Game design that I'm surprised didn't make it into more books

[Gundark]

A little about me. I'm 33 years old, married, soon to have 4 kids, full time job, church activities, etc, etc. I'm lucky enough to have a group that meets together every week to play RPGs, right now we're play Warhammer FRPG (using a published adventure path). This is really our first time deviating from playing a d20 game. Anyhow my point is I don't have a lot of time to play let alone prep for a game.

I'm really surprised that more game designers don't take into consideration fast game prep times. Spycraft 2.0, Iron Heroes, and SW SAGA are really the only (d20) games that seem to take this into consideration (and really SW SAGA only becomes fast with familiarity)

Is it just laziness on game designers part? There are a lot of campaign settings, and d20 games that I wouldn't mind playing with (World of Warcraft rpg, Iron Kingdoms, Grim Tales, d20 modern, etc) but don't because in the end prep time makes it not worth the effort.

I'm stuck (or at least I feel stuck) using published adventures ( not that this is bad, some are darn good). Sometimes I get the itch to write my own adventure, and then when I think of the work and I forget it.

So why havn't more game designers done something about this? I have to say SW SAGA has me hopeful that 4th ed. is going to take this into consideration.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

It's not d20, but Gary's Lejendary Adventure game defintitely takes prep time into account. C&C is a quasi-d20 system that is good for prep time, too.

 

[kaomera]

So why havn't more game designers done something about this? I have to say SW SAGA has me hopeful that 4th ed. is going to take this into consideration.

Because it requires extra work on their part and many players may not appreciate the compromises required.

I would put forward Savage Worlds as almost the quintessential fast-prep game. I have a hard time getting many players interested in it because they feel it lacks the depth of options available in other systems. I'm interested in you listing "Iron Heroes" as a low-prep game, as the main reason I never got that interested in it was that it seemed really more complicated than I wanted for what it does. (IMHO: IH is as complicated as it is largely because it is balanced against normal d20. That's fine, and I can see the reasoning behind that design choice, but it's not something I need / want.)

 

[rowport]

...I'm really surprised that more game designers don't take into consideration fast game prep times. Spycraft 2.0, Iron Heroes, and SW SAGA are really the only (d20) games that seem to take this into consideration (and really SW SAGA only becomes fast with familiarity)

...
I'm stuck (or at least I feel stuck) using published adventures ( not that this is bad, some are darn good). Sometimes I get the itch to write my own adventure, and then when I think of the work and I forget it. ....

Gundark-

I broke apart your original question in two sections to highlight both parts because I really think you are asking, "why am I forced to run published adventures to cut d20 prep time?" Honestly, I am not sure that is a fair question. When I started reading your post, I immediately starting thinking, "hmm... what about Fantastic Locations or the Expedition book series from WOTC, or the GameMastery scenerios or Adventure Paths from Paizo?" I mean, you really cannot get much faster than Fantastic Locations-- which comes with all the stats, the color maps, and even suggested minis, unless you use the GameMastery scenerios which *include* the minis, too! But, that said, if you do not want to use published adventures, you are back to the longest prep time-- preparing your own.

The reason I think it is still an unfair question is because you are implicitly suggesting that the d20 complexity takes too long to stat NPCs-- I assume that, because writing a plot is not longer for D&D than any other rules system, it is the rules complexity that takes time. If that is correct, then there are lots of ways to cut that time: pick up Dungeon and use the NPCs without the adventure. Use the example NPCs inlcuded with every WOTC prestige class. Or just make NPCs using core books-- they will generally be effective enough that way. Just because the rules complexity to mix and match every class and feat *exists* does not mean you need to use them.

 

[bento]

I'm really surprised that more game designers don't take into consideration fast game prep times. Spycraft 2.0, Iron Heroes, and SW SAGA are really the only (d20) games that seem to take this into consideration (and really SW SAGA only becomes fast with familiarity)

I think D&D 3.5 has addressed this problem for the past two years. Besides creating more adventures, many of the critter books (Lords of Madness) and landscapes (Sandstorm) have large sections devoted to running adventures with statted monsters and such. While they may not be complete adventures, they provide you with a map, hooks, and encounters (monsters & traps). I know a lot of people complained about MMIV, but I've read the reason classed monsters were included was to save DMs time during prep.

Is it just laziness on game designers part? There are a lot of campaign settings, and d20 games that I wouldn't mind playing with (World of Warcraft rpg, Iron Kingdoms, Grim Tales, d20 modern, etc) but don't because in the end prep time makes it not worth the effort. So why havn't more game designers done something about this? I have to say SW SAGA has me hopeful that 4th ed. is going to take this into consideration.

I don't think most publishers focused on settings have the page count to spend more time helping with pre-stated monsters and encounters. I guess they have a choice between putting out a lot of new content and letting the GM do the rest vs. less content but packaged up ready-to-use.

Look at the difference between a Eberron setting book like The Five Nations, where the authors are challenged with cramming in new cities, important NPCs, monsters, and PrCs against a critter book like Libris Mortis, where the authors have 50+ pages to flesh out adventure & campaign ideas using monsters most players are very familiar with.

I think most publishers have in mind the GM that likes the pieces and has the time to put them togther. Look at the flak WoTC got from GMs from including stat-ed monsters in MMIV. I guess think kind of material works better in adventure modules and critter books like LM and Dragonomicon.

 

[Gundark]

The reason I think it is still an unfair question is because you are implicitly suggesting that the d20 complexity takes too long to stat NPCs-- I assume that, because writing a plot is not longer for D&D than any other rules system, it is the rules complexity that takes time. If that is correct, then there are lots of ways to cut that time: pick up Dungeon and use the NPCs without the adventure. Use the example NPCs inlcuded with every WOTC prestige class. Or just make NPCs using core books-- they will generally be effective enough that way. Just because the rules complexity to mix and match every class and feat *exists* does not mean you need to use them.

I can see how it might come across that I was suggesting it was bad to use published materials. There are a lot of great published materials out there and I really have enjoyed a lot of them. What I meant is that when I want to write my own adventures it can be time consuming. You're right in pointing out that coming up with a concept is the same no matter what game system you use. You can't blame the system for that. My complaint was aimed at the time it takes to prep NPCs/work out the crunch elements of the adventure. Yes there are lots of good materials in which to borrow from. Dragon/Dungeon magazine are a great source of NPCs.

My point is that I think it's a design flaw that you have to borrow NPCs from other sources (dungeon/dragon/fantastic locations). While there are shortcuts, d20 generally takes significant time to prep crunch wise. Now every DM preps differently, some do minimal prep and fill in the details as they go, others like to prep more details. A good game should be able to accommodate both styles of game prep. I purchased Etools to help cut down on the prep time. The problem with Etools is that if you what to play in a different setting/game other that standard D&D (say Arcana Evolved for example) the program becomes less useful.

Now the long time it takes to stat NPCs doesn’t have to be an issue. We’ve seen that this isn’t a problem with d20 as a whole but a problem with the design of lots of d20 games out there. As mentioned in my original post Spycraft 2.0 is a complex game with a surprisingly quick crunch prep time. I can prep the crunch part of a Spycraft adventure in about an hour regardless of the level of the adventure.

The question I’m asking is: Given that we’ve seen how some d20 games have included a system to speed up the crunch prep of an adventure, why haven’t more publishers done this?

 

[Shazman]

If the desingers do more prep for you, that means less time is spent on new content. Less new content means less books sold. That, of course, means less profit. A company like WotC has huge overhead and a parent company that expects good profit margins, so it has to make a lot of money. New splatbooks with new combat systems, feats, spells, and prestige classes are what sell. Smaller companies can get away with making their products more user friendly at the expense of more new content. WotC doesn't have that luxury.

 

[Gundark]

Well Shaz...you may very well be right. This idea however doesn't seem right to me. Typically crunch sells very well for WotC. A crunch book that is a streamlined NPC system would sell I would argue. But hey...I could be wrong. Even if you're correct about WotC shying away from something like this, I'm surprised 3rd party companies havn't jumped on this. Adamat is rumoured to be doing something along these lines (faster NPC stat system) but not sure if the book is in limbo or not.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Is it just laziness on game designers part? There are a lot of campaign settings, and d20 games that I wouldn't mind playing with (World of Warcraft rpg, Iron Kingdoms, Grim Tales, d20 modern, etc) but don't because in the end prep time makes it not worth the effort.

When they do something like that (i.e.: classed NPC's in MMIV) there is often a huge outcry of those WITH time who say that this is a waste of space because they could have come up with it themselves in 20 minutes (or whatever).

And since they have the time and inclination to complain, WotC hears them.

What they don't hear much of are those busy DMs who use their stuff but can't spare a few minutes to say "Hey, this rocks, I use it all the time and need more things like it!"

Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and all.

 

[Gundark]

Because it requires extra work on their part and many players may not appreciate the compromises required.

I would put forward Savage Worlds as almost the quintessential fast-prep game. I have a hard time getting many players interested in it because they feel it lacks the depth of options available in other systems.

Well yes Savage worlds is definetly fast. I had a hard time selling it to my group for the same reasons you mentioned. I hate to sound like a broken record but Spycraft 2.0 is a game that gives players complexity and is very easy on the GM to run.