Would you be satisifed with d20 as your only RPG? [Ties into RyanD's blog entry.]

[coyote6]

No.

I'm sure it would be possible to take the basics of d20 and modify it in a such a manner (and in a sufficient number of manners, since not ever variant will be appropriate for every campaign) that it might satisfy me, but I haven't seen those variants yet. And it's easier for me to, say, get Exalted or SR4e or GURPS 4e, than to rebuild d20 to get the things I like from those game systems.

Heck, besides M&M, is there a decent class-and-level-less/point-based version of d20?

 

[drothgery]

Heck, besides M&M, is there a decent class-and-level-less/point-based version of d20?

I think M&M is the only level-less. Call of Cthulu d20 is classless (or possibly has two classes, if you consider the offensive and defensive options sufficiently different), and True20 almost is (with its three roles). Buy the Numbers makes D&D point-based.

 

[Ace]

If I house ruled it and had a group that was awesome I could live with it.

As it I really only "own to play" 3 games -- True 20, Unisystem and GURPS.

I have a few others in print and many LEGAL Pdfs but I don't plan on playing any of them

 

[jcfiala]

So after all my babbling, the big question is are you satisifed enough with d20 that you never need to play another RPG again? (I would have made this a poll, but I wanted more then a yes or no answer.)

Well, it depends. For instance, when I look at a game that starts out with "Is this a game where the players take the role of individuals, who are expected to work together (or at least as a group), and who will likely become more powerful over time?", as he says, then d20's a good idea for it, at least to start.

But there's other options out there. There's games where the characters start out pretty powerful to start with (Feng Shui, Shadow of the Century), games where the characters don't gain a lot of experience over time (Call of Cthulhu), games where the characters don't necessarily work together as a group (Amber), and the like.

Another question is support materials. If I've got an idea for running a modern-day zombie adventure, then All Flesh Must Be Eaten springs readily to mind - the entire game is set up to help you run that sort of game out of the box. On the other hand, if I was going to do zombie roleplaying in a D&D style world, then I'm more likely to run D&D than I am Dungeons & Zombies (although d&Z looks like a lovely book).

I like D&D an awful lot. But I think roleplaying game systems are tools - you choose the one to fit the game you want to play.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

Me too!

I think I'm exactly who Ryan is talking about.

I've played a crapload of systems. I'll name most (I'd go for all, but I know I'll miss some.).

D&D (all editions), many variants of 3e (Ie Iron Heroes, AU), Traveller (and the T20 version), Cyberpunk, Shadowrun, Champions, Toon, oWOD (all main 5), WFRP, Ars Magica, Gurps (a bunch of different ones, too), COC (not the d20 version, though), Chivalry and Sorcery, Alternity, Gamma World (two different editions of said), Rolemaster, HoL (yes, actually -played- it).. And, like I said, I'm forgetting some.

That said, I've -read- other systems. The street fighter game, TMNT, Ghostbusters, that Wild Wild West game, and many mores.

I currently play D&D (and run it), play in a D20 modern game, a Traveller (T20)game, a shadowrun game (3rd edition) and a Gamma World game (I believe 6th edition).

And yet.. And yet if somehow all other non-D20 systems disappeared, and none ever reappeared? I wouldn't care. What I like is role-playing. And while I enjoy certain genres more, and like trying other systems.. I wouldn't care if it was D20 from now on, and wouldn't be overly upset if it was just D&D from now on. I can still roleplay.

Ditto. As a long time lapsed RPG-er, d20 was what brought me back into the fold (anyone still remember that old Salon article about Ryan?), and the crap load of systems I've bought and read since then (Blue Planet, Nobilis --- games that couldn't tell you what to do with them for adventures to save the authors' lives) don't hold a candle to what the plethora of d20 material offers in terms of fitting into a busy adult's schedule. When I sit down at the table, I want to play (or GM, or whatever). d20 lets me do that. The other systems all assume that I've got my life devoted to the game or something, with a total lack of system and third party support.

I now have enough gaming material to run 5 years worth of d20 campaigns. Try to find that with any other system.

 

[Desdichado]

just about the only d20 ruleset that i have no experience with...

Heh. I find that unlikely. There's an awful lot of them.

mind enlightening me as to how they soften the powercurve and make it more gritty without just making it so your more likely to die? In grim tales is a lvl 20 char still two orders of magnitude stronger than a lvl 1 character? If not, thats awesome, i will have to try and pick up a copy. But i would like to learn more for now.

Heh again. You seem to be focused on only one aspect of d20--levels--which is kinda ironic, as that's the easiest aspect of the game to control for a GM. As GM, what level the game is, how often that level set changes, and what kinds of level-appropriate (or not) challenges you throw at the PCs is probably the easiest thing to control as it doesn't even require any type of alternate or house rule to adjudicate. If that's your biggest complaint about d20 then I'm not feeling much sympathy with your plight. If you don't like 20th level characters compared to 1st level characters, it's the easiest thing in the world to not have 20th level characters exist in your world.

When I run, I usually start the characters at about 3rd level, and play until (at most) 10th level with those characters. At most.

But depending on what you mean by gritty--there are d20 systems that address even that. Ken Hood's Grim N Gritty Hit Points System as a modular add on house rule, and Darkness & Dread written by Mike Mearls and published by FFG both provide systems where as characters advance in level, they get many of the benefits of levelling up, but do not get the hit dice associated with it, for example. Buy the Numbers and True20 also allow for much more granular advancement that doesn't even incorporate levels per se too.

 

[Herobizkit]

As it [is] I really only "own to play" 3 games -- True 20, Unisystem and GURPS.

I haven't seen Unisystem yet, but I'm with you 110%. If you could d20-ify GURPS (BESM d20 comes VERY close), I believe I would have the perfect system to run anything, period.

GURPS supplements are jam-packed to the nines with real-world, incredibly well-done research that is invalubale to any gamer. Not only does each supplement create new rules for each setting (and invariably cause the same cross-product snags as d20 supplements), there is also a great deal of "how to" suggestions for campaign flavour and lots of background information to show the reader the sources of inspiration.

True20 takes what works from d20 and shaves off the excess. While it does create a less "role-centric" universe, it puts the emphasis on the story and takes it away from the traditional kill/take/power-up mentality of standard d20.

Personally, I enjoy d20 Modern's take on the traditional character classes. More generic, but still customizable. I wish they had more talent trees, or a "universal" talent tree that every role could pick from, but d20 gets it the most "right" for the kinds of characters *I* enjoy creating.

Special mention goes out to Shadowrun's magic system, as well as the system presented in Erik Mona's Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth. That's the kind of juice I like with my breakfast.

And more psionics, dammit.