rant on d20 part 2

Since powerful magic is in some ways similar to advanced tech, I'd probably say that high tech versus low tech (or very well equiped versus poorly equiped) is pretty much the same as a guy with powerful magic items or spells versus a guy without even masterwork gear. Also, even within the same PL, equipment makes a huge difference. Let's take PL 7. There's a huge difference between a combat Spec with a Body Tank and quantum rifle that's been cybered up with a fast chip, a reflex, and Amazing programs, and the combat spec Cerametal armor and laser rifle. If you use the Star Drive eqiupment book, there's an even bigger difference. I think that's the same difference between characters with lots of magic items and characters with none.

I tend to that high level action is potentially more lethal than low level. At low level, the kobolds with heavy crossbows are dangerous; they can kill you if they get lucky. At high levels, the angry wizard ready to toss a pair of nasty spells is dangerous. The difference is that YOU need to get lucky to survive a well planned high attack, while the enemies need to get lucky kill you. Two fights in row, our wizard died instantly (at around 11th level). If he hadn't rolled extremely well in the next fight, he would have died again. At high levels, a strong attack against a weak area is much more deadly than anything at low levels.

HEY
If having lots of magical items bothers you, then talk to your DM about having innate powers that replicate the effect of items, instead of having a truckload of items. There'd be a cost multiplier for the effects, but you'd also have the benefit of never losing access to the ability. Instead of having boots of speed, take a bit more out of your resource pool and gain the ability to increase your speed to supernatural levels for short while. Instead of giving your Monk an amulet of natural armor +2, he trained under the Stone Fist masters where he developed tough skin from the intensive training, however, he donated all the gold he had at the time to the monastery. The effect is pretty much the same as a no space item like an ioun stone, except that the flavor text is different.

While a 24 skill is more extreme than a +18 attack bonus, the principle is the same: characters who specialize get really good at what they do. There's not that much difference between the warrior using TWF to attack at +19/+19/+14/+14/+9 and the warrior with a bought up action check multistriking a guy on the good and ordinary phases, while using his combat spec bonus and supreme skill to offset the penalties.

Armor does reduce damage in DnD. Let's take a very simple case. A has a +0 attack bonus and does 6 damage each hit. B has a 11 AC. A and B both suck, but B still takes an average 3 points per round. Now let's give B some armor that takes away 1.5 damage each hit (DR style armor). The average damage is cut in half to be 1.5. Or B could have DnD style armor that increases his AC by 6, to 16. A's chance to "hit" now drops to 25% from 50%. The damage is still 6, and the chance to do that damage was cut in half so the average damage is now 1.5. Each armor reduces the damage that you take. In this situation, both ways have the same result. And the flavor text works too. Weapon failed to penetrate DR = weapon bounces off armor. Weapon misses because of AC bonus from armor = weapon bounces off armor. Of course, there are some situations when the systems aren't indentical. Overall, I prefer armor as defense because it seems more robust.

Simple descriptive differences mean quite a bit. A weapon hits the Alt character, doing no primary wound damage, but the secondary stun gets through. The warrior only had 12 stun points, so the few that get through will eventually wear him down. Or the weapon hits the DnD character, beating his AC. It does 8 damage out of his 50 HP. It bounced off his armor, but caused some bruises. Eventually, the fatigue and bruises will slow him down so much that he can't defend himself and is killed or knocked out. By changing the description, we can see that the DnD character just took some stun. Let's fast foward a few rounds. The Alt character is down his last few stun, the fighter is down to his last few HP. Each is battered, bruised, not exactly in the best fighting shape. However, the armor has done an excellent job of preventing lethal hits. The opponent then rolls a perfect hit (nat 1 or 20). The Alt character takes a real mortal point, and enough stun to knock him out as the weapon slips past his weary guard and into a gap in his armor. He falls to the ground and is dying. The DnD character takes a critical hit and goes down to negative 6 after losing 16 HP. Slowed by his bruises, he can longer adequately defend joints in his armor and takes a brutal penetrating blow. He falls to the ground and is dying.

Despite the fact that in one case, armor protected against the main damage of the attack, and only stun got through until the guy was worn down, and in the other, real HP damage got through each hit, both fights can be described the same way.

I like Alternity too though. The weird dice modifying dice mechanic is bit wonky, and complicates probability checks. Also, some of the perks and skills seem to be a bit under/over costed. It doesn't seem quite right that +1 resistence for Dex costs the same as +1 for Will, since most PCs aren't going to be subject to interaction skills anyway.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

vturlough said:
[deletia]

>DND is very good for levels under about 12th or so. VERY >GOOD. I really like how it plays. That is pretty much true no >matter the edition.
What do you like about how it plays?
I have a very small sample set of D&D to draw from, because I've only got time for one game right now. But I see on the Story board descriptions of a number of level 12+ campaigns that strike me as "very good": meaning I would like to play in them or failing that, bring nachos for the players so they'd let me watch.

>DND is NOT consistent.
>The style of play that players do changes as levels increase. In >the beginning, players are generally cautious. When one or two >hits can take a person out, there is more planning. As levels >increase, players get egos. Even villains their levels cannot >take them out in one blow. The style is not the same.

But that's not the system. That's how players and GM's react to the system.
The system makes it generally harder to kill things of higher CR/level: there are a very few "egg with sledgehammer" monsters. (Mostly things with petrification or spellcasting). In that regard, it is very consistent.
There's nothing that says you can't carefully plan your actions at
higher levels: in the campaign I'm in now, I started playing by the
seat of my pants and the grace of Pelor, but now actually do have to plan carefully.

>Part of that is heroic and the heroic style but it can be achieved >in different ways.
The heroic style is a style of play, not of system. Heroic adventures happen because of the GM and players, not the shapes of the dice.

[Deletia]

>"Balance" Come on! The very fact that a DM has to "balance" >what a character gets and when means that items are >important. I don't like that I can't play a high level character >with no items (as I tended to do) and be even a third as >efficient as someone with items. I don't want the ITEMS to be >the emphasis.
This point has come up a few times before in some other threads I've been watching, actually.
But all items are designed to give advantages: if the GM is stingy enough, items like masterwork tools can be major "game breakers".
GM's have to work out a "magic level" for any setting they create or follow their prepared setting. But those magic levels are not
something that should be put in a set of core rules that need to work for multiple possible settings.
Alternity has tech levels 0-whatever for a reason: so the GM can design societies (settings) of various levels of technical sophistication.
You might have them all, but you certainly decide which one to use when you make up a planet. If you use part of the Alternity setting, you follow their tech level guidelines.
Everything after that is staying in the guidelines.

[deletia]

>Also, several of the game designers have said that at higher >levels, the modifer is more important than the roll. Therefore, at >some point this is out of the DMs hands. I am not saying it can't >be done but how to do it? And, by changing that, what else am >I affecting?
This is actually shaping up to be a real problem, particularly with
Epic characters. With Epic characters passing around +20 bonuses (for example) on skill checks/attack rolls, suddenly the 20 pips of the die look less impressive.
That said, an individual character can still have the same
success/failure problems they did before, but some characters are going to be able to compare their DC's with their bonuses and recognize immediately that they shouldn't even try the action.

>(I have a friend who DMs who keeps chaning the numbers on >his players to make it challenging. For every single thing! There >are no more DCs of less than 30 for the thief because the thief >played by the rules and is good. Is that fair?)

Well, that implies the thief is working on slicker walls, better hidden traps, and more complex locks. If that's true, that's fair. It also fits with most people's concepts of character progression, where you start simple and move on to more difficult things.
If the thief is climbing the neighborhood apple tree which was a DC 10 twelve levels ago but has now become a DC30, that is not fair. It's also a problem with the DM, not the rules.
Rules are nice, but they can't stop people from misusing them.

[deletia]
>tjasamcarl: Again, it isn't personal preferences if the SYSTEM is >at fault. If the mechanics don't support what I am talking >about, I am constrained by the mechanics, not my imagination.
Could you give some examples of what you want your imagination to do? I'm having trouble visualizing this.

[deletia, but note my comments on magic level vs. tech level above]

>There is a HUGE difference between a 24/12/6 and +18. Come >on! If you know Alternity, you know that! First of all, with a >stat MAXING at 14, 10 levels in a skill, where 12 is highest, is >HUGE! This is a person who is both high in natural ability (at >least a 12 attribute) and high skill (10 - 12, which again is max). >The +18 could be gotten by a mid range character, easily. The >Alternity character would have had to have been playing a while >to get that good! Also, Alternity characters might get two or >three hits at that level but with some pretty hefty penalties. A >fighter, with a BAB of 18, could have six attacks with the right >feats! BIG DIFFERENCE!
Caveat: I don't know Alternity. D20, however, I do know, and I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of +18 being easy for a midrange character.
If that +18 is a BAB, the character is an 18th level fighter. That's
not midrange.
If that +18 is a melee/ranged score, we can start to add in ability
bonuses. An ability score of 20 would give a +5 bonus. That's not only a high ability, it's inhumanly high. (or has been obtained
through ability score raises). That still leaves us looking at a 13th
level fighter. To me, that's a character that's been "played a while": I think WOTC estimated it would take characters about a year to reach that point if they played an average of 3-4 hours a week. (Cannot source that.)
Adding in feats, we can pull of another +1 bonus for Weapon Focus.
That moves us down to a 12th level fighter. Still been played a good long time in my book.
Now we can start adding in items, for another +5 bonus, pulling us down to a level 7 fighter. That, to me, is the high end of midrange, but it's not incredibly rare.
But the item bonuses that may be added in are only for one specific blade. If you lose the blade, you lose your bonuses. I don't understand that is an issue with Alternity scores.
(EDIT: The maximum number of attacks a character may have with a single weapon is 4. If the character is fighting with two weapons, they may have one bonus attack. Even then, this attack will be at a substantial penalty unless they have learned Ambidexterity, Two-weapon Fighting, Improved Two-weapon fighting, and Perfect Two-weapon fighting:a substantial number of feats and training. Or been a ranger, but let's not add that to the discussion.)


>Um. Okay, we will really have to agree to disagree. Armor was >MADE to resist and absorb blows, not make someone HARDER >to hit. It makes it easier. NOT DAMAGE, to hit. And, imo, if you >get HIT by a 5 # sword swung by a strong person, it should >hurt!
This is a good point. The counter argument, however, is that then heavy enough armor would allow someone to ignore entire classes of weapons (like the d4 weapons). I'm not sure that would be an improvement, just a different problem. Though I may get a chance to find out in the future...

>Alternity reflects this. DND does not. Hit or miss, that's it.
>Alternity also reflects that as you get wounded, you get tired. >DND allows you to fight at 1 hp with full strength!
This is true. It's not as realistic, you're right. But it does save
on book-keeping, which is not to be despised.

>I also took out a player, by knocking him out but not killing him,
>via secondary damage.
It is possible to knock people out in D&D. Most people don't bother, but the rules are there.

[deletia]
>It is also a great system for less than 12th level. It just doesn't
>stay consistent and does have some mechanic issues.
What happens at 12th level?
Skills top out @ +18, BAB @ +12, spells are not quite gamebreakers yet...I'm not seeing a problem, necessarily.

>Can we agree on that?
Well, you can probably tell you haven't convinced me yet. But you can keep trying.
aja

(Edit: improved line spacing)
 
Last edited:

Droogie said:
And as much as we all love to sit around and day-dream about what 3e could have been, and what should have been done, the vicious fact is that 4e is NOT just around the corner.

That's okay, because we can house rule all we want. I made a lot of changes to 2e over the years even though 3e was far off.

I like "rants" like these because they make me think about D&D and the d20 system in ways that I haven't before.
 

Talk about Deju Vu. Well all I'm going to say is, thanks to d20, I FINALLY have a setting I truly enjoy and feel apart of. Course it would be nice if I could actually RUN the damn thing! :)
 

Excellent posts!

Greetings!

An excellent discussion. Thanks for the replies!

perhaps what I should have called this, instead of "rant on d20" is "why WotC should have used Alternity".

Droogie: Excellent points and that is what I do as well. I had considered a huge add on by someone on the boards that convereted all armor to a deflection bonus and DR. In the end, though, I decided it was too complicated and not worth the effort. It would also probably make the game less fun and who wants that?

ajanders: Sorry, man, that was too tough to read! I didn't get through it all.

LostSoul: Thanks! And Yes! That is the point, to some extent. I have certainly done a lot of house rules through the years and will continue to do so.

Nightfall: Um. Setting? Did I miss something? Or did you mean DND as a game system? I agree that in the age of the internet, it sure feels like we are more connected to everything now.

Okay, big one here:

hammerhead: Okay, these are big points for me. In part, because I don't know that understanding of my points is there from what I read. I am going to try again.

There is a BIG difference between powerful magic in DND and powerful tech in Alternity. Again, this is a game "engine" or mechanics difference. ALL spells in DND must be cast by a spell caster. Arcane spells higher than 6th level can only be cast by Sorcerer and Wizard. 7th level spells are gained at 13th level, etc. Therefore, it takes a dedicated spell caster to get prismatic spray and a bigger dedication to get Meteor Swarm.

Even assuming that they can get an item and use it, there is some chance of failure (scrolls) and it could be dangerous. (I would require a Spellcraft check to place it properly.)

A level one wizard and sorcerer could try and use a Meteor Swarm Scroll but would have a big chance to fail and that could be disastrous.

In contrast, a starting character in Alternity can attempt anything. The difference is how good of an attempt they can make. If the started character got a laser rifle, they can use it, but they won't be very good at it for a while. They will "grow into" their weapon. There is nothing about that weapon that allows them to use it better. Again, this is game mechanics and the difference between a Fantasy with magic world and a more modern setting.

[DND Rule Suggestion: Items have level limits before they can be used? Just as it is done in NWN? So, the caster level to make is the user level to use? This would allow some "growing into" the item as the character figures out more as they go.]

Further, because technology is *easy* compared to magic, anyone can try and hit someone with the most advanced rifle. Not everyone can use magic. That's a big difference. Another example if farming. I can't farm. Not a whit. If you give me a plow and an ox, I am going to go foraging. If I get a tractor, though, I might be able to figure out how to plant something to harvest. Again, that's the difference with technology.

For both systems, it is also what the DM allows. The items you quoted would be minor artifacts in DND! It isn't a fair comparison to give huge items in Alternity and not discuss what the equal would be in DND!

As far as combat is concerned, the mechanics make a BIG difference! This is what I am not sure if you understood. Even a veteran character in Alternity has to be worried about some street punks with guns. That's the way it should be. The veteran character will win, most likely, but he could be wounded in the exchange. That makes sense. It also emphasises the character (checking against their skill) instead of the items (checking against a given AC). In DND, a 12th level character would laugh at a group of 1st level characters. They don't stand a chance of even hitting him except on a 20.

Good ideas about items. Special abilities to mimic items. I like it. Again, I also like my idea about minimum level to use something. Good idea!

Again, with your paragraph about the Alternity 24 skill vs the +18 BAB. It is NOT the same. Again, this gets into specifics of the mechanics and how the two systems are set up. I won't do that. Suffice it to say, it is much easier for a DND character to get those attacks than the Alternity character.

btw, as a side note, Alternity does a much better job of time, if you ask me. In DND, playing through several modules and tracking time religously, I think character advance from 1st to 20th in about six game months. In Alternity, there is a better feeling of advancement taking time. Yes, that is sometimes frustrating. Yes, that isn't necessarily fun. It is easier to speed up progression though to give a feeling of progress than it is to justify slowing it down. That's me, though.

As for armor, hmmm. Again, I am not sure you understand. While I like your idea that hit points could mean something, the base system doesn't have any definitions for them other than damage the character can take. (In other words, as the system is, hit points do represent damage a character can take. They are *not* VP/WPs of SW at this point.) Also, the statistics aren't the same between the games, so I am not sure those are relevant. In your example with the body tank, which would hopefully be used by a high level character, his AC isn't 45. It might be less due to no DEX but it isn't 45. In fact, there is no AC so it is tough to say. It is the skill of the shooter that determines the hit at all levels of play. THAT'S WHY ITEMS ARE SO IMPORTANT IN DND! In Alternity, you might always have the same type of non magical armor for the entire game. (Especially non combat types.) And, it will be just as effective later as it was in the beginning. In DND, it is assumed that the character's AC will have increased with level.

Again, do what you want. I prefer armor as DR because that is what it is made to do. It also makes combat less appealing when you could die at any point (12th vs 2nd level) rather than being able to shrug off any combat. I think combat should be less appealing but that is me.

Yes, descriptions can be used but the definitions of the wound damage in Alternity makes it easier to do. What does 20 points of damage mean? You don't know without knowing the level of the character, his class, his CON, etc. In Alternity, 3 points of stun means bruise damage. It won't kill anyone probably won't knock anyone out but it has meaning. Two points of wound damage means a good cut or some such with bleeding. Again, intrinsic meaning without knowing anything else about the character. A point of mortal damage means something. The character is dying unless they can get help but they probably have a while before this happens. Also, Alternity character are affected by damage as they don't fight as well. In DND, they fight at full ability until 0 HPs.

Okay, this is already too long. Let me sum up.

DND has some excellent points. Perhaps in 4E or with house rules from the other good d20 supplements we can get a little more realism and keep most of the simplicity of DND.

If I need a better system then DND, I go to Alternity. It has it all. Complex skill checks, classes, heroic characters, wound points that don't allow easy instant death, good integrated magic system and many other good things.

Don't get me wrong. The last time I played Alternity, I almost brought over some good aspects of DND that I like. (Most notably initiative because combat is MUCH faster when you don't roll initiative every round!)

Thanks for reading! Good discussion!

edg
 

To quote a great historical figure, Bugs Bunny, "He don't know me very well do he?" ;) When I mean SETTING, I mean SETTING. The setting in question, if you had looked at my signature, is the Scarred Lands. A d20 product AND a very good one in my opinion. It's my obsession, my madness and my passion. :) I don't think I've been this passionate about a setting....well ever! :) I was passionate about defending the Realms for a time. And for a while, getting Greyhawk to have it's own HC as well as the LGG. But this, this land, this world, this place, does something for me. And in it's form as d20, I have MORE fun, more adventure and more excitement than ever.

Course it would help if I got to USE half the ideas in a real life campaign! ;) But I digress. This is what d20 has done for me. I've found a calling and I LIKE IT! :)
 

Remove ads

Top