evildmguy
Explorer
Greetings!
In my first posting (as vturlough) I started by saying this:
Okay,
I like DND. Love DND. Been playing it for a long time. Therefore, here is my rant on d20 and DND.
Bad things:
Classes
Importance of items
Game Balance
Wargaming
Skills
"Upping the Numbers"
AC
kind've a rant
Hit points
CRs
Good things
Simplicity
Gets casual gamers
There has been a lot of discussion on that thread which I haven't been able to follow. (moved to new town same state, started new job, still unpacking, etc.) I do find it interesting that HPs seem to be discussed a lot at the end. (I haven't read all the pages yet.)
There was one criticism in that I didn't suggest any good alternate ideas for what I didn't like. I will do so here. I also want to talk about this in a slightly different way.
It is too bad that WotC didn't come out with d20 before 3E as 3E could have benefited from even another year of development after d20. While still not perfect, some of the games developed under the d20 license have been quite good.
The only other new thing I have to add, in my rant area, is this. I find it very interesting that the latest computer version of DND, Neverwinter Nights (NWN), has very much so changed DND! Parry rules, limits to when an item can be used, class abilities, alternate spells and more were all added into the computer version of the game that would work well in the pen and paper version.
In particular, the parry rules and items rules are very interesting. I really like that while not addressing the importance of items, that by having to be a minimum level to use an item, it does stop characters from being "out of balance" with a too powerful item.
Alternate
Okay, on to what I was told I missed. An alternate game or rule to handle any gripes that I have with the system.
Alternity.
IMO, I have yet to see a system that is as simple, elegant, playable and enjoyable as Alternity. Hands down, it was the best system out there. (Too bad TSR/WotC won't sell the rights or do anything with it.) Alternity addresses 90% of the issues that I had as well as many things that others have.
Classes: They are there. And, after reading people's responses to my first rant as well as Monte Cook's reasoning for classes, I would keep them in there as is. They work very well and will give that feeling of making progress that classes do.
Importance of Items: Yes, it is nice to have the cool weapon but the weapon itself never overshadows the ability of the character.
Game Balance: Very tough to break. Also, with a more skill based system, technically there are limits as well as people being as good as you, which "balances" itself, in a way.
Wargaming: Not based on wargaming. This is a game for individual who want their *characters* to be the focal point of the story/adventure/campaign.
Skills: The basis of the system. Nothing exists that any character couldn't eventually learn. Yes, without the ability (high attribute) to do something, they won't be as good or it will take longer. The possibility is there.
"Upping the Numbers": Nope. You want low for results for differing grades of results. Therefore, the more experienced, or naturally good, people will accomplish tasks faster and better than those with less ability. Makes sense to me.
AC: Nope. Armor reduces damage. Also, armor is not needed. It takes many hits, without being unrealistic, to take someone down.
Side Note: Damage. I was recently shocked when I watched the Discovery channel and its look at getting into the FBI. Specifically, there is one point where the FBI trains its people to KEEP SHOOTING UNTIL THE OPPONENT goes down! (This is because to knock someone out or kill them, you have to hit them enough times to drop blood pressure to the brain or hit a vital spot. The only way to do that is to hit them lots.) Alternity does have this as it would take some really good shots and really good damage rolls to drop or kill someone in less than three shots or so.
kind've a rant
Hit points: Alternity has three types of damage, and a fourth subdual type, which all mean something. They are less abstract and still work. I think this is an excellent system. It allows for abstraction in combat when needed but also has definite effects.
CRs: Hmm. Not sure about these. These are tough. While a good guideline in DND, and d20, these are still subjective. Some for the same reasons as above (items, hit points, etc.) and other reasons (like cover or smart tactics) that are tough to say. In the end, a good guideline. I say this because I think it is the same with Alternity. They have a CR system in part (probably where d20s came from) but in the end, experienced GMs will just have to figure it out.
Good things
Simplicity - A tough one. Alternity was rated as less complex than 2E (with the optional core rules) but would more complex than 3E. I really can't honestly judge this one because, math geek that I am, I easily took to and understood this system. I also am able to easily extrapolate from this system and expand it. So, I don't know. I think it is fairly easy. combat and some modifiers do get tough but after a while, my players were rattling them off.
Gets casual gamers - Alternity probably won't be as good at this as 3E is. It is just complex enough that casual gamers probably won't be interested, at least to start. Perhaps, after a few sessions of something like 3E, casual gamers might be willing to try it.
Again, in the myriad of game systems I have read (which includes White Wolf games, FASA games, WEG games, GURPS, Harn and many others), nobody does it better than Alternity. (James Bond theme, anyone?) The simple fact, though, is that like collectable card games, once a game system is not supported (i.e., you can't get materials for it), it dies. Alternity (and spellfire, Blood Wars, X-Files, Highlander CCGs) is a great system that needed to hang on just a bit longer to really make its mark.
Ah well.
Thanks for reading! Replies welcome!
edg
In my first posting (as vturlough) I started by saying this:
Okay,
I like DND. Love DND. Been playing it for a long time. Therefore, here is my rant on d20 and DND.
Bad things:
Classes
Importance of items
Game Balance
Wargaming
Skills
"Upping the Numbers"
AC
kind've a rant
Hit points
CRs
Good things
Simplicity
Gets casual gamers
There has been a lot of discussion on that thread which I haven't been able to follow. (moved to new town same state, started new job, still unpacking, etc.) I do find it interesting that HPs seem to be discussed a lot at the end. (I haven't read all the pages yet.)
There was one criticism in that I didn't suggest any good alternate ideas for what I didn't like. I will do so here. I also want to talk about this in a slightly different way.
It is too bad that WotC didn't come out with d20 before 3E as 3E could have benefited from even another year of development after d20. While still not perfect, some of the games developed under the d20 license have been quite good.
The only other new thing I have to add, in my rant area, is this. I find it very interesting that the latest computer version of DND, Neverwinter Nights (NWN), has very much so changed DND! Parry rules, limits to when an item can be used, class abilities, alternate spells and more were all added into the computer version of the game that would work well in the pen and paper version.
In particular, the parry rules and items rules are very interesting. I really like that while not addressing the importance of items, that by having to be a minimum level to use an item, it does stop characters from being "out of balance" with a too powerful item.
Alternate
Okay, on to what I was told I missed. An alternate game or rule to handle any gripes that I have with the system.
Alternity.
IMO, I have yet to see a system that is as simple, elegant, playable and enjoyable as Alternity. Hands down, it was the best system out there. (Too bad TSR/WotC won't sell the rights or do anything with it.) Alternity addresses 90% of the issues that I had as well as many things that others have.
Classes: They are there. And, after reading people's responses to my first rant as well as Monte Cook's reasoning for classes, I would keep them in there as is. They work very well and will give that feeling of making progress that classes do.
Importance of Items: Yes, it is nice to have the cool weapon but the weapon itself never overshadows the ability of the character.
Game Balance: Very tough to break. Also, with a more skill based system, technically there are limits as well as people being as good as you, which "balances" itself, in a way.
Wargaming: Not based on wargaming. This is a game for individual who want their *characters* to be the focal point of the story/adventure/campaign.
Skills: The basis of the system. Nothing exists that any character couldn't eventually learn. Yes, without the ability (high attribute) to do something, they won't be as good or it will take longer. The possibility is there.
"Upping the Numbers": Nope. You want low for results for differing grades of results. Therefore, the more experienced, or naturally good, people will accomplish tasks faster and better than those with less ability. Makes sense to me.
AC: Nope. Armor reduces damage. Also, armor is not needed. It takes many hits, without being unrealistic, to take someone down.
Side Note: Damage. I was recently shocked when I watched the Discovery channel and its look at getting into the FBI. Specifically, there is one point where the FBI trains its people to KEEP SHOOTING UNTIL THE OPPONENT goes down! (This is because to knock someone out or kill them, you have to hit them enough times to drop blood pressure to the brain or hit a vital spot. The only way to do that is to hit them lots.) Alternity does have this as it would take some really good shots and really good damage rolls to drop or kill someone in less than three shots or so.
kind've a rant
Hit points: Alternity has three types of damage, and a fourth subdual type, which all mean something. They are less abstract and still work. I think this is an excellent system. It allows for abstraction in combat when needed but also has definite effects.
CRs: Hmm. Not sure about these. These are tough. While a good guideline in DND, and d20, these are still subjective. Some for the same reasons as above (items, hit points, etc.) and other reasons (like cover or smart tactics) that are tough to say. In the end, a good guideline. I say this because I think it is the same with Alternity. They have a CR system in part (probably where d20s came from) but in the end, experienced GMs will just have to figure it out.
Good things
Simplicity - A tough one. Alternity was rated as less complex than 2E (with the optional core rules) but would more complex than 3E. I really can't honestly judge this one because, math geek that I am, I easily took to and understood this system. I also am able to easily extrapolate from this system and expand it. So, I don't know. I think it is fairly easy. combat and some modifiers do get tough but after a while, my players were rattling them off.
Gets casual gamers - Alternity probably won't be as good at this as 3E is. It is just complex enough that casual gamers probably won't be interested, at least to start. Perhaps, after a few sessions of something like 3E, casual gamers might be willing to try it.
Again, in the myriad of game systems I have read (which includes White Wolf games, FASA games, WEG games, GURPS, Harn and many others), nobody does it better than Alternity. (James Bond theme, anyone?) The simple fact, though, is that like collectable card games, once a game system is not supported (i.e., you can't get materials for it), it dies. Alternity (and spellfire, Blood Wars, X-Files, Highlander CCGs) is a great system that needed to hang on just a bit longer to really make its mark.
Ah well.
Thanks for reading! Replies welcome!
edg
)
