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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7027717" data-attributes="member: 996">Not unfair, exactly.  That style of play could include a lot of player-customization of PCs, which could, in turn, take the game in quite different directions.Yes, d20 was very much a 'core system' like BRP or TFT or Interlock or d6 (among others - it seemed every publisher re-cycled enough rules from one game to the next that they had at least a de-facto 'core system') were in the 80s - a basic skeleton of resolution an character-creation mechanics that could be fleshed out into a variety of games, and that facilitated a group going from one of those games to another without starting from scratch.  d20 was /also/, like FUDGE and Fuzion were in the 90s, more or less open-source (FUDGE was a lot more open-source!), which really worked out well (arguably a little too well for Hasbro's liking, or we woudn't have gotten the GSL) when combined with the first-RPG mystique of D&D. It was also less necessary, since fluff & crunch weren't so tightly coupled.  You can cleave a power source off 4e for instance, creating a very different world, without wrecking the game because a specific PC function had been niche-protected for that source.  You could re-skin powers, or selectively ignore specific powers that didn't fit a theme of campaign or style of play.  Yeah, OK, you got there. <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=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification