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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dead" data-source="post: 1514441" data-attributes="member: 18707">I never said d20 systems all "felt like D&D". No, some d20 systems have bastardized the core rules so much that they don't feel like D&D and all you've got left is the thin thread: roll a d20 against DC that makes them "d20".But that's the point. d20 fails as a "generic" system because you have to change it so much to get it to work (specifically science fiction).A good "generic" system allows you to use the rules in any genre without changing them. You can take a PC from one campaign and it could conceivably work in another.With d20 you can't do this because everyone changes the core rules so much to work with whatever genre . . .  sci-fi, Cthulhu horror, etc.I mean, just take a look at the statistics. Probably 80% of d20 products are "sword & sorcery" type worlds while 20% are sci-fi/modern. I think this is telling us that d20 (err . . . D&D) is only "truly" suitable for medieval fantasy.On the other hand, take a look at GURPs. About 20% is medieval fantasy; 20% sci-fi; 20% modern; and 20% misc. These stats show that it is a good "generic" system because there is an even spread of genres. I mean, this makes sense too because GURPs was specifically designed to be generic. As opposed to d20 that was designed from a fantasy medieval system.Don't get me wrong, I love a lot of the fantasy medieval d20 products on the market (Malhavoc Press is great). But d20 that is not fantasy medieval? No thanks! Non-fantasy medieval d20 has to bastardize the core rules too much to work -- I'd rather play GURPs! (I'm glad that it works for a lot of you out there, though.)P.S. I'm not a troll, I'm a bullywug (and no racism on EnWorld please).</blockquote>

Verification