing the former start to happen, with Mongoose's "OGL" games leading the way.

d20 should encourage creativity and I think it does in general, but it also lets people feel lax about working on the rest of the things. Like keeping spells in the skill examples that aren't even in your game system. Compatability with the PHB is only needed if your product has the phrase "must use the PHB" or however they phrase it exactly. If your game is actually OGL not d20, as soon as someone familiar with d20 opens it up its obvious what system its for. Look at the class blocks for example. I think this is another myth that will fall by the wayside as well, but it may take another year or so.

But, setting system compatibility aside, very few of them are "best". M&MM is one of the best D20 System games out there to date, with some really great innovations, and is probably the best D20 System supers game out there, and i like supers RPGs. But what's it got over Champions/Hero 4th, TMNT, Godsend Agenda, Heroes Unlimited, Marvel Universe, or DC Heroes? [OK, trick question: the main advantage it has over Heroes Unlimited is that it doesn't suck. But for the rest of those?] To me, it doesn't matter if it's better than Silver Age Sentinels D20, Four Colors to Fantasy, The Foundation, and Deeds Not Words (and i'm not convinced it actually is better than all of those; but for sake of argument), because my scope is a lot bigger than D20 System. You wanna sell me on a product, you need to be the best product in that niche to date--not just the best D20 System product. Spycraft is an excellent example of this--it might be the best action/espionage RPG i've ever read (somehow, MS&PE, Top Secret, and James Bond 007 never really 'clicked' with me) [only reason i don't have a copy is that my funds are limited, and a friend has one so i can just borrow it].
(In UA) To take a specific example: recharge magic. Seems well-done, but i've got at least a dozen RPGs on my shelves already that do the same thing, in some cases better (and in some cases worse). It just doesn't matter to me that it's new to D&D, because my scope is a lot bigger than that--if i wanted to play a game like that, i've got a lot of choices, and even if i specifically want that option in my D&D game, i can just grab a system like that that i already have (such as Ars Magica, which has the added bonus of compatible number ranges).

Well taht depends on what kind of game you're wanting to run. If you already have some stuff right out of d20 that you know you want to include and there's more of it you want than what is in Ars Magica, I wouldn't use Ars Magica and convert a bunch more stuff...I'd use d20. Much simpler. Choosing the system i usually what I do FIRST and then root thru other books for ideas, not the other way around.

I haven't played nearly all the supers games on the market (TMNT/Heroes Unlimited/Aberrant are probably the only ones played, more have been read) but from all my reading I've liked the implementation of Aberrant the best. Simple system taht I made a whopping _4_ tweaks to and it ran smooth as butter allowing everyone to make the characters they had in mind. I love 4 Color to Fantasy and need to look at M&M more (broke so can't buy it tho) but I would be perfectly happy running a game of 4CTF or blending that on top of other d20 stuff. See if I told my friends I wanted to run HERO I would get things thrown at me. NONE of the people in our group want to play it as we all find it too complex. Yet Rolemaster is old hat to everyone so go figure.

So HERO will never happen in that group. We're all comfortable with d20 and most of us with the Storyteller system so it would proabbly come down to 4CTF, M&M and Aberrant if I was going to run a supers campaign. If your players are happy playing whatever system instead more power to ya. My group isn't a "it MUST be d20" kinda group either....we got burned out on 3E and went back to Rolemaster. Some of the players have very limited experiences tho and some of teh sytems I could run something in would just be more of a pain than they're worth so I don't *grin* Some fo teh systems I would love to play I don't feel I could run well either..SLA Industries for example. Absolutely love it an da buddy of mine from college ran it great....I can't pull it off tho so I won't even bother *grin* Godo reading tho

Data point for D&D3.5E being pushed up: Monte Cook, and i think possibly Skip Williams and Ryan Dancey (i'm not sure on my recollection of either of the last two) said that they'd planned from before the release of D&D3E to release a revision in about 5 years, based on their projections of sales. And Ryan has mentioned that initial sales [of D&D3E] were higher than expected.

3E initial sales were higher and I think that overall sales of the line have been higher than originally anticipated, but the yearly sales have been lower than they expected after the initial several months. I think the beancounters basically said "hmm...we should be moving 3000 units this month instead of 2000" "yeah but we sold an extra 30,000 copies upfront" "and? revise it early! more money to be made"

Hagen