D&D 4E Star Wars Saga Edition as preview of 4e?

[Ashrem Bayle]

You know..... A D&D conversion using these rules sure would make a great House Rules thread.

 

[Desdichado]

Well, there are four d20M books currently in the Amazon Top 100 Gaming category. I check roughly once a week, and that's about par. It may not do as well as WotC's other lines, but it does dang well by any other company's standards.

Ergo, I see a second edition within the realm of possibility, at least.

Sure is a slow product release schedule, though. I can't see starting from scratch and doing anything with that.

Honestly, I'm not sure I care to see it happen either. I rather like d20 Modern as it is and I'm a little gunshy of new editions of games that already work perfectly well.

Either that or I'm turning into a stodgy old codger.

 

[buzz]

Sure is a slow product release schedule, though. I can't see starting from scratch and doing anything with that.

I could see doing a new core book, but then leaving the supplement sales to 3rd party pubs. The core d20M seems to be a consistent seller.

I also see enough room for improvement that I'd be happy with a new edition, despite liking the current.

Either that or I'm turning into a stodgy old codger.

Duh!

 

[Desdichado]

I could see doing a new core book, but then leaving the supplement sales to 3rd party pubs. The core d20M seems to be a consistent seller.

I also see enough room for improvement that I'd be happy with a new edition, despite liking the current.

That's a good way to do it. As long as it doesn't invalidate the rest of the d20 Modern line, I'd be in favor of it. In any case, I'd imagine much of the new Star Wars Saga edition changes to the d20 system could be incorporated as house rules without mucking anything up much.

Duh!

Yeah, that does pretty much go without saying, doesn't it?

 

[Klaus]

I suppose I am alone in thinking that there should be less, not more, character customization should there be a 4th Edition. Make it a class based game again, not a point based one.

I'd rather have a wide spread of pissibilities and leave the restricting of options on the hands of the DM. That's far easier than trying to include more options in a more restricted game.

 

[Felon]

A new version of D20M would do my heart good.

A new version of D20 Future would be very welcome indeed, although perhaps Star Wars will make such a revision superfluous.

 

[Arkhandus]

I'm kinda with Reynard on this, but I do want to see more than just 4-10 character classes. Give us 12 or 15 or 20 character classes, that each have a clearly-defined role/archetype/whatever and cover all the bases well enough. Limited customization for each class; so the class defines the character to some extent, but still allows one fighter to look different from several others, while still being able to fulfill the expected fighter roles and be fairly simple to 'buid'.

7 or 10 classes might manage to cover the bases well enough, but I dunno. A mere handful of 3-6 classes seems like a moot point. With that you may as well be playing a strictly point-based game, with no simplicity and no archetypes to inspire players, or help draw newbies into joining the game and not being too intimidated by character creation. And a point-based game would not really be D&D. I'm fine with playing a point-based game designed with the right context, but not one that pretends to be D&D while ignoring 20-odd years of D&D history.

Mmmrrh. Now I'm probably going off on a rambly tangent.
*re-lurk*

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm kinda with Reynard on this, but I do want to see more than just 4-10 character classes. Give us 12 or 15 or 20 character classes, that each have a clearly-defined role/archetype/whatever and cover all the bases well enough.

It may be that with a limited number of classes, but with talent trees to provide 'virtual classes' you'll get what you want within the SWSE rules.

Personally I dislike massive numbers of classes, because it means that every decision you take knocks out other potential decisions; I prefer more freeform systems myself.

It would be nice if the SWSE system satisfied us both!

Cheers

 

[Turjan]

Honestly, I was just being snarky, and did not mean to further derail this thread into a debate about complexity.

That said, sales would indicate that the majority of the fanbase is pretty happy with D&D as-is. The people who want it to be more like [previous edition of choice] or ["lite" system of choice] are vocal, but a minority nonetheless. They are better served by those publishers that can profitably cater to their needs, e.g., C&C, True20, OSRIC, etc.

I'm not sure whether a complexity debate derails this thread. To me, it fits the bill quite well. What else do you see behind the title question?

Even if you are most probably right with your assessment of the current fanbase, I think that the makers of D&D might try to address a new generation of players if they don't want to dwindle away with their existing fanbase. A faster, less complex game might be one way to achieve this goal. Perhaps, there is a possibility to do this in some modular way that allows adding complexity later on. We will see.

I don't really see a good low complexity model of D&D that comes without lots of old baggage at the moment, which is nice for long time fans, but not so attractive for relative newcomers. And True20 is complex in its own way, just differently so from D&D. In a way, SW is a good model for a low complexity fantasy roleplaying game.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

I'm of the opinion that while the new Saga Edition rules are not a test-bed for 4e D&D, I wouldn't be too surprised if certain rules, which end up being exceptionally well-received, do end up in the inevitable 4e D&D ruleset.

Granted, my interest in the SECR is as a Star Wars gamer, as I honestly haven't played a game of actual D&D for some years now. I'm getting to the point as a gamer and GM that I don't want an overly-complicated "realistic" system. I just want one that let's tell the stories I want to tell or take the actions that I want my character to take without having to cross-reference multiple rules. From the sounds of it, SECR is a solid step in that direction.