Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1173472" data-attributes="member: 172">I'm just curious who claims this. It can be ported to any style, I imagine, but how much work it takes and the suitability of the final result is another question. I would generally agree it is better suited as-is for more cinematic/heroic play, taking more adaptations to go outside it.Horror games aren't really about advancement and progression, so I am not sure why this is a problem. Just why, for example, would you think that d20 CoC with low level characters is not suited to this? (I know why I wouldn't use it, but it has nothing to do with the characters being too empowered...)I refer you to a point I troubled to emphasize in an earlier post: you are conflating the conventions of D&D with d20. Do you really think a high level Traveller or B5 character is going to shrug off weapons fire like a high level D&D character? They would be so much goo. This is mostly a function of the damage system and the damage system can be changed.Referring to D&D, I'll grant you this. It is, as you say, part of the design.I'm not seeing this problem.Will characters have many tasks that become trivial for them as they advance levels? Yes. As the DMG says, the world should not level up with the character, and I wholeheartedly concur. That being the case, there still remain guards to be snuck past, chasms to be lept over. And they are the same ones that were there when you were at low levels. And now they will be trivial. But now you have bigger tasks ahead of you, like sneaking past the famed Guardian Hounds of the Dark Temple [TM].Will characters bumble into tasks beyond them? Yes. But this was also true at low levels. A fire trap that you might plop in a low level encounter could easily be beyond the abilities of a low level rogue to detect and disarm.There is nothing about the proabilities of the dice mechanic itself that causes more or less randomness at a given level. You have a 50% chance of succeeding at a task with a DC of your modifiers + 11. This is true at low levels, it is true at high levels. The conditions around you might cause DCs to vary, and they will vary more widely between party members as you advance, but that is to be expected.It takes the fire out of such arguments because it invalidates them. When rules text dictates that no matter how you overcome the challenge and meet the goal, you get the XP, it's pretty vapid to try and wave that off as so much prattle.Of course, you have statistics for this right? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />That said, while I would say this matches my experience, I am not sure why this is a problem. Rewarding people XP for good roleplaying is in no way the objectively correct thing to do. Many people have a real hard spot making the wizard learn magic faster or the fighter swing his sword better because the player is a good thespian. Just like single characters taking on armies kills your SOD, this kills the SOD of other players.Which is why these sorts of rules are optional.Why is it useless? It describes the magnitude of awards that should be granted so you don't vary much from the existing XP scale, and describes situations you would use it. Sounds useful to me.Not this, I will say, does not match my experience. IME, players who have this mentality are in the minority. And those people don't have roleplaying as their primary objective in the first place. This entirely overhyped line of reasoning just doesn't pan out in reality.WRT 3.5 as compared to 3.0, I would have to agree. Changes is the Paladin class (pokemounts) and many spell changes I disagree with were conceived with this ill-conceived line of reasoning.I don't think you are as lucky as you make yourself out to be; I think your perspective is a bit skewed. Sure, there are groups out there that do just this. However, as a counterpoint, of the 4 groups and 6-8 campaigns I have played with since 3.0 came out, none of them were just about killing things and taking their stuff. All involved plots, character development, reasons for things happening in site based encounters when they occured, and more complex goals and MOs.And funny thing is that coming here, reading story hours and talking about playing the game, I can see that I am not alone.That's one I'd have to cede you, in part. I would temper this with the observation that I have learned: only stat what you need to stat, and use your resources (DMG and other publication NPCs, computer generation) and know when it is safe to cut corners. I almost never stat villagers and whatnot beyond what they need to interact with players and do their jobs. A rule of thumb I use is best skill is level +3, assume a stat modifier of +2 for the best stat. Using this thumbrule, I can handle most commoners, experts, and aristocrats without knowing anything more than their name and personality. Spellcasters, their level determines their best spell level predictably, and players seldom require them to cast more than 1 spell per level.In short, don't obsess over stats, and you will learn that you don't need them more than you did in 1e/2e. But you will learn to appreciate them for what they can do that 1e/2e couldn't.And I would point out that it does just fine for games without lots of violence. Not that I would recommend against trying other games if you find them too your taste, but don't limit yourself because you only see and hear about some people playing in the style that Gothmog describes here; plenty of us are doing just fine with d20.SW has an advantage over FUDGE in that it is playable off-the-shelf. FUDGE requires a bit of tinkering. It does have the disadvantage in that it shares the same wonky dice system deadlands uses; FUDGEs dice system is MUCH better IMO (though fudge is flexible enough that you can just rip out the resolution mechanics of SW and put FUDGE in its place, keeping things like edges, etc. A nip here and a tuck there, and  I think you would have something superior to SW.) BRP IMO has outlived its usefulness, and has a very outdated skill system; d20 has a better skill system which more inherently handles changes in difficulty and better handles opposed roll type situations.</blockquote>

Verification