Needless Variation

[nsruf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Needless Variation

Designer's privilege. ... In short, they were given far too much decision making power, IMO.

Maybe, but then we want these people to give us their creative best as well. Placing the designers under too many restrictions could also make for a bland and mediocre game.

I don't want to say that e.g. the damage threshold rules are especially innovative, but everybody is going to draw the line for "permissible change" somewhere else.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Needless Variation

Maybe, but then we want these people to give us their creative best as well.

Absolutely, which is why they were given so much creative power. It's a double-edge sword. But the reason I said "IMO" is because there are certain changes that I could have lived without, like the damage threshold. It's not that I don't like it. It just doesn't vastly improve upon my gaming experience, thus I could care less. When taking that into consideration, the change was completely unnecessary. But, they can't cater to everyone, which brings us back to "IMO".

 

[Plane Sailing]

The issue you raise makes me think of apiary.

When you want to move a beehive 10ft, you have to do it in big stages. If you move it 10ft the bees can't find their hive that evening and die. If you move it 80ft, the bees come out in the morning, say to themselves "hey, this is different" and take special account of their new position, so they can navigate back safely. after a few days you can move it back 70ft to the position that you *really* wanted it in, and they re-adjust once more.

If you give the bees a big change, they see it coming and prepare for it. If you only give them a little change they assume that its business as usual and then get tripped up.

Cheers

 

[KDLadage]

And the events of our Friday game this last week panned that theory out...

Care to tell us more?

OK... so my group currently has a Friday Game Night (coordinating a night all of our wives would not object to took a while). In order to get the most from this, we rotate Game Mastering. First Friday of the month is Eric's STAR WARS campaign (I play a 3rd level Scoundrel in that one); second Friday of the month is Gary's URBAN ARCANA campaign (where I play a 4th level Dedicated-2/Charismatic-2 street-priest); third Friday of the month is my UMBRAGIA campaign (a northern oceans naval campaign...); fourth Friday of the month is Rich's SUPPRESSED TRANSMISSION campaign (based on a timeline written by Kenneth hite over on PYRAMID Magazine). If a month has a fifth Friday, we wing it with one-offs or board games (usually something like STAR WARS EPIC DUELS).

Anyway, over the last few weeks, the subtle differences in the way the d20-system is used in these systems has become evident. Just this last Friday, we have two characters go down and they are dying. One of the new players ask how stabilization worked. I explained it. But I explained it as a player most familiar with the D&D rules. Eric looked at me funny and explained it as a STAR WARS gamer; Gary then explained it as a player most familiar with d20 Modern.

Now it isn't that we do not know the rules. I have read the D&D books (3,5 included) cover to cover. I enjoy it. Eric is a Star Wars fanatic, and so has read the Star Wars game cover to cover. Gary loves the Urban Arcana setting and so has read d20 Modern and the setting book cover to cover. Eric and Gary have skimmed the D&D rules; Gary and I have skimmed the STAR WARS rules and Eric and I have skimmed the d20 Modern rules... and so, most of the time, we just roll what we are told to roll by the Game Master (who knows the rules for his game) and go on. But the rules for recovery, being as varied as they are, seemed really odd, and caused us some confusion (and disrupted the game for a good thirty minutes while we argued which method was correct).

Now... of all the methods, the d20 Modern/Star Wars method makes the most sense. You just set the DC based on the "realism setting" you want in your game. Just like I believe that the Massive Damage Threshold is a good idea -- and I realize it is used in most versions of d20. It is just that having it fixed at 50 in one game, CON in another, and 10 in another seems odd... In Cthulu, you have a "setting" and so fixing the number someplace makes sense. In d20 Modern and d20 Fantasy, there is no fixed setting, and so it needs to be something the DM can place where s/he feels it makes the most sense in thier game. In my opinion. Your milage may vary. That sort of thing.