Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 2409182" data-attributes="member: 32164"><p>A couple points...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Neither do I. I was just trying to make the point that rather than giving out experience points that accumulate to give you a level bonus (and all that comes along with it), you break that level bonus into its 10 (or 12, or whatever) constituent pieces. To take a specific D&D example, a fighter who "levels up" improves his defensive capability, a couple skills, his melee and ranged weapon skills, and learns 1/2 of a combat feat. In WFRP terms, that's about 5-6 "advances" per level.</p><p></p><p>I agree with you that it's totally doable. But it's quite a deviation from the D20 norm. Essentially, it's more compatible with a point-buy type version - like Green Ronin's own <em>Mutants and Masterminds</em>.</p><p></p><p>WFRP gives xp in 100s but the minimum cost for advances is 100 and they're all round numbers. As a result, you might as well drop the extra zeros and just call them "advances" rather than giving out experience points you number in the hundreds.</p><p></p><p>For the record, I don't think Ryan holds any particular bias for D&D (moreso than the average gamer, anyway). He has just pointed out that, for some reason, even though it wasn't first, D&D captured more of the market than its competitors. That implies that gamers, on average, judged D&D "more buyable" (dare I presume "better?") than its competition. Since the only things that distinguish D&D from its competition are its mechanic and, to a lesser extent, its "core story," its success must be due to one of those 2 things. Since the core story was borrowed a LOT, that probably doesn't explain it. Therefor, the point is that for doing D&D's core story, the d20 mechanic is "better."</p><p></p><p>What was being marketed by the alternatives? Either more "detail" or games that added something to the D&D mechanic (which they often dumped just to avoid being sued for copyright infringement). Interestingly, TSR had the system sitting under their noses - they could have swiped the "all the same mechanic" idea from Top Secret and combined it with the d20 for tasks AGES ago. They "half got it" when they created <em>Alternity</em>. They standardized the mechanic across the system, but they tried to replace the D20 mechanic with something MUCH more complex. And gamers, as a whole, didn't take to it.</p><p></p><p>Near as I can tell, when they made 3e, WotC sat down and looked at that mechanic. What did D&D really HAVE over its competition, mechanics-wise? Answer - a simple combat resolution system. So they took D&D, and adopted the <em>Alternity</em> concept of universal task resolution, and class + skill characters, created mechanics for setting difficulty numbers in non-combat situations so the core mechanic could handle more than just combat, and the d20 System was born.</p><p></p><p>On a related topic:</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>That the base AC is equivalent to "taking 10" on a Defense Roll is well-established. That Palladium books got sued because this was the core mechanic of their combat system is also pretty well-established. All having a "Parry skill" and "Dodge skill" does is add an extra roll to combat. The "defense roll" option is even in the 3.5 DMG.</p><p></p><p>I think Ryan meant that the concept of "saving throws" are a key part of the system, not the fact that there are 3 of them. He was essentially saying D&D needs saving throws. If you think the game needs more than D&D's "core 3," you can do that. Even D&D allows for "Str-based" Fort saves, "cha-based" Will saves, and so forth. Worth thinking about...</p><p></p><p>The ability scores are another D&D legacy. You can change their range, or alter the bonues, or use point-buy or whatever. The only reason for 3d6 is that it produces a bell curve with mostly average results, a few good ones and a few bad ones.</p><p></p><p>The spell system is integral to D&D, NOT d20. Alternative magic systems is an innovation I wish we'd see more of. The game finally has a few (<em>Wheel of Time, Midnight, Black Company,</em> the forthcoming <em>Iron Heroes</em>, and so forth.</p><p></p><p>Now, on to some of the <em>Alternity</em> concepts...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em>Alternity</em> was a fascinating game that might qualify as being OGL-compliant. Maybe. More on that below, however first I'm going to quote from the Alternityrpg website as part of my response...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It was a cool system, but I always found the implementation a bit wonky. On the other hand, likening a die roll to a numeric penalty or bonus is not new, or particularly excluded from d20. The defense roll above is one example. Opposed skill checks is another. "Hyper Rolls" in <em>Four Color to Fantasy</em> is a third. Armor DR as a variable is a fourth, and so on. The core task resolution is still a d20. Other than having high ability scores (So you could roll under them) and penalties as additions and benefits as subtractions, (good god, was everyone at TSR THAT influenced by THAC0??), it's just not that different.</p><p></p><p>For instance, nothing about the d20 mechanic prevents you from using a +1d4 rather than +2, or a +1d12 rather than +6. Or about ruling that failing by 1 is different than failing by 10, or that beating a DC by 20 ought to be worth more than doing it by 1. In fact, I think Mike Mearls is using the former in the "armor as DR" rules for <em>Iron Heroes</em> while the latter (at least on the success side) is being tapped for that game's "skill challenge" system. Mearls seems to be retaining hit points primarily in order to retain compatibility with the D&D monster manuals.</p><p></p><p>As an aside, Bill Slavicsek probably deserves an enormous amount of credit for the creation of the d20 System. He used difficulty numbers in WEG's <em>Star Wars</em>, then designed [/i]Alternity[/i], and then went back to difficulty numbers (same levels of "easy (5)," "average (10)," "tough (15)," "challenging (20)," "formidable (25)," "heroic (30)," and "nearly impossible (40+)" as SW) in d20. Coincidence? I doubt it. I'd say Bill was building on the D&D mechanic from the beginning. The default roll of 3d6 produces the same average, so you can set an "average" task DN at 10, the default combat TN in D&D. Heck, if you like d6's, <em>Unearthed Arcana</em> tells you how to use 3d6 to replace the d20 rolls, making bonuses matter more and chance matter less.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 2409182, member: 32164"] A couple points... Neither do I. I was just trying to make the point that rather than giving out experience points that accumulate to give you a level bonus (and all that comes along with it), you break that level bonus into its 10 (or 12, or whatever) constituent pieces. To take a specific D&D example, a fighter who "levels up" improves his defensive capability, a couple skills, his melee and ranged weapon skills, and learns 1/2 of a combat feat. In WFRP terms, that's about 5-6 "advances" per level. I agree with you that it's totally doable. But it's quite a deviation from the D20 norm. Essentially, it's more compatible with a point-buy type version - like Green Ronin's own [i]Mutants and Masterminds[/i]. WFRP gives xp in 100s but the minimum cost for advances is 100 and they're all round numbers. As a result, you might as well drop the extra zeros and just call them "advances" rather than giving out experience points you number in the hundreds. For the record, I don't think Ryan holds any particular bias for D&D (moreso than the average gamer, anyway). He has just pointed out that, for some reason, even though it wasn't first, D&D captured more of the market than its competitors. That implies that gamers, on average, judged D&D "more buyable" (dare I presume "better?") than its competition. Since the only things that distinguish D&D from its competition are its mechanic and, to a lesser extent, its "core story," its success must be due to one of those 2 things. Since the core story was borrowed a LOT, that probably doesn't explain it. Therefor, the point is that for doing D&D's core story, the d20 mechanic is "better." What was being marketed by the alternatives? Either more "detail" or games that added something to the D&D mechanic (which they often dumped just to avoid being sued for copyright infringement). Interestingly, TSR had the system sitting under their noses - they could have swiped the "all the same mechanic" idea from Top Secret and combined it with the d20 for tasks AGES ago. They "half got it" when they created [i]Alternity[/i]. They standardized the mechanic across the system, but they tried to replace the D20 mechanic with something MUCH more complex. And gamers, as a whole, didn't take to it. Near as I can tell, when they made 3e, WotC sat down and looked at that mechanic. What did D&D really HAVE over its competition, mechanics-wise? Answer - a simple combat resolution system. So they took D&D, and adopted the [i]Alternity[/i] concept of universal task resolution, and class + skill characters, created mechanics for setting difficulty numbers in non-combat situations so the core mechanic could handle more than just combat, and the d20 System was born. On a related topic: That the base AC is equivalent to "taking 10" on a Defense Roll is well-established. That Palladium books got sued because this was the core mechanic of their combat system is also pretty well-established. All having a "Parry skill" and "Dodge skill" does is add an extra roll to combat. The "defense roll" option is even in the 3.5 DMG. I think Ryan meant that the concept of "saving throws" are a key part of the system, not the fact that there are 3 of them. He was essentially saying D&D needs saving throws. If you think the game needs more than D&D's "core 3," you can do that. Even D&D allows for "Str-based" Fort saves, "cha-based" Will saves, and so forth. Worth thinking about... The ability scores are another D&D legacy. You can change their range, or alter the bonues, or use point-buy or whatever. The only reason for 3d6 is that it produces a bell curve with mostly average results, a few good ones and a few bad ones. The spell system is integral to D&D, NOT d20. Alternative magic systems is an innovation I wish we'd see more of. The game finally has a few ([i]Wheel of Time, Midnight, Black Company,[/i] the forthcoming [i]Iron Heroes[/i], and so forth. Now, on to some of the [i]Alternity[/i] concepts... [i]Alternity[/i] was a fascinating game that might qualify as being OGL-compliant. Maybe. More on that below, however first I'm going to quote from the Alternityrpg website as part of my response... It was a cool system, but I always found the implementation a bit wonky. On the other hand, likening a die roll to a numeric penalty or bonus is not new, or particularly excluded from d20. The defense roll above is one example. Opposed skill checks is another. "Hyper Rolls" in [i]Four Color to Fantasy[/i] is a third. Armor DR as a variable is a fourth, and so on. The core task resolution is still a d20. Other than having high ability scores (So you could roll under them) and penalties as additions and benefits as subtractions, (good god, was everyone at TSR THAT influenced by THAC0??), it's just not that different. For instance, nothing about the d20 mechanic prevents you from using a +1d4 rather than +2, or a +1d12 rather than +6. Or about ruling that failing by 1 is different than failing by 10, or that beating a DC by 20 ought to be worth more than doing it by 1. In fact, I think Mike Mearls is using the former in the "armor as DR" rules for [i]Iron Heroes[/i] while the latter (at least on the success side) is being tapped for that game's "skill challenge" system. Mearls seems to be retaining hit points primarily in order to retain compatibility with the D&D monster manuals. As an aside, Bill Slavicsek probably deserves an enormous amount of credit for the creation of the d20 System. He used difficulty numbers in WEG's [i]Star Wars[/i], then designed [/i]Alternity[/i], and then went back to difficulty numbers (same levels of "easy (5)," "average (10)," "tough (15)," "challenging (20)," "formidable (25)," "heroic (30)," and "nearly impossible (40+)" as SW) in d20. Coincidence? I doubt it. I'd say Bill was building on the D&D mechanic from the beginning. The default roll of 3d6 produces the same average, so you can set an "average" task DN at 10, the default combat TN in D&D. Heck, if you like d6's, [i]Unearthed Arcana[/i] tells you how to use 3d6 to replace the d20 rolls, making bonuses matter more and chance matter less. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
Top