Eternalknight said:
What do you think it's strengths and weaknesses are? Do you think D&D, or more importantly the d20 system, is a success or a failure? What can you see in the future of D&D and the d20 system?
In inverted order:
"Difficult to see the future is." I think new d20 publishers are going to slow. I see less and less room for new items that aren't repeated. Take for example how Green Ronin has teamed up with another publisher vice print stuff in the same category. However, d20 Modern may see a new spurt of growth.
Is the d20 system a success? I pretty much think so. D&D itself wears very well from what I have seen, and does a good job of walking the line between GM utility and player options.
The d20 system itself -- as was to be expected, many vendors put out crap... and most of their stuff was decried as crap. But other vendors (and WotC themselves) turned out the topnotch stuff.
I knew the d20 system was a success when my group herophile asked me if there was a d20 system game that would be good for modern conspiracy. I smiled slyly and ponied up
Spycraft. In other venues, I have seen the d20 wave overcome many emotively defensive system advocates. When people out in the market -- not just participants in forums -- realize the advantages of d20, you know that d20 has succeeded on a grassroots level.
Soon my group will be experimenting with Spycraft and d20 SW, where a year ago Shadowrun was the alternative-to-D&D game of choice.
That said, in some ways the d20 system/effort has fallen short of the mark. I haven't seen the sort of cross-pollenization and improvement of concepts in the OGC that I was hoping for, and some vendors are deliberately excluding some of their best material from the OGC pool.
Strengths and weaknesses of D&D:
Strengths
- Simple, flexible core mechanic (and, I might add, not another tired dice pool system.)
- Class based system makes for simpler chargen, strong character roles, and strong team dynamic. Further, it enforces logical, consistent characters with a minimum of GM fuss.
- Prestige classes gave GMs a tool to make elite groups in the game meaningful
- Feat system provides for simple character enhancment options without tedious point accounting
- Spell system likewise allows characters to do interesting things in a fairly balanced fashion without tedious accounting of "mana points" or rolling
- Combat system hits heroic feel well
- Relatively easy to extend
Weaknesses
- System needs a more formal method for creating and modifying character classes
- Clerics of different faiths are too similar
- BAB might have been better off worked into the skill system.
- NPC classes seem too built on the adventurer model (SW is better.)
- The arcane/divine dichotomy bugs me (not as it stands so much as when I try to do modifications.)
- Some magic seems a little to low level and/or convenient.
Overall, I consider these weaknesses fairly tolerable compared to many other games on the market. And I vehemently disagree with others here that think it doesn't do well outside of fantasy. I think d20 SW and Spycraft are
excellent games. I think d20 SW is so much better than WEG SW that it is not even funny.
Further, in no way are classes "outmoded". That's a popular diatribe that point-based fiends constantly yammer, but there is no objective truth to it. Point based systems are easily abused and all too often lead to characters with no focus and with illogical sets of capabilities. Characters made under point based systems that are logical and consistent tend to fall along the lines of character classes anyways.
And I say this as someone who thinks HERO is the bee's knees. But I know its weaknesses.
That is not to say I think it can do everything well. I still have doubts at how effective it will be in superhero genres. Both d20 superhero games I have seen to date have failed to impress me. Mutants & Masterminds could be phenomenal, but for the time being I anticipate that MEGS and HERO will be my first choice for supers gaming (for high power and low power respectively.)
