Needless Variation

[KDLadage]

(cross posting to the Rules Forum, d20 Modern forum and House Rules forum)

Something that has been bothering me: the d20 system is supposed to be a rules set that can be tailored to various genres in such a way that it can server as a solid foundation, thus keeping you from having to learn a new system all the time, as you play things like d20 Star Wars, d20 Dungeons and Dragons and d20 Modern. (1)

For the most part, the theory holds true. However, in playing the d20 system in various genres, I a noticing some needless variation. By this, I mean that sometimes the rules are changed from one area to another with no good reason. For example:

• Dying Characters: Quick! In the d20 system, how do you stabalize when you are a dying character (i.e.: when you have -1 to -9 hit points)? Well, in Dungeons and Dragons, you lose one point per round with a flat 10% chance to stabalize each round. Now, when you shift to Star Wars, since they use the Wounds/Vitality system, I understand that some changes needed to be made, so it uses a DC 10 Fort Check to do it. But in d20 Modern, you shift to a DC 20 Fort Check. Now, d20 Modern is supposed to be very close to the Dungeons and Dragons system -- so why this change? Is there a reason anyone can think of for the d20 and d20 Modern rules not being unified in this area? Especially with the release of 3.5? The only thing I can think of is because of the Threshold Rules, but still...
• Threshold: In Dungeons and Dragons you have Hit Points; in Star Wars you have Wounds and Vitality; in d20 Modern, they went back to Hit Points but added the Threshold to make things a bit more realistic -- i.e.: any wound could be the one that does you in. Is there any reason anyone can think of for the Thrshold rules not being used in D&D 3.5 (most likely not as a standard rule, but it could have been in the DMG as an optional rule)?
• Skills, and Feats galore!: There appear to be a multitude of skills and feats that operate differently (sometimes subtle differences, sometimes significant differences) from one version of the d20 system to the next. Can anyone explain to me why these variations exist? Again, especially after the release of 3.5, when much opf this could have been made uniform?
• And so on...

I ask this because each of these things makes for a difficult environment. A player learns (let us say...) Dungeons asnd Dragons. He then goes into an Urban Arcana game. Now, the rules are close enough that he feels comfortable to begin play, but different enough that it becomes frustrating trying to explain to the player how the rules are ever-so-slightly (but when combined, are effectively quite significantly) different now.

Just curious.

Also, have any of you modified one d20 rules set with the rules from another one? IE: has anyone used the threshold rules in D&D? Has anyone used the Wound/Vitality system in d20 Modern? And so on...

==========
(1) As well as many others... Call of Cthulu, Wheel of Time, etc and so on.

 

[JPL]

I suspect the d20 Modern massive damage rules will be in Unearthed Arcana. Maybe vitality points, too.

In some cases, the changes are there because the different genre demands it.

For example, CoC characters who run away don't take an attack of opportunity --- this reinforces the idea that you don't have to go toe-to-toe with every Nameless Evil you meet. d20 Modern has a few feats like Agile Riposte which would be overpowered in a melee-heavy game, but acceptable in a world where firearms are the norm.

In other cases, it's just the continued evolution of the d20 system as a whole. d20 Modern was almost a D&D 3.25 --- and many of the fixes made therein were carried over to 3.5. If there is ever a d20 Modern 2.0, it will undoubtedly borrow many of the ideas from 3.5, such as the assumption that everyone uses some sort of minis.

I'd be strongly tempted to use the non-lethal damage rules from d20 Modern in my next D&D game...and maybe the massive damage threshold, too.

 

[Dismas]

In D&D you have threshold (it maybe an optional rule, I can't remember), the threshold is set at 50hp, this came in 2e (IIRC).

The threshold is a good way of tailoring the deadlyness of the game. In CoC it is 10, in d20 Modern it is Con D&D 50, giving a nice spread between 'gritty' and fantastic. d20 Modern also has a feat to improve your threshold.

I could see a sort of Super Hero style game were for normal people the MDT was 10, but for heroes it was 50.

 

[Kesh]

• 
  Dying Characters: Quick! In the d20 system, how do you stabalize when you are a dying character (i.e.: when you have -1 to -9 hit points)? Well, in Dungeons and Dragons, you lose one point per round with a flat 10% chance to stabalize each round. Now, when you shift to Star Wars, since they use the Wounds/Vitality system, I understand that some changes needed to be made, so it uses a DC 10 Fort Check to do it. But in d20 Modern, you shift to a DC 20 Fort Check. Now, d20 Modern is supposed to be very close to the Dungeons and Dragons system -- so why this change? Is there a reason anyone can think of for the d20 and d20 Modern rules not being unified in this area? Especially with the release of 3.5? The only thing I can think of is because of the Threshold Rules, but still...

• 
  
  I can't comment much on Star Wars, but d20 Modern is simply supposed to be more lethal.
  
  

  Threshold: In Dungeons and Dragons you have Hit Points; in Star Wars you have Wounds and Vitality; in d20 Modern, they went back to Hit Points but added the Threshold to make things a bit more realistic -- i.e.: any wound could be the one that does you in. Is there any reason anyone can think of for the Thrshold rules not being used in D&D 3.5 (most likely not as a standard rule, but it could have been in the DMG as an optional rule)?

  
  Again, to make d20M more lethal. Whereas, in D&D you will be finding creatures that easily deal 20 or more HP per hit by the time you reach 10th level, making high-level play impossible if you use the d20M massive damage threshhold.
  
  

  Skills, and Feats galore!: There appear to be a multitude of skills and feats that operate differently (sometimes subtle differences, sometimes significant differences) from one version of the d20 system to the next. Can anyone explain to me why these variations exist? Again, especially after the release of 3.5, when much opf this could have been made uniform?

  
  usuallly, these are tweaks to make the various items fit better with the particular game system. Or, the rules that were made for one game can't be used in another (ex. Call of Cthulu has some neat psionic feats, but the rules are not OGL.)

 

[Vigilance]

Also something to keep in mind, having a Core, unified system solid enough to spread across multiple genres does not mean EVERYTHING always works identically.

Look at GURPs and Hero, two other fine universal systems. They have books for each genre (GURPs Supers, Champions etc), and things work slightly differently to better represent the feel of the genres.

Also, Star Wars will likely resemble d20 Future in its next incarnation, and 3.5 is MUCh closer to Modern than 3.0 was.

So a lot of the changes you cite are not, in fact, "needless variation", but simply the rules evolving.

Chuck

 

[Spatula]

Dying Characters: Quick! In the d20 system, how do you stabalize when you are a dying character (i.e.: when you have -1 to -9 hit points)? Well, in Dungeons and Dragons, you lose one point per round with a flat 10% chance to stabalize each round. Now, when you shift to Star Wars, since they use the Wounds/Vitality system, I understand that some changes needed to be made, so it uses a DC 10 Fort Check to do it. But in d20 Modern, you shift to a DC 20 Fort Check. Now, d20 Modern is supposed to be very close to the Dungeons and Dragons system -- so why this change? Is there a reason anyone can think of for the d20 and d20 Modern rules not being unified in this area?

The Modern stabilization rules makes it more likely for a dying character, especially an experienced or tough one, to stabilize on his own. The D&D version doesn't work in Modern because there's no easy access to cure spells & potions. In D&D, a cleric can spontaneously cast a cure minor wounds orison, automatically stablizing a dying character and healing 1 hit point. Or a non-cleric can fish out a cure potion and dump it down the throat of a dying companion. There's no particular reason not to use the Modern rule for D&D, but it seems that the 3.5 designers weren't too concerned with adopting Modern changes (they revamped the Jump skill for example, but it works differently than Modern's revamp of the same skill).

Threshold: In Dungeons and Dragons you have Hit Points; in Star Wars you have Wounds and Vitality; in d20 Modern, they went back to Hit Points but added the Threshold to make things a bit more realistic -- i.e.: any wound could be the one that does you in. Is there any reason anyone can think of for the Thrshold rules not being used in D&D 3.5 (most likely not as a standard rule, but it could have been in the DMG as an optional rule)?

It would make D&D combat too deadly. In Modern, it's hard to increase a non-melee weapon's base damage, or to improve your chances of getting a critical hit. There's no sneak attack, for example, and Improved Crit is a high-level class ability instead of a feat. Also, nearly every weapon crits on a 20 and does x2 damage. Whereas in D&D it's very easy to increase your damage and weapons have a wide variety of critical hit characteristics.

 

[KDLadage]

...Or a non-cleric can fish out a cure potion and dump it down the throat of a dying companion...

...and in one of my games, instantly choke the guy to death. It is a bit tough to drink something when you're unconcious and dying...

 

[Spatula]

...and in one of my games, instantly choke the guy to death. It is a bit tough to drink something when you're unconcious and dying...

It's a full-round action to administer a potion to an unconscious character. DMG pg 191.

 

[KDLadage]

Looks Like I rolled a '1' on my Perform (Internet Humor) skill check.

Yes, I am aware it is a full-round action. I am aware it is in the DMG. and I am aware that it is a rule that was Rule-Zeroed in my games (that was why I said 'in one of my games' -- the players are aware when they join all variations and such that I use to the rules).

I removed this rule because it makes no sense to me.

 

[takyris]

I wasn't sure you were joking. One source of confusion was that you were referring to a House Rule that changes existing book rules, when the main topic of this thread, which you started, is what a pain it is to have all this rules variation.