D20 taking over?

[drnuncheon]

When I read this line, I really blanked out for a second...

Jack VANCE? Dying Earth? The place from whence was derived the D&D spell system and Ioun Stones???

Perhaps I'd better pick his works up again...

Sure, EGG stole some stuff from Vance's work, but the core assumptions of D&D - things like levels, the cinematic combat system and the heavy slant towards fighting and action - work against the feel of Vance's world.

If I were going to play in a Dying Earth game, I'd want the game to focus on the wordplay, on the trickery and the character interaction.

Vance's characters don't go out and heroically slay deodands and pelgranes - they con each other, plot elaborate revenge, get swept up and firmly hoisted by their own petards.

J

 

[drnuncheon]

Because I have yet to find any RPG that couldn't be done just as well, if not better, as a D20 product. Yes, even Exalted and Feng Shui.

Baron Munchausen.
Dragonball Z.
Dying Earth.
Over the Edge.
Most superhero stuff.

I disagree on Exalted and Feng Shui, too, but not as strongly as those above.

Let's face it - d20 has a lot of baggage left over from D&D. It's got classes and levels. It's got a very abstract and cinematic combat system. It's got heroic advancement where being really good at something means that you do better in a fight.

Yes, you can get rid of all of those. You can remove classes like CoC did. You could get rid of levels and make combat a skill just like everything else. You could remove hit points and add in a detailed hit location/wound system.

But by that point...is it really d20? Or is it just a game system that happens to use a 20-sided die to resolve things? And is there any benefit to continuing to call it d20?

J

 

[Psion]

This can be said of any system and is usually the GM's responsibility. If I want to play a Chaotic Evil Drow Elf in a group of lawful Good Humans then I don't think you'd let me.

I can (and BTW, DO) say "no evil characters, no nostandard races or classes without my prior approval," and I will be pretty safe. OTOH, with a free-form point based system, I find that I have to handhold players through chargen to make sure they don't do anything contradictory or illogical. Any time that the GM can spend worrying about the progress of the game instead of worrying about handholding the players is time well spent.

I forget that most people cant multiply 50 by 1.75 that is pretty complex now that you mention it. Sorry to be so sarcastic but I always hear this argument and it's just not true. I've played with some major retards who seem to be able to do the Champions math just fine. If you're over 12 it shouldn't be a challenge if it is then you need to do fourth or fifth grade math over again.

You can be sarchastic all you like. You will still be wrong.

I have a masters in electrical engineering. I am in no danger of not having the required skills to handle HERO. That said, I realize that not all people have my level of mathematical acumen. There are people for whom math is like work, and they cannot do figures like 50 times 1.75 in their head. And some of those people are worth playing with. I think you are remiss to pass judgement on them because of it.

Get some perspective. You may be comfortable with the math, but you don't game alone.

This can also be done with any game unless I don't understand what you are saying.

Sure they can. And like I said before, I think there are a lot worse systems for it.

Perhaps more importantly, other games don't have near the familiarity or user base, so expecting people to be as accepting of them is a little off.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

open architectures vs. closed architectures

d20 is open architecture. Anyone can write for it, anyone can modify it, and anyone can publish for it. All the other systems are closed, or have too little market share for any network externality to take hold.

In any market battle between open systems and closed systems (IBM PC vs. Mac, VHS vs. Betamax), the wise bet on the open system. And it's a good thing too! Open systems bring along with them more innovation, lower cost (in RPG terms that means lower learning curve), and greater variety and style of products.

I'm rooting for d20/OGL all the way, and I do hope that the tendency for publishers to publish new systems just for the sake of having new systems goes away when they realize that tapping into the d20 markets and modifying rules appropriately will net them more money.

I'm still waiting for the other major system vendors (Hero, GURPS) to release using the OGL too, but my guess is just like the Apple, they'll only realize it too late.

 

[Psion]

Let's face it - d20 has a lot of baggage left over from D&D. It's got classes and levels. It's got a very abstract and cinematic combat system. It's got heroic advancement where being really good at something means that you do better in a fight.

1) Why is that baggage? D&D is hardly the only venue for which most of these are appropriate.
2) Most of those are mutable points and can and have been changed in other D20 system games. And I most strongly dispute that the ones that aren't very mutable are baggage. GURPS soured me to unstructured chargen a long time ago regardless of the genre.

 

[SableWyvern]

The Words of Sabaron:
Because I have yet to find any RPG that couldn't be done just as well, if not better, as a D20 product. Yes, even Exalted and Feng Shui.

That's a fair enough reason for playing nothing else than d20.

However, your original comment gave me the impression that you think nothing but d20 on the market would be a good thing. And the quote above is not an adequate reasoning for such a belief.

Whether they are the purest of "role" players, or powergaming, minmaxing, monster-bashing, dice-roll-loving munchkin gods, different people find different systems appealing. If, as some people have said, in this and other threads, the rule system doesn't matter, people wouldn't even buy a system - they'd just play a free-form, rulesless or rules-light game of their own devising.

Given the people out there who, for whatever reason, prefer other systems to d20, and even moreso, those who don't like d20 at all, the dissappearance of all other systems would be a terrible thing.

Of course, it is entirely possible that your original comment referred to nothing but the fact that you personally wouldn't be bothered or affected if d20 was the only avaiable game. Which, is fair enough I guess. It's just that, as I mentioned in my previous post, that whole idea, nothing but d20, chills me to the bone. Ugh. What a completely, utterly, depressing thought.

*shiver*

 

[maddman75]

I'm a pro d20 guy. Why? Because I don't feel that mechanics reflects that big a flavor change. d20 != d&d

d20 is basically -> roll a d20 + mods to reach a difficulty number to resolve tasks, use skills for stuff you get better in, use feats for stuff you can just do. All the rest, hit points, armor class, levels, and classes can and have been altered to fit different games while still maintaining this basic familiarity.

What flavor do you get by picking up and rolling a handful of dice instead of a d20? Or using quirks and advantages instead of feats?

And most importantly, do they bring enough to the game to get me to read 200 pages on a new way to roll dice? I seriously doubt it.

Someone would be hard pressed to get me to learn a non d20 game at this point.

 

[drnuncheon]

1) Why is that baggage? D&D is hardly the only venue for which most of these are appropriate.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with using them where they are appropriate. I think a lot of games would be better off in d20. But I was specifically talkin about places where they weren't appropriate.

2) Most of those are mutable points and can and have been changed in other D20 system games. And I most strongly dispute that the ones that aren't very mutable are baggage. GURPS soured me to unstructured chargen a long time ago regardless of the genre.

Different strokes. I happen to enjoy GURPS and HERO a lot. Other people don't - that's great. But I'm not saying GURPS or HERO should be the only system out there, as one poster was saying about d20. That's just plain stupid. GURPS, HERO, d20, each has its strengths and weaknesses. Other games specifically tailored for their settings can still do a better job than a generic system.

Please note that I am decidedly not saying that every game specifically written for its setting can do a better job than d20 (or GURPS, or HERO). But a well-done, well-designed game can.

As for these baggage items being mutable points - sure. I talked about that. If you change all of them, is it still d20? Or is it a system that happens to use a 20-sided die for resolution?

If I remove classes and levels...and I add in flaws/disadvantages (because I think they're a neat concept)...and then I decide that I'd rather have advantages as well...and I make everything a point-buy system...and I completely redo the magic system to one that's skill-based...

...am I still playing d20?

...am I still making a d20 game from a legal standpoint? Am I even allowed to publish these alternate classless/levelless character creation and advancement rules? I'm foggy on that part of the OGL.

J

 

[Trevalon Moonleirion]

I really don't know how to answer the question....I don't see a total "d20 monopoly" however. In the end, its all about the game and not the system, but as some others have said, sometimes the mechanics of a game are an important part of the feel and flavor of the setting. I personally like the world of darkness/trinity etc. rule set for the WoD books--i think it suits them well. I also like Alternity, but since it has some simliarities to d20 I need to think about the differences and pros and cons of both before I do anything to really start running a Dark*Matter campaign like i recently got the urge to.

 

[Henry]

Let's face it - d20 has a lot of baggage left over from D&D. It's got classes and levels. It's got a very abstract and cinematic combat system. It's got heroic advancement where being really good at something means that you do better in a fight.

Yes, you can get rid of all of those. You can remove classes like CoC did. You could get rid of levels and make combat a skill just like everything else. You could remove hit points and add in a detailed hit location/wound system.

But by that point...is it really d20? Or is it just a game system that happens to use a 20-sided die to resolve things? And is there any benefit to continuing to call it d20?

I disagree here, but let me try to point out why: there is no necessary association between D&D constructs and d20. As you pointed out, CoCd20 got rid of classes, more or less, and still retained excessive ease of creating a character. It takes as long to plan a Coc character as it does to plan a D&D one. It is still, indeed, a d20 game, as the main points - the levels, feats, skills, and core mechanic - are still there. As you can see from this, as well as a cleverly-designed game such as Spycraft, there is no concept that d20 cannot transmute other than these four and still be called part of the same "family" of games. The secret that GURPS missed, IMO, is that you do have to change parts of the system, including system rules, to build a character for a different setting. The system of adding more points for a higher powered game will break a design curve at some level, hence the need to change out some elements (everything from Op Attacks to Race capabilities) to match the setting.

I agree that d20 still needs plenty of improvements in many of its current rules sets, but that is what the OGL is for.

WE JUST NEED MORE MONKEYS AND TYPEWRITERS!