D20 'philosophy' cramping my style

[Arnwyn]

Lets think about the reactions I got here. Some people suggested adding a rogue level. That would actually increase the power of the Imp quite a bit more than I wanted. It doesn't need a sneak attack, for example. Others suggested adding intelligence. This would cause complaints, even if I put in a note explaining why I did it. I guarantee that someone in this thread would be offended by that. Others pointed out swapping points from one skill to build a bluff skill. That sounds like a good idea, it's the one I'll probably actually use, but some people won't even like that.

The point is, this requires quite a bit of second guessing. Maybe I should have known the rule about swapping skill points on monsters, but I didn't know it, and even that is't going to please a segment of the D20 audience who demand strict canonical adherence to the "letter of the rules" and do not approve of those parts of the rules which reccomend flexibility, like rule zero.

And obviously, here's your problem. You seem to lack a certain grasp on reality, and that is: "someone is going to complain about something". As another poster mentioned, you're trying to please all of the people all of the time. Sadly, you're never going to do that. Thus, it has absolutely nothing to do with D&D and d20 - nothing at all. It's simply human nature. (Thus, you're completely wasting your time worrying about what one possible internet wonk might say.)

Rule 0 is a perfectly viable option. However, it is not an option at all when money becomes involved (ie. purchasing a product). Nor should it be. If you're writing a product for a game system for money, then it behooves you to know the game system. Period.

 

[Will]

So its love it or leave it, eh? Either D&D is perfect or you are a "hater". I run into this attitude quite often . I bet it was very prevalent toward the end of the era of 2E as well....

No, but based on the histrionics and the wording of your posts, I genuinely don't believe you like D&D, its fans, and would prefer to be writing for other systems. You probably regard it as a cross to bear that D&D is so prevalent.

I could be wrong, but that's the impression I get.

There are a host of things I don't like about D&D, and if anyone cares to hear them, I'll start up a thread on the subject. There are also entire styles of games that I don't think suit D20 without negating the point of using the OGL.

I don't couch such comments in terms of how unpleasant the fans are related to the system.

Oh, I also have some diatribes about how obnoxious a lot of fans are, and how they aren't entitled to 'professional' and calm responses if they are being bastards on online fora. I don't generally open threads with such comments, though.

 

[Will]

Oh, I'll also point out that if what you want to do is write an adventure that doesn't actually even -use- a system (in the hopes of telling the true story), you are perfectly free to. If you can't find a publisher (which is likely), publish it yourself as a PDF! If it's very good, maybe you can start your own movement.

It's not like adventures sell tremendously well, anyway, so what the heck.

 

[swrushing]

Was my comment a threat? if you want to see it as that, fine. It was a request. I spend my money where i wish for many reasons. The obvious contempt for the fanbase you are exuding here is very much a reason i would not purchase a product i know you were involved with, barring some other incredibly good reason.

the fact that you do not want your comments and attitudes and expressed opinions to be tied to your work in the very field and products you are talking about says something to me.

In my experience, especially in creative endeavors, enjoyment of the designer is a major thing in determining its quality, its richness and its value to me. i would not dream of buying a product from a writewr who really seems so afraid about what i consider to be bare minimum Gm decisions.

also, as stated before, the little girl left over thing doesn't exactly inspire me as its, IMO, rather over done and obvious.

By the way, this should please you, for a variety of reasons including the negative attention brought about by this thread, I'm probably not going to continue with this project.
DB

Thats ok, as i said i think you will indeed be better off writing for a group you do not hold in such obvious contempt. That would probably be better for everyone.

What game system would you find more suited to your tastes of writing? If you could instead get some other game publisher to publish your module/campaign instead of being stuck with d20 and their wrong-headed fans... which would you choose?

is HERo more your cup of tea?

FUDGE?

GURPS?

d6 fantasy?

 

[Drifter Bob]

I never said I didn't like D&D, I play D&D every two weeks. I like it a lot. It is a fun part of my life and a great source of amusement and intellectual diversion.

I do think as many other people do, that there are some things which need changing about D&D. As I have pointed out in other threads, D&D will in fact change, like it or not. The question is how and based on what kind of stimulus.

I do not like some small, loud factions of the culture of D&D who react with hostility and bitterness toward any attempt to discuss any percieved problems with the game.

That makes me makes me wonder if people think this might be a trend which is harmful to the game.

I've said my piece. I don't think many people understood what I was getting at, it is basically impossible to get my point across now that this conversation has regressed, as most reform oriented discussions of D&D seem to do, into a "D&D lovers versus D&D haters" debate. If I wanted to have that debate, I could do it elsewhere.

At this point I can only conclude that very few if any people agree with me, that is ok! For those of you who seriously attempted to address the issue, thanks, and I agree with those who pointed out that you cannot please everybody. I really appreciate all the technical advice on the bluff problem.

I did this because I love role playing games, including D&D, which I played since I was a kid and have endured a lot of flak for sticking with over the years.

For what it's worth, though I may be cranky and a bit of a curmudgeon, I am not a D&D hater.

after you have stated that you dislike the game you write for, after you have hand-waived even minuscule changes to your design that would lie perfectly in the rules

I really appreciate all the friendly comments though, and for what it's worth the ideas on how to fix the little problem I had.

Thanks a lot for your comments.

I probably will do that, thanks.

Ok first off let me ask Drifter Bob "please tell us what module/campaign/source book this is or at least who will be publishing ti so those of us who are either inspired or replused by your tone, opinions or arguments here can make an informed purchase decision.

Let me be the first to make it explicit. Better keep that info to yourself if you want even a chance of a sale with me.

I must echo James Heard here. You are not going to get my money, or more precisely, Jeanry Chandler is not going to get my money, and I am glad you stopped that project.

As for those of you who are hostile, and those who seem to be dishonestly attributing things to me that I have not said, there is obviously nothing further for us to discuss. I think that some of you might understand my perspective better if you actually read my posts and did not attribue those of other people in the thread, or even intentionally sarcastic "anti d&D" rants brought out for irony, to me. If you relaxed a litle you might find that I'm not attacking D&D.

I do play other rpg games, in the last year I've played: shadowrun, d20 modern, gurps, universalis, feng shuay, riddle of steel, dying earth rpg, sorcerer, burning wheel, the old call of cthulhu and even a really old game called "paranoia". I play these mostly among other people, mostly hard core gamers, who are into them. When I have choice of games it's usually D&D.

As for D&D, I think the combat sytem could stand some tinkering, the skills are hard in character generation, levels go up too fast, and there are a few things with the spells I'd like to tinker with if I could figure a good way to do it, but I still think it's one of the funnest games particulalry for people who aren't traditional gamers. It's the one I know the best and love the best.

As a result of my writing and getting moe into the community of D&D, I've become honestly worried about the future of it. Maybe it's my non D&D playing friends bending my ear, maybe there really is something wrong. either way I have said my piece. I apologize to anyone I have offended by my tone, I never was a diplomat. I hope some of you have gotten something good out of the thread, I did. This will be my last post in the thread though because now it's really gotten nasty, and I think the subject I wanted to discuss has been overshadowed. I'm not being "meladramatic", I'm sorry if this is long winded, I'm just trying to make myself as clear as possible, because some people seem to keep misunderstanding me or misrepresenting what I have said in this thread.

DB

 

[Will]

Man. Talk about melodrama.

I doubt anyone here hates you, DB. And, honestly, if you have a big trouble communicating your point effectively in a text medium...

I'd suggest perhaps seriously thinking about your approach, rather than talking out both sides of your mouth. 'I had some trouble communicating my point and, of course, people are apes and hate any complaints directed at D&D, so they started ranting and raving.'

I've had quite civil discussions about the failings and strengths of D&D. Clear communication and avoiding snide comments do wonders. Sure, some people don't respond right, but here's a hint: I bet a lot of people who have responded don't disagree with some of your basic points. They just aren't sure what those points are.

 

[swrushing]

Well, after this "they hate me" rant, i gotta say my "are being trolled" light just went from flashing yellow to constant red.

pretty good execution. i would give it about a 7 of 10.

 

[Destil]

The thing was, I just wasn't sure in this particular case which approach would be considered "legal". You can know most of the rules system but there are always areas which aren't necessarily clear from the books, or which are ambigious so there is a certain degree of interpretation necessary. Sometimes, there can be a consensus in the online community which is almost like a religious dogma. Which of the several methods listed would be least offensive to the most people? I'm still not certain. Looked like int boost or skill point swapping was the best, but some people aren't going to like even that.

Some people won't even like your stpry, let alone the rules you use to make it work (and there's certinaly a lot more grey area with that than with something like randomly giving a monster a +30 to bluff with no explination). That's part of writing modules...

it's risky because you don't know how your interpretatoin should be recieved. People don't agree on the rules. When it's close to a gray area, you can get in serious trouble unless you have a signed affidavit from WOTC saying it's ok...

This part made me laugh. Spend some time in the rules forum. Look at how people treat the opinion of Skip Williams (official unoffical answers!). Look at how prople will slam WotC when they make big mistakes (4 ranks of bluff will slide under almost everyone's radar, but look at the halfling outrider).

 

[ajanders]

This seems like a thinly veiled threat to boycott my work or that of any publisher who hires me because I dare to point out what I see as a problem. Cute.
DB

And I'm obligated to buy your work why, exactly?
You have demonstrated an ignorance of the d20 system.
You have demonstrated you prefer your own set of wonderful rules that only work like the SRD when it's convenient for you.
As a DM talking over beers, that's fine.
As an author, it's not something I care to buy. I keep versimilitude in my game by making sure things work the same way for the PC's and the
NPC's.
You break that rule, I've got lots of other stuff to spend my money on...as does everyone else in the world.
Let me make myself perfectly clear here: your sloppy mechanics will keep me from using your products.
Your sloppy mechanics will be noticed by good reviewers: the fact that you see poor mechanics mentioned so rarely speaks to how easy it is to get it right.
Your moral stance won't even enter into it: I want the adventure, not petulant whining about the system keeping down the story.

 

[FireLance]

Well, this thread looks almost done, which means it's about time for me to chip in .

My view is, as a purchaser of a game module, I would expect the writer to pay as much attention to the rules of the game as he does to the rules of spelling and grammer.

It doesn't mean that rules exceptions (or bad spelling and poor grammer) cannot be used. It just has to be done in a way that advances rather than takes away from the module. For example, just as bad spelling and grammer can be used to emphasize a character's lack of education or intelligence, rules exceptions can be used to cover special and unique situations.

However, I would expect it to be used sparingly and only when necessary. Most of the time, the desired effect can be achieved without breaking the rules (and as a number of posters have pointed out, Drifter Bob's bluffing imp is one such example).