Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thorin Stoutfoot" data-source="post: 421246" data-attributes="member: 1887">But you lose inter-game compatibility! And you have to explain to all your players that there aren't feats in this game. Can you hear the groans already?Again, you're leaning towards SAS instead of the d20 defaults. Why add unnecessary barriers towards market acceptance? If SAS d20 was the only d20 supers game in town, then sure, do whatever you want with the skills list. But since it isn't, anything that reeks of gratituous incompatibility or that sends the vibes that you care less about the d20 market than your SAS "true blue" loyal fans is dissing the average GM (it's always the GM who picks up the book first) who thinks, "Man, these guys don't get d20, I'll look at the other d20 products first, or wait for a better implementation."I don't have SAS d20, so if you'll be so kind as to send me a copy, I'll post here with an analysis of why CoC d20 is considered a d20 game, but SAS d20 isn't. My suspicion is that CoC managed to get away with the minimal changes to the system needed to provide the atmosphere and attitude for CoC gaming, while SAS d20 has gratituous changes like you described, which don't add anything for the d20 player, but are a nod to the SAS loyalist (who wouldn't buy a d20 game anyway).In other words, consumers don't care if by making those changes you've made, you make it easier to dual-stat books. We don't care about making your life easier, or saving you printing costs. But if you gratituously deviate from the standard for no reason at all (and changing skill names is definitely in the category of "gratituous"), then you might as well give up on the d20 logo and base the entire game on the OGL, AND you should be prepared to get pissed off buyers of your product.</blockquote>

Verification