I Am Puzzled

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yes, but instead of reinventing the wheel, you'll go out an buy a whole new car.

I *like* my car. I don't want a whole new car. I want this car, just with a different radio! That other car does not perform like this one does, really at all. I'd have to drive this new car around for quite a while, and then do work on it, and drive it in a way it really isn't intended each and every time I go for a spin, to get it to perform the same as the old one. So, why not just replace the bit that I don't like?

Yeah, I have found things in my cars I've owned that I didn't like, but- with the exception of things that actually broke or wore out- nothing annoyed me enough to change them out for aftermarket parts.

I guess its my personality.

You mention GURPS as an alternative. Yes GURPS has the point buy... but the play experience is rather different from D&D, with the different probability distribution, different views on hit points and magic, and all that. So, if I like the gameplay at the table of D&D, GURPS is probably not a good replacement. For each alternative you mention, the same basic argument will hold - those other games survive by *not* being D&D, by offering something substantially enough different that folks will sacrifice the network externals to get that different experience!

Don't get me wrong - I am also mostly a "pick the right tool for the job" kind of GM. But I can see the point. If D&D really is the right tool for the job except for one subsystem, then maybe replacing that subsystem is the way to go.

GURPS was never really my game, though I played it a lot in the early 1990 ('cause of my group)- I really wish you (and others) had been around for my D&Dized Fantasy HERO games... Because both games tend towards the cinematic side, the feel was pretty close.

Even I though I'm a big enough HEROphile that I think I can use it for damn near anything, I currently own wound 60-70 RPGs (down from @100) because I am primarily a right tool for the job GM. I really don't like importing one games' sub-systems piecemeal into another's. The closest I have come is when:

1) I almost imported HERO 4th's martial arts system into 2Ed D&D...but that's because they had a conversion chapter to do that in Ultimate Martial Artist. I didn't do it because it really would have been a wholesale replacement of the 2Ed combat rules. If I'm going that far, I might as well run HERO.

2) I use random character background generators from games like Traveller, or from a free-standing product like the Central Casting books.

 

[Anselyn]

Say you were an avid cyclist. You have a bicycle you really liked, but the seat isn't comfortable. Do you go looking for an entirely different bike, or do you just replace the seat?

Character building and advancement is only one aspect of the game. Swap out the character advancement system from D&D, the rest of the game still plays like D&D!

Ahem! Saddle.

I agree. It's an attempt to fix a small system that is seen as unfair because of the otherwise randomness of game starting points. It then complicates into a mess of trying to give sensibly quantified points of measured or perceived benefits. It's an accelerator on the optimise and gamify axis.

 

[pickin_grinnin]

I stick to point-buy systems whenever I can. Character creation is one of my favorite part of rpgs, and I don't like to be hemmed in by rolled stats, set classes, etc.

The only reason I own Pathfinder (and MIGHT buy 5e, maybe) is because it's hard to find people around here who will play anything else. If I could find some decent reliable players who were willing to branch beyond D&D/Pathfinder, I would never DM/GM or play in either of those systems again.

 

[trancejeremy]

I think one thing, is that most point buy RPGs have an immense complexity level.

Hero in particular is infamous for being complex. GURPs isn't far behind

With perhaps the exception of 3.x, D&D has always been relatively simple, and I'd say even 3.x isn't so bad unless you are the DM.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As a HEROphile and a lifelong D&D player, I'd have to say that both games are about equivalent in complexity. However, with HERO, its complexity is obvious to anyone, whereas D&D's remains hidden until it bites you.

And that very transparency probably puts people off of HERO. They cans SEE the MATH staring them in the face.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I would cheerfully use HERO for almost all* games I would run. I like the flexibility of the system and I like the ease of use in play. Yes ease of use in play. HERO is much simpler in play than DnD 3.X and many other games out there. I admit that character design can be complex, but honestly, not that complex unless you're playing supers. In fact if a player has a clear concept they can put together a starting character as easily as a 1st level DnD character.

Of course I've said all of this on the forums before.

More on topic (ie: one reason I think many gamers stick with DnD and similar systems.)

My girlfriend is fairly new to RPGs. She likes HERO but she prefers Pathfinder. I think there's several reasons for this but one I've noticed is the clear, well defined class progression available in DnD.

What she likes about Pathfinder is the laundry list of powers that one gets as one goes up levels. As she is relatively new to RPGs she gets great benefit from having a list of stuff from which to pick as the characters level. Lists/modularity are/is easier than "dream something up" that HERO and GURPS give you. There is also the cool factor - you see some cool power et.al. higher up the list. You aim for it, you work toward it, you get it! That's a very satisfying aspect of playing games. She's not (yet) familiar enough with the 3.X system to see how clunky it is. Nor have we reached high level play where the problems become very pronounced. So she is unaware of one of the biggest negative aspects of the system. (i.e.: it falls apart at high levels.) Sure I've mentioned this, but being told something and experiencing it for yourself are two very different things.

I think by their nature points buy systems encourage wider choice, a more freeform style of character design/advancement, HERO and GURPS being the best examples.

Me, I'm well past the point where I need the list. I prefer coming up with my own list. But I've been a gamer for 30 something years. And a hard core gamer at that. I don't need the help and sometimes I feel downright restricted by the options. Now of course the reason I am able to come up with my own list for a character is because I've had so many years playing with systems where there have been example lists. Between that and a very deep familiarity with a great deal of genre fiction from which to draw I'm well catered to. "If I see further it is because I stand upon the shoulders of giants." To coin a phrase.

So I love HERO. It is so very open - it enables me to play the character I want to play straight out the starting gates. My girlfriend looks at HERO and is rather flabbergasted by all the openness. She prefers a more well defined framework in which to operate. I suspect that will change with time and familiarity with more RPGs.

Another reason is that it's easier to mod a system you know than to learn a whole new system and THEN mod that. Even if the other system would be quicker and easier it isn't perceived to be because of the "devil you know" effect.


Cheers.

*Only exceptions are L5R and Ars Magica. In both cases the system is part of the appeal and it's pretty much impossible to replicate it with another system.

 

[billd91]

My girlfriend is fairly new to RPGs. She likes HERO but she prefers Pathfinder. I think there's several reasons for this but one I've noticed is the clear, well defined class progression available in DnD.

What she likes about Pathfinder is the laundry list of powers that one gets as one goes up levels. As she is relatively new to RPGs she gets great benefit from having a list of stuff from which to pick as the characters level. Lists/modularity are/is easier than "dream something up" that HERO and GURPS give you. There is also the cool factor - you see some cool power et.al. higher up the list. You aim for it, you work toward it, you get it! That's a very satisfying aspect of playing games.

I can easily see that. Having experience with both Hero and many editions of D&D, I have more of a feeling of real progress in D&D games as I level up. Unless I'm using a power framework like a multipower, adding a significant power in Hero can take quite a while as I save points from session to session. The D&D increases are regular and, as of 3e, pretty frequent. D&D also allows a lot of customization by equipment that can change significantly in character with just a good couple of treasure hoards. I can do the same in Hero, but I'm largely redesigning the character to do so. That may be a plus to some, but redesigning in Hero feels different to me from adding new gear. The character continuity just doesn't feel the same.

 

[Anselyn]

And that very transparency probably puts people off of HERO. They cans SEE the MATH staring them in the face.

I agree. I think it's an example of dissassociated mechanics that some people, including me, can't get past. "Casting a Fireball" directly links what the player says is happening to what the character is doing. Somehow saying I cast a Fireball when "Fireball" is mechanically an arbitrary cool tag for [Intensity=12, Fire Damage]* just isn't the same.

* Symolic of the feel of HERO rather than intended as a genuine example.

 

[innerdude]

Over the past few decades, I've seen more and more people incorporating point-buy/modular systems- stat generation, spellcasting, character class design, feat acquisition- into their D&D games. Some have even become part of the published game itself. I have no issue with that per se.

However, I'm puzzled: with all the good point-buy/modular RPGS out there- HERO, GURPS, M&M etc.- why aren't people playing those more? To clarify, while I fully realize that D&D is the 800lb gorilla in the market, once you've found a good point-buy RPG, why do people try to remake D&D more like those games instead of the other way around?

Personally, I found it easy as pie to run D&D style games in HERO. I can even accommodate elements from different editions of D&D in a fantasy HERO campaign with almost no fuss.

So why do people keep beating their heads against the wall of D&D's core designs when there are seemingly better options out there for them?

Simply put, inertia.

It's the same reason I fought against the very thought of looking at anything other than D&D for YEARS. "I'll have to learn a new system." "My players will have to learn a new system." "It won't be a smooth transition." "What if it's WORSE than just sticking with D&D?"

That's the thing about D&D---it's a KNOWN quantity. You pretty much know before hand the type of experience you're going to get.

It's the same thing posited in the E-myth book---people don't go to McDonald's because they're expecting food excellence. They go to McDonald's because they know EXACTLY what the experience will be. There's no hidden gotchas, no showing up and suddenly the old french fry recipe has been turned on its ear.

To a lot of people there's real value in meeting a consistent expectation, even if the overall experience could be superior and more individualized to taste.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Right, but most people don't go into McD's asking for a burger with, saaaay, pepperoni slices.

As for the inertia idea, it does factor in, but IME, those guys tend not to modify their D&D games with mechanisms from other RPG systems. The one exception I've seen to that is importing things from closely related systems. So for example, in our group, I and others have imported 3.X mechanisms from AE, Pathfinder and other cousins, but that's about as far as those guys go.