Monte Cooks WoD is for 3.5

This has certainly been an interesting read. To answer the two original questions:

1) I am more interested in it because it's d20. I hope that it will be as portable to 3.5 as possible. Monte or Sean wrote about the loss of mastery when 3.5 came out, so I hope I can use as much mastery over 3.5 as I have when reading MC's WoD. I've gotten rid of many d20 & OGL books that weren't very portable to d20 (and even some that were) because there just isn't time for all the great games that are easy to run to keep those that require me to learn and work at it. Here's hoping that MC's WoD is a little more d20 and a lot less OGL, if you take my meaning.

2) The cover really doesn't do anything for me one way or another. At first, I tought it was a woman, which might have been a little more intriguing.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Heh... I've been sitting here saying to those down on D20 saying that it's not really targeted at the present WoD fans...

Then I wander over to the WoD forums, and the split doesn't look much different. The smack talk about d20 is, naturally, more petulant and ignorant, but there seem to be just as many folks over there that are eager to see what Monte turns out.
 

blargney the second said:
Interesting! My experiences with WoD games were really not equipment-oriented. I think we found a total of 4 magic items over an entire campaign.

Well, I didn't say "equipment-oriented" -- I mentioned dungeon crawls (i.e., linear adventures that consisted of killing lots of enemies) and loot (i.e., rewards gained as a result of killing enemies). Those rewards weren't always equipment, but that doesn't change the basic dynamic any. The basic equation still functions the same. PCs kill X to gain Y (Y, in this case, was usually a special ability of some sort, though magical weapons seemed to abound in Werewolf).
 

blargney the second said:
Interesting! My experiences with WoD games were really not equipment-oriented. I think we found a total of 4 magic items over an entire campaign.

In years of Vampire games, I don't think I ever saw a single magic item. My Nosferatu hacker did however take wallets off of those who suffered unfortunate accidents as a result of the nights events and drain their credit cards.

Poaching the ghouls and resources of fallen rival Kindred was high sport among the Ventrue players (not mine, 'though, he was above that sort of thing, besides, he already had all the money he could possibly ever need or want...).

The World of Darkness already has experience, already has 'monsters,' already has a lame alignment system (and by 'lame' I mean every bit as 'lame' as the D&D enforced morality system) that straightjackets roleplaying, already has 'classes' that do better or worse at certain defined roles than other 'classes' (Tremere - spellcaster, Brujah or Gangrel - warrior, Nosferatu - rogue, etc). It's just a game. It's not like 'purer roleplaying' than D&D, since it's got the same dice-rolling of Ability+Skill pools replacing social interactions, unlike say, an *actually* 'purer' role-playing game like Amber Diceless or LARPing.

White Wolf's strongest point, IMO, was the often beautifully written, evocative and compelling background material and internal fiction that D&D didn't really get into as much, at least not into the core products (Ed Greenwood's Dragon articles and the Dragonlance novels being cases of evocative descriptive 'fluff' that made their respective settings stronger, but not so much things you would find in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting hardcover). Once White Wolf-style writers started working on d20 product, such as the Scarred Lands setting, and then started crossing over to work directly for WotC (Ari Marmell being one fine example), that advantage of WW's started creeping over into D&D product as well, leaving very little for a WW fan like me to get all snobbish about.

Very similar rules mechanics, often written by the same darn people.

The only qualitative difference that matters here as to whether the game is a 'role-playing' or 'roll-playing' game, whether it is 'deep' or 'shallow,' is the quality of the DM and players, and *nothing else.*

The d20 system with it's occasional straightjacket classes like the Paladin, restricted to one style of role-play doesn't discourage role-playing anymore than the ST system with it's mandatory psychological flaws based on Clan (oh, you're a Brujah? You *must* be psycho! Oh, you saw a fire? Roll dice. You don't get to roleplay being brave, if you fail, you shriek and fly about hands in the air like a punctured ballon, oh great bad Gangrel who firedances on the weekends... The new Requiem rules have even *more* role-play restrictive mechanics! Oh look, half the Kindred in town are together for a fancy dress party and a new Kindred enters the room, *everyone* roll for a Beast freak-out, and if you fail the debutante ball turns into bloodbath of frenzied mayhem, with more and more tux and gown-clad jaded 400 year old socialites flipping out as the bloodshed continues and they have to make more and more dice rolls to avoid picking up a serving platter and joining the carnage!).

It's the players / GM who choose whether or not to avoid being slaves to the system, *either* system, and move into a 'deeper' roleplaying experience. And sometimes, they just want to kill stuff and take their loot, and in that case as well, there's no reason to look down upon *gamers having fun,* since that's the friggin' point!

I've seen intense role-playing in Star Fleet Battles, the *least* role-playing conducive game in the universe. I've sat frustrated as Werewolf game after Werewolf game degenerated into 'My rank 2 Black Fury can kill three Antediluvians in a single round by popping in from the Umbra during the day and dishing out 35 Aggravated wounds with each of my half dozen claw hits, and they can't soak more than 20, and can't have more than 8 HT...'

System is a tool. If the players want to role-play, they will, and they'll discard or modify the role-playing restrictive rules (like Lawful Good Paladins, or the Humanity trait, or Rotschroek) in the process.
 

Set said:
already has a lame alignment system (and by 'lame' I mean every bit as 'lame' as the D&D enforced morality system) that straightjackets roleplaying
You make some good points in this post, but this is just stupid. Nothing about either D&D's alignments or any of the various morality systems used by White Wolf games "straightjackets" roleplaying. Only misunderstanding of them and misuse of them, by players and GMs, does that.

Don't blame the rules for a bad result which is caused by the people at the table getting it wrong.
 

hmmm... so it'll be something like an almost-postapocalyptic scenario using the basic features of the xWoD...

...sounds ok, but since I use GURPS for most of my games and I've always felt that GURPS Cabal is "the WoD done right", and since this here is a postapocalyptic version of it that's been available for years, I'll probably stay with my old campaign...;)
 

Psion said:
You can't be serious.

Rarely, but this time I am.


Psion said:
I've seen multiple riffs on the WoD idea of different clans or types of these creatures, with varying degrees of playability and success. WoD obviously, by design intent, has more depth and breadth in these creature types.

Bringing this to D20 from a designer with demonstrated talent is a GOOD THING[tm].

I bow to your capitalization but not to your content. The breadth of creature types in WoD can be solely attributed to their backgrounds rather than their powers. You can handle all the different powers and vamp types using Racial Character Classes, as I suspect would be the subject of this book.

Do we really need another different take on Vampires in d20? Between Ravenloft and all the Green Ronin and other 3rd Party stuff on monsters? Sure, you can play WoD as hack and slash or DnD as a high-brow RP but the way both work the best is the other way around. Personally, I'd use the system that works best for what you want to do. d20 players don't need this sort of book, we've got all the tools we need to do it already.

You know, it occurs to me that we all may be making a huge assumption that this is WoDd20. You'll notice that the cover of this product does not sport the d20 logo. 3rd edition could refer to nWoD, considering that it is the 3rd iteration of the setting. V:tM and its siblings had a 1st and 2nd Edition, V:tR could be said to be 3rd edition. So, theoretically MC's WoD could be Monte's take on the WoD using the nWoD rule set. Considering how good a job he did on Arcana Unearthed, his take on nWoD could make an interesting book.


Lord Tirian said:
Seen the CoC-book? Everything you need in one neat book, including monsters.

Yes, I even have the book. I will also point out that the lisence has expired, so it's not like it's as easy to get your hands on as the SRD is but my original point was that the SRD isn't really good enough to run the game without supplimentery material, it's designed that way. Heck, if everyone could legally dl the complete rules for free why would anyone ever buy a DnD book ever again?
 

Ipissimus said:
You know, it occurs to me that we all may be making a huge assumption that this is WoDd20. You'll notice that the cover of this product does not sport the d20 logo.
"It uses the familiar d20 mechanics (six stats, hp, "classes," skills, feats), but I'm not sure if it's going to have a d20 logo on the cover." - Sean K. Reynolds, 22/2/07 (D<->M for you Americans ;) ) -> link here, as was posted earlier in this thread.

Of course, he might've been fibbing or what have you, but honestly I doubt it.
 

Has anybody of the pro WoD or D&D posters given a thought WHY Monte Cook took over this project?

Was it because he desperately needed cash?
I do not think so, he is one of the Bestsellers of non WoC D20

Was it because he had nothing elseto do?
Nope, he has a lot of non RPG projects going, this was his last project.

So why did he take this project?
He just couldn't resist!

But why I ask you should he take the WoD and just convert the mechanics to D20 while working under the constraints of the offical WoD setting?

I think he was given full freedom to realize HIS ideas of the WoD (after all it is called Monte Cook's World of Darkness, isn't it?).

So I say it again:
I DO NOT THINK THAT THIS IS A CONVERSION OF THE OFFICIAL WOD.
THIS IS WOD IMAGINED BY MONTE COOK DONE IN THE SYSTEM HE KNOWS BEST.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top