Rodrigo Istalindir
Explorer
ecliptic said:
So, how about 10+Con, or just 10? Both standard 'skulls' in GT, both easily reachable in a game where magic isn't raising ACs to high levels, and where saves are lower than stock D&D.
Game of Thrones or Black Company description?
- Thread starter JoeGKushner
- Start date
So, how about 10+Con, or just 10? Both standard 'skulls' in GT, both easily reachable in a game where magic isn't raising ACs to high levels, and where saves are lower than stock D&D.
WizarDru
Adventurer
ecliptic said:
I think that you've also got to consider the idea that in Martin's world, there is no healing magic and there are very, very few magic items, at least in Westeros. This means that no one is going to have an AC in the 30s, for example. His damage is going to cap much lower, his ability to resist poisons, diseases and heal his wounds will be greatly reduced. His AC will cap much lower than a normal 20th level character, and he won't have things like fortification, deflection bonuses, miss chances and so forth. He won't be able to recover nearly as quickly, and will be much, much more vulnerable.
Mind you, I don't think any of the characters of Westeros are 20th level characters, so the point is somewhat moot. Given their specific shown abilities, I'd wager most of the characters probably aren't more than 8th-10th level, IMHO.
Berandor
lunatic
Now, I probably wouldn't want to use GoT with standard D&D, but for the sake of argumentJoeGKushner said:
If you're talking about straight combat ability, a noble also gets bonus feats that might be used to buy hit points (toughness?) or better AC/AB. The defense bonus would have to be switched into something else with standard D&D, or be able to stack with armor (giving the noble an excellent AC).
But you're right. Combatwise, the noble will probably be a weaker choice, and considering that when porting the class into a game you'll likely not use all of its abilities (like influence rolls, or armor as DR), it might be different to use the class as is in a straight-up D&D game.
Starman
Adventurer
JoeGKushner said:
No. I guess I just don't really think about compatability when it comes to liscenced settings. I just want the rules to reflect the setting. So, if A Game of Thrones is vastly different from core D&D, I don't care. Now, if somebody came out with Kewl Fighter Class Book and it was vastly different from the baseline, I would be annoyed.
Starman
For me, D20 is about core mechanics, not complete compatibility.
The core mechaincs, roll D20 and ranks and beat difficulty is D20.
Adapting that toa genre in any way is not an issue with me.
The Dragon ASOIAF articles made me sick. I do not want to see Dany as a sorcerer. etc ad nauseum.
The point is, anyone who has played DnD can sit down and pick up most of the mechanics realtively easily.
This post and a couple of others you have made me think that you think that to be d20, a product/line needs to be completely compatible with D&D to be d20, Joe. I respect your opinion, but I couldn't disagree more.
Black Company, B5, etc are d20 through and through to me.
Razuur
The core mechaincs, roll D20 and ranks and beat difficulty is D20.
Adapting that toa genre in any way is not an issue with me.
The Dragon ASOIAF articles made me sick. I do not want to see Dany as a sorcerer. etc ad nauseum.
The point is, anyone who has played DnD can sit down and pick up most of the mechanics realtively easily.
This post and a couple of others you have made me think that you think that to be d20, a product/line needs to be completely compatible with D&D to be d20, Joe. I respect your opinion, but I couldn't disagree more.
Black Company, B5, etc are d20 through and through to me.
Razuur
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Razuur said:
And that's okay! That's one of the things I like about En World and even RPG.net. There are those who disagree with you, and can do it without insults and come from a well reasoned background.
I know dude! I wan't raggin on you. I'm with ya and feel the love.
Your view of D20 is actually my view of D&D. My view of D20 is really just based around the core mechanic.
I can understand you frustration. Maybe we need a new label to denote the "compatibleness" of a product to 3.5 generica. Never happen, but we could make our own. We could call it the Kushnometer Scale.
AgoT and B5 would rate low on the scale, but AEGs Mercenaries would be real high!
Razuur
Your view of D20 is actually my view of D&D. My view of D20 is really just based around the core mechanic.
I can understand you frustration. Maybe we need a new label to denote the "compatibleness" of a product to 3.5 generica. Never happen, but we could make our own. We could call it the Kushnometer Scale.
AgoT and B5 would rate low on the scale, but AEGs Mercenaries would be real high!
Razuur
Last edited:
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Razuur said:I know dude! I wan't raggin on you. I'm with ya and feel the love.
Your view of D20 is actually my view of D&D. My view of D20 is really just based around the core mechanic.
I can understand you frustration. Maybe we need a new label to denote the "compatibleness" of a product to 3.5 generica. Never happen, but we could make our own. We could call it the Kusnometer Scale.
AgoT and B5 would rate low on the scale, but AEGs Mercenaries would be real high!
Razuur
One of the thigns I don't like about GoO is that their d20 products aren't even compatible with one another sometimes. You can't really take things from BESM d20 and put them into Slayer's d20 for example although since Tri-Gun d20 had no system behind it, it defaulted to BESM d20.
I just don't like the design philospiphy that some companies use to change the system. "D&D can't handle low magic, gritty campaigns." to which I have about three or four engines that I've used or seen handle grim and gritty, to which the other person inevitably responds, "Well, I haven't read that so I stand by my statement."
That's one of the things I like about Conan though. It's strong enough to go on it's own OGL label.
What bothers me a little about AGoT is that like Talislanta, there are going to be two gaming editions. Wouldn't it be better for the marketing side if the d20 version was close enough to d20 that it could be used with minimum fusswork and the Tri_Stat Version was the one heavily modified to get that gritty feeling? I mean, the guys doing Talislanta were originally going to do it OGL but for whatever reason, decided to make it d20. Sure, it's going to have a different feel, but we've been told that you'll be able to drop a Thrall right into a regular game with no modifications. That's a good thing to me. If I want to convert something, I don't need an OGL product. Heck, I'll read the AGoT books again, with the novellas and the comic adaption of the novellas if I want background material.
Oh, I get what your saying Joe.
But some people don't like Tri-Stat (me being one of them). I like the D20 mechanic. If the D20 version was like the Dragon version (very D&D) then I wouldn't be able to purchase it. Why can't the Tri-stat be more ture to the core, and let the D20 be gritty? I want my AgoT to be gritty, and I want D20!
I guess Blue Rose is a real good example of something that would satisfy all. They have all of the rules for their system, and then in the end, there is a D20 conversion section for coverting things either to BR or from. I thought that was a great addition.
Without something like that, a product is less mine-able for other systems. But then if we are mining for other systems, we really aren't the target audience for what they are trying to do... right?
Razuur
But some people don't like Tri-Stat (me being one of them). I like the D20 mechanic. If the D20 version was like the Dragon version (very D&D) then I wouldn't be able to purchase it. Why can't the Tri-stat be more ture to the core, and let the D20 be gritty? I want my AgoT to be gritty, and I want D20!
I guess Blue Rose is a real good example of something that would satisfy all. They have all of the rules for their system, and then in the end, there is a D20 conversion section for coverting things either to BR or from. I thought that was a great addition.
Without something like that, a product is less mine-able for other systems. But then if we are mining for other systems, we really aren't the target audience for what they are trying to do... right?
Razuur
Similar Threads
