Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1505975" data-attributes="member: 172">You are getting off track here. It's not just me who would be doing the training, but that's not the point. Return to my original post in this thread. It's the fact that we, collectively, will have to get up to speed on any new system, and part of that time will be spent in less that optimal playtime at the gaming table.Please do not attribute new motives to me, especially when my motives have  already been plainly stated. Learning new systems takes away quality playtime. If the system is not better than d20, I have no motivation to "give another system a chance." It's a negative tradeoff I am unwilling to make. I mean, unless a system appears to offer me a net benefit, why should I?Absolutely incorrect. The granularity is, to me, not only one of the least important aspects of the dice system, it is almost irrelevant.Of much more importance to me: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I do not agree that, in play, the treatment of a target number is the same. Theoretically, mathematically, if the GM uses modifiers, it is the same. In actual play, it is not. Varying DCs are far more an implicit element of the d20 task system than modifiers are to CoC, and in "skill level as target" systems, the GM tends to use no modifier by default. Call it human nature vice anything inherent to the rules, but I don't think it's ignorable.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">More importantly, the handling of opposed checks is much superior to CoC/BRP. The "successful defensive roll wins" gives the defender an implicit advantage. The "generating a target number" technique works better to match off opponents of differing skill. It doesn't matter what your skill is in BRP or how good you roll; if the "defender" succeeds at his roll, you lose. And again, its use is more implicit than an exception as in BRP.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Finally, innovations like take 10 and take 20 are timesavers for "roll again" rolls, and make a more practical cuttoff for when rolling shouldn't be necessary.</li> </ul>IMO/E, the d20 skill system is much easier to use in play and produces more sensible results with less brain sweat than CoC/BRP. The granularity, so long as it is sufficient (and I consider anything finer than d10 to be sufficient), hardly enters into the equation at all.But nobody but me in my group has the Traveller books. They don't have a history with it. They do not have a common shared history of games, and many of the games they do have a history with I am not interested in or I feel are clearly inferior to d20.My players buy what we play, typically. Many won't buy it unless they know we are going to be playing it for the long haul. And that's pretty sensible, I think.When I have a steak, I don't set out to eat a whole cow. Just the cuts I need.I must admit, more products out there than I know what to do with. I still never got as much use out of Requiem for a God as I wanted to, and am pining to fit things from Spells & Magic and Second World Sourcebook into my game. It's a strange sort of annoyance, having more material than time.But given a little perspective and reflecting back on games that would have been great if they had more support, I have to make the case that too much support is better than not enough. Anything I don't use today, I can make use of another day. In the end, I see the availability of material to be a boon, not a curse. There are many games that WISH they could enjoy as much support as D&D/d20.After 3 years of d20, I am being more selective in my purchases, and try to only buy things that I think have a real good place in my game. I think I am close to a happy equilibrium. If I buy everything that comes out, you have nobody to blame for getting the chaff with the wheat but myself.I could bring up some non-D&D games that would really break this theory. Frex, I find HERO 4e->5e much more drastic a change than 3e->3.5e. And don't get me started on CT/MT to TNE/T4/GT. It's enough to make me cry.</blockquote>

Verification