So when should a publisher ditch d20 and develop their own system?

[Rothe]

I feel for those guys. Even if they could make the a leap in game design it is probably a bad business decision.

D&D has a huge installed base and has set certain expectations of what an RPG "needs" mainly because that is all that most people have seen.

I liken making a great game to software. People in the software field seem to rave about Firefox (spelling?) and other browsers, but the vast majority still use InternetExplorer despite it's many documented problems. Microsoft may not make "the best" software but it works well enough for enough of what peole want to do. The barrier to change is just too high, despite assurances that a Mac, for example, can now run most or all Windows programs.

People have invested into a certain game mechanic for RPGs and the barrier to conversion is just to high, even if spelled out. It doesn't help/hurt, that a huge amount of material is published for d20. To me, this is very similar to the Mircosoft business strategy circle..software-feeds-operating system-feeds-software-feeds operating system-repeat. Except with d20 its..mechanics-feeds-supplements-feeds mechanics-feeds supplements, repeat. The very mechanism that created this, the OGL, is even analogous to the PC clone route that let Microsoft crush Apple.

So I can see the "hate" for d20 that creative game designers may have, it has basically foreclosed the market for alternative core mechanics as a valid business decision. Its the same "hate" many Mac proponents had for Microsoft (or maybe still ahve) before the iPod saved the company.

Personally, I have a love/disappointment relationship with d20. I love that it seems to have revitalized the industry and found a great way to let everyone contribute to the game while still having a means to control core quality. The dissapointment is that it does create a barrier to other core mechanics to be introduced and flourish, a barrier that has nothing to do with quality. In WOTC case I doubt it was an intended consequence.

 

[Drawmack]

IMHO, which is probably completely wrong, a company should switch system iff their current rule system does not adaquatly express the mood and character of the game they are creating. With d20 as the rules set, as Ryan is quoted saying above, this is very hard to do. Just look at the number of d20 games we have where the mood and feel are completely different CoC, d20 Modern, Wheel of Time, Judge Dredd, Star Wars, etc.

The d20 system is a wonderful concept in gaming as long as your system has classes, levels, skills, feats, and some sort of magic/advanced science then you can use the d20 system and just modify parts of it.

Using d20 for an original game is actually a great idea because gamers are already familiar with the d20 system which lowers the learning curve on your game and increases the probablity of people buying/playing it.

On top of all the reasons I have already stated creating a system from the ground up is expensive. First off, as Ryan mentions, you need to hire people who have a collegiate level mastery of mathematics and those people are not cheap. Secondly you've got to hire writters, and those with a name that will sell your product are not cheap. Thirdly, you've got to test --> rewrite --> test --> etc. the system until it is highly playable, this is expensive. Fourthly you have to edit, layout, add artwork, and print those rules which are all expensive. Getting a high production run of a stable, balanced, playable system is not only next to impossible but also very, very expensive. Heck even WotC screwed it up at first and had to release 3.5 just a couple years later.

So IMHO PP should not move away from the d20 system.

 

[Gundark]

I should note that PP has not said in any way that they were moving away from d20. This is just wishful thinking from some d20 haters on the PP forums.

 

[Crothian]

It would depend if they could come up with a good system. There are plenty of systems out there but not all of them are good. I think they have a large enough fan base and are doing well with the mini side that a new system would not be completely terrible idea. I also don't hear a lot of d20 gamers that buy their stuff to use pick apart like they do with other d20 games.

 

[hafrogman]

But we hear from publisher all the time about the d20 market is a shadow of its former self.

I think you'll find that's less because other systems are picking up the slack and more because the slack is. . . slack.

 

[Psion]

I think that d20 has the virtue of being a well tested baseline. If they had a well established house system that has been through the paces, that would be one thing. But were they to draft a new system, they would face nigh inevitable "first edition" syndrome and growing pains.

In the long run, it might pay off. In the short term, unless they got some specific benefit out of switching systems, it probably wouldn't be worth it.

Of course, I say this from a customer perspective. A publisher can possibly actually benefit from the "edition churn" that follows a game being in great need of new editions.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

It's not that other games have failed to eclipse D&D because of the the d20 rules system (or AD&D rules system). They've failed to eclipse D&D because it is D&D - the longest-running and best known rpg brand out there.

Although, I doubt that any game designer truly believes his brand name will ever beat D&D or d20 in terms of sales and brand recognition, barring some incredible phenomena. The owners/initiators of the D&D/d20 brands have a marketing capital which I'd imagine exceeds every other RPG company by a significant factor.

But does that mean no one should ever try to create any new RPG rules again? That they'll never be happy in life because their game will never be #1? That the d20 system will always be best, all designers should be subservient to it, and gamers will never get tired of playing it?

I don't believe it. I think variety really is the spice of life, and my experience tells me that gamers actually want that variety.

Don't get me wrong - I've got no grudge against D&D or d20. Heck, our Kingdoms of Kalamar setting is official D&D v3.5, and HackMaster has licensed old-school D&D at the core. I love to play both.

Here's another example. Our upcoming Aces & Eights rpg (Spring 2007, by the way ) will not be D&D/d20 based, though it'll update and streamline a few of our original elements we put into HackMaster. The rest (like the Shot Clock and Target Silhouettes, brawling rules, cattle drives, trial system, gunfight rules, and much more) are our own new game mechanics.

Now, does that mean A&8 is somehow less than d20, or that we're trying to "topple the king?" Of course not. At worst, it just means we wanted to do things differently, and that we think gamers like variety, and that we think it will be a profitable game.

So, I guess that my long-winded answer to the original poster's question is that publishers should "ditch" d20 and develop their own system whenever they've got a fire in their belly about a new non-d20 product that their best research/costs shows them will be profitable enough to produce. If they don't care about it, and it's not going to make any money, don't do it.

Of course, the above is all just my opinion - so take it with a pound of salt.

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

Also Pinnacle Press is a bad example, because they had used a non-d20 system before and only jumped on the d20 bandwagon to make some extra money, All their d20 offerings were rather lackluster. So if your designers don't like d20 you're better off with a different system.

Who is Pinnacle Press? If you mean Privateer Press, I would heartily disagree that their RPG products are "lackluster" : Monsternomicon was innovative and polished, and the World Guide and Five Fingers are books with high production values and some of the best reads I have had from RPG books in many years.

I'm not sure what you mean with the bandwagon comment ( PP started their business with some pretty good d20 adventures that were in the highest tier of 3rd party offerings as far as quality goes - these came before the mini war game, and may have partly helped to finance that endeavor ), but clearly RPG is second fiddle to Warmachine/Hordes now.

In fact, I think PP knows that they are not RPG design experts ( evidenced by their definite and acknowledged issues with d20 mechanics ) but they have a pretty canny strategy with maintaining a minimal release schedule, keeping RPG players buying their minis for RPG's and attracting RPGers to the wargame. One may even go so far as to suggest that the RPG products are nothing more than sales collateral for their wargame products, although they probably make SOME profit.

Bottom line for PP is that RPG's are no longer their core competency. The better question to ask might be why SHOULD they spend the money on resources outside of riding the OGL wave as far as it goes?

 

[Turanil]

Is it a good move for a publisher to ditch d20 and develop their own system? And if so, when?

My answer is YES.

Ditch d20 from your products. But go further than that: ditch any game mechanics from your products. So, Privateer Press created Iron Kingdom? It certainly looks good, but I don't want to again play d20... and don't want to play a new system. I just want to play the system I like (for which I have enough books of rules already) with the setting. Then, for those who like d20, there is already a large amount of official D&D 3.5 and third party d20 rules, so no need to get even more when buying a setting book. Look at Green Ronin, their next printing of Freeport will be devoid of game mechanics (these will be on separate supplements). If it also was the case with Iron Kingdom, I could probably buy the two, put Freeport in the setting, and then use what I want for rules. However, since I am not interested in more d20 rules, I have no use for Iron Kingdom books...

 

[3d6]

It depends on what you mean by "good move". One answer is you should use a new system if you can make a better game by doing so; the other is that you should use a new system if you can make more money by doing so.

Unfortunately, you can't really know in advance if you'll satisfy either of those conditions.

I also don't know what people consider to be d20 games. Does "d20" mean that the game is basically D&D compatible? For example, is Mutants and Masterminds a d20 game? It uses the d20 task resolution mechanic, feats, and skills, but it drops the damage/hit point system and the classes, so its not in any sense D&D-compatible.