Only the Lonely: Why We Demand Official Product

[hawkeyefan]

Gotta love in these discussions how folks who seem to be calling for official support always seem to look down on the “professionals” that would provide that support.

 

[jmucchiello]

Not arguing that, except it's not a d20-based system.

Only issue I potentially see is the less granularity of a d20 vs d100, but it's still possible to do this with a d20 system.

Yes but that's the value of the d100 system. You can increase in ability slowly. +1 in d20 is +5 in d100.

Actually if i got to decide 6e D&D mechanics, I'm partial to a d20 dice pool, attribute+skill as the target number, roll under system, where skill ranks give you more dice to roll.

And why abandon 10 + ability modifier = DC. What is +skill? I thought skill ranks increases the dice rolled. Why are you double dipping skill? What do multiple successes do?

 

[3catcircus]

Gotta love in these discussions how folks who seem to be calling for official support always seem to look down on the “professionals” that would provide that support.

Who said anything about looking down on them? I pointed out that if they aren't always self-consistent, at least having a definitive "current edition of this thing" is more consistent than expecting every DM to do their own.

 

[3catcircus]

Yes but that's the value of the d100 system. You can increase in ability slowly. +1 in d20 is +5 in d100.



And why abandon 10 + ability modifier = DC. What is +skill? I thought skill ranks increases the dice rolled. Why are you double dipping skill? What do multiple successes do?

So, let's say you have a Dex of 10 and 3 skills ranks in "bows." You roll a d20 and try to get under 10. Someone with a higher Dex is naturally more "talented." But unless they increased in the skill they can only roll the one die. Let's say someone with a Dex of 10 puts 8 ranks into the skill. Maybe that means they roll 3 dice. 3 dice have a better chance of rolling under 10 than one die.

Each additional successful die roll could add to your success. Use of dice pools and margins of success/failure, with additional successful dice adding to a margin of success. Is take existing weapon damage averages and add margin of success to the damage. So let's say you need to roll under Dex 10 and get a 7, 9 and 12. So you would do (arrow avg dmg) + 3 +2 more for the second success for a total of 8. If you succeed by a large enough margin, it's a crit. Fail by a large enough margin and it's a fumble.

You could also do this unskilled by rolling 2 d20s and being forced to pick the higher of the two results.

You could then instead of rolling against a Dex score (with situational modifiers), use an opposed roll (let's say the enemy uses a Dodge skill with a margin of success of 3, so you'd have to roll less than 7, but you're at point blank range, so it Bumps it back up to a 9 u need to roll under).

More fiddly than d20 vs DC? Yes, but infinitely more tuneable.

 

[jmucchiello]

More fiddly than d20 vs DC? Yes, but infinitely more tuneable.

My total made up guess is that 90% of D&D players don't need "more tuneable."

 

[hawkeyefan]

The real problem with progressive conversion is age. To do the conversions, you should have experience with all 5 editions. Aside from us old timers, most people don't have that experience. And some of us skipped 2e or 4e (inverse Star Trek movie rule).

Regardless, as I say for all conversion projects (whether between editions of a game or between different game systems), never attempt to convert mechanics directly. Convert the fluff and assign mechanics using the target game based on the fluff you wish to achieve.

You don't find a stat block of Mordenkainen and convert it. You create a 5e "powerful, infamous wizard" and create a stat block using the 5e rules.

Absolutely. Sometimes I think people get so caught up in conversion that they miss this more simple approach.

Use the source material, whether it’s a novel or past edition, as inspiration to then create what you’re looking for.

Who said anything about looking down on them? I pointed out that if they aren't always self-consistent, at least having a definitive "current edition of this thing" is more consistent than expecting every DM to do their own.

Well, typically when people use quotes around a title or description, it’s meant to be ironic. Why use “professionals”?

If I misinterpreted, then my apologies, but that’s how it read.

 

[3catcircus]

Absolutely. Sometimes I think people get so caught up in conversion that they miss this more simple approach.

Use the source material, whether it’s a novel or past edition, as inspiration to then create what you’re looking for.




Well, typically when people use quotes around a title or description, it’s meant to be ironic. Why use “professionals”?

If I misinterpreted, then my apologies, but that’s how it read.

No worries. Pros could be a WotC or a 1-person writer/artist/editor. If you sell it and get paid, you're a pro, in my book.

 

[ChaosOS]

Still surprised people aren't talking about dmsguild, but I think there's another point related to it - the only way to legally publish content for 5e that's not OGL compliant (aka using wizards IP, which old setting conversions necessarily do) is through the dmsguild. But, WOTC only unlocks settings that have official books. Anything you publish to convert a setting like Dark Sun is legally risky, and you certainly can't be financially compensated for your time.

 

[3catcircus]

Still surprised people aren't talking about dmsguild, but I think there's another point related to it - the only way to legally publish content for 5e that's not OGL compliant (aka using wizards IP, which old setting conversions necessarily do) is through the dmsguild. But, WOTC only unlocks settings that have official books. Anything you publish to convert a setting like Dark Sun is legally risky, and you certainly can't be financially compensated for your time.

Yep - and there is no 5e content for GH showing up under the 5e AND Greyhawk filters, for example. And the DMs resource for Ghosts of Saltmarsh is under the 5e AND FR filters...

 

[pemerton]

in the absence of an official setting guide, I think people can manage without needing to do as much work as it seems, if they really want to play in a specific setting.

It doesn’t need to be a 300 page book, when you get down to it.

So much this! Especially if we're talking about GH, or Dragonlance, or the Known World/Mystara.

This. Ask 10 people to convert some type of mechanical info from prior editions to 5e and you'll get 10 different results.

But why is this a problem?

When I wanted to run an Alien scenario in my Traveller game I statted up an alien using the available system resources. It took me 10 to 15 minutes. Having done it once, I statted up a larval state alien at the table in less than five. What does it matter that, at another table, or even at my table at a different time if I were in a different mood, it would be done differently?

When I posted my thread, another poster informed me that there had been stats for the various life stages of an alien published in an early number of the Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society. Having subsequently looked at those ones, they're different from (more vicious than) mine. Once I'd acquired the PDF from DriveThru RPG it was interesting to make the comparison, but that has no effect on the (successful) play experience at my table.