Do Star Wars Saga skill rules make d20 better?

[Cam Banks]

Query:

What are gamist, narrativist, and simulationist styles?

Wait, forget about the simulationist. RPGs and simulation games are two entirely different entities.

These are terms used to describe design styles, and the concept has often extended to play styles also. Most people are a combination of the three types.

Narrativist play is focused on the story, the drama, the act of creating a specific narrative (hence the name). Rules and/or the setting itself don't need to be particularly realistic or detailed, but should serve the needs of the story and little else.

Gamist play is focused on the rewards of play, the experience of playing a game with rules that can be understood and eventually mastered. Gamist goals often stress the development of a character sheet over the character in the story, especially true in campaigns that feature interesting new rules, classes, races, and so forth to try out.

Simulationist play looks more toward a realistic or at least believably immersive experience in which the course of the game reflects the expectations of the players. Simulationist RPGs aren't the same as tactical board games or war games, and can in fact be heavily slanted toward intrigue or social conflict, but the rules and the setting itself must promote that in a manner that simulates those things, without lack of verisimilitude or logical consequences.

Unfortunately people have used one or more of these definitions, or versions of them, to slam or downplay the importance of various games and play styles. I think the truth is often that this is best as theory and not truth in practice. It's possible to meet all three styles in the same game, which I believe is often where criticisms of heavily-weighted gamist, simulationist, or narrativist games stem from.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I really wasn't referring to the 'general competence' effect of Saga with 'not a bug, but a feature'; I was referring to Saga's elimination of all skill bonuses except training, skill focus, equipment, teamwork effects, and force point use.

But since you asked... I guess I missed where Aaragorn, Conan, Rand al'Thor, Vlad Taltos, Croaker, and Sam Vimes weren't pretty competent in areas far from their specialty. The hyper-specialized character is, like the arcane/divine split, very much a D&D-ism; in the fantasy fiction I've read, characters are broadly competent. Heck, from the handful of D&D novels I've read, it seems like Drizz't and Elminster and Tanis and Raistlin are too.

There has NEVER been a hero of the source literature (mythical, literary, or trashy) that is as pathetically pigeonholed in terms of basic skills as a D&D character. That's why no one can ever figure out how to stat them out.

 

[Mokona]

standard fantasy where the archetypes are much more segregated

I see little to no evidence in literature, myth, or roleplaying character concepts by players that agree with your analysis. Could you point me to some references or provide a citation that supports your claim?

I, not particularly heroic, couldn't stat myself out with D&D rules given my knowledge of swimming, horseback riding, survival (as an Eagle Scout), boating, science, driving, climbing, profession (business), and computer use. Dungeons & Dragons characters are super specialized because of a rules quirk (not because of the demands of the genre).

 

[Ranger REG]

Unfortunately people have used one or more of these definitions, or versions of them, to slam or downplay the importance of various games and play styles. I think the truth is often that this is best as theory and not truth in practice. It's possible to meet all three styles in the same game, which I believe is often where criticisms of heavily-weighted gamist, simulationist, or narrativist games stem from.

So, in practice it is possible to use one or more of the styles mentioned above (though I do not acknowledge simulationist style in RPGs, IMNSHO) using the SAGA rules or somesuch clone, correct?

 

[Plane Sailing]

If you are trying to model the actions in the SW movies (which saga mostly obviously is) then it is a feature. If you port it over to standard fantasy where the archetypes are much more segregated, then it is a major bug.

Where do you get the idea that standard fantasy has much more segregated archetypes? I don't see it in fantasy stories (and remember - many people consider star wars to be fantasy in space!)

 

[Arkhandus]

Its just about as absurd as the current DnD ruleset. I present to you Headsmasher-Buttstomper 20th level fighter, slayer of demons and devils, conqurer of hoards, slayers of dragons, owner of a 9 intelligence.

Party: Lets go guys, we have to catch up with the BBEG!
Headsmasher: I get on the cart...I still can't ride a horse and my armor give me a check penalty of -8.

*party arrives at small 15' brick wall*
Headsmasher: I still can't climb, I spent my points on swim and jump. *rolls* I got a -3, did I climb it?
*Headsmasher crashes through wall*

*party encounters a charismatic 1st level goblin warrior who out-intimidates Headsmasher*
Headsmasher: He's got a stick! Run!

DS

Your point being.......? So the dumb fighter got outwitted by a goblin that managed to make him think that the goblin was actually a powerful sorcerer or polymorphed dragon and will murdalize Headsmasher Buttstomper if he doesn't go away right now...... You know Intimidate is Charisma-based, right? Because it's not just about physical stature and muscle, it's convincing people that you're dangerous and that they don't want you to start doing horrible, unspeakable things to them.

So.....the fact that a fellow of subpar intellect is easily outwitted, but can still be good at smashing things, is supposed to be an example of absurdity in D&D?

 

[Baby Samurai]

There has NEVER been a hero of the source literature (mythical, literary, or trashy) that is as pathetically pigeonholed in terms of basic skills as a D&D character. That's why no one can ever figure out how to stat them out.

Nice – well said!

 

[Gez]

I thinks that's not a bad thing to do. I personally dislike the cross-class skill rules; and while I agree with the intent, I think it's needlessly complicated, especially for multiclassed characters.

To simplify it a bit, I've removed the "half points" system -- there is still a cross-class skill limit equal to half the class skill limit, but one point is worth one point. So, at first level, you can put up to four points in a class skills, and up to two points in a cross-class skill.

On the other hand, there are things I like in the D&D skill system, such as synergy bonuses.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I prefer the Iron Heroes system.

 

[mmu1]

Its just about as absurd as the current DnD ruleset. I present to you Headsmasher-Buttstomper 20th level fighter, slayer of demons and devils, conqurer of hoards, slayers of dragons, owner of a 9 intelligence.

Party: Lets go guys, we have to catch up with the BBEG!
Headsmasher: I get on the cart...I still can't ride a horse and my armor give me a check penalty of -8.

*party arrives at small 15' brick wall*
Headsmasher: I still can't climb, I spent my points on swim and jump. *rolls* I got a -3, did I climb it?
*Headsmasher crashes through wall*

*party encounters a charismatic 1st level goblin warrior who out-intimidates Headsmasher*
Headsmasher: He's got a stick! Run!

DS

You'd be more persuasive if any of your examples actually reflected the way the game works. Or any kind of logic, really.

1. You can ride horses untrained and armor check penalties do not apply to ride.

2. There's no reason for a 20th level character to have an armor check penalty of more than -5 while travelling. (that of MW Full Plate) You usually don't wear shields when climbing walls.

3. Since when is a 15' brick wall in decent shape an easy climb without help, either in D&D, archetypal fantasy fiction, or real life?

Of course, throw a rope with a grappling hook over it - which is what would happen in most fantasy fiction - and Mr. Buttstomper can take 10 and waltz right over it. (and he'd never roll a -3, since his strength is in the 20s, so he actually has a positive climb modifier even after the armor check penalty)

4. Using Intimidate in combat only lets you make the opponent shaken, not change his attitude or tell him to run away. (that takes 1 minute) That, and it's an opposed roll, with the goblin rolling 1d20+4+Cha (assuming he maxed out Intimidate) vs. 1d20+20+Wis+Bonus on Saves vs. Fear for the 20th level character. Good luck with that.