D&D: Does Obsidian 'ave an interest?

[Tigranes]

I love humanity.

[MrBrown]

I don't mind the D&D settings. The majority of the fantasy RPGs out there use similar Tolkien-esque settings anyways; even if D&D suddenly disappeared, I doubt this would change.

 

I do mind the ruleset though. I'm just totally bored with class-based. IWD2 introducing 3e toned this down a little, but with ToEE I'm getting angry at it again. Classless, please.

 

(I'm fine with most of other aspects of the 3E rules though, just not classes).

[Exitium]

I wish, that once and for all people would stop making D&D games with D&D locales and D&D rules. I mean, don't get me wrong - D&D has its place, but I'd like to see something new!

[The Situationist]

I AM SICK OF FORGOTTEN REALMS AND ALL IT'S "DROW THIS" "ELF THAT" BULLs***. STOP MAKING FORGOTTEN REALMS GAMES ALREADY YOU s***HEADS.

 

dasfkjslkdjflkjsdf

 

Drizzt IS STUPID

Elves SUCK

 

And for d20 modern, WHY DONT PEOPLE MAKE THEY OWN SYSTEMS?

 

SARGY, stop typing like a HUGE f***ING MORON. We know you sure do love your Barbarian, i'm very fond of mine too as it was my first character. BUT I DONT ROLEPLAY HIM ON MESSAGEBOARDS BECAUSE, lets say it all at once:

 

IT IS HORRIBLY STUPID

 

Sorry for the ranting, but I HATE FORGOTTEN REALMS AND ALL THE HUGE PILES OF s*** THAT HAVE FALLEN OFF IT'S EVEN BIGGER MOUTAIN OF s***. I also hate people that want more 'base it off this' crap instead of people making their own stuff, while it's fun to have a game that uses the PnP rules, people rarely fully implement them.

 

P.S. Ravenloft sucks and it's got all those silly goths and goths suck too.

One word:

 

Medication.

[Slammy1]

Well, I'm neither that upset nor invested in my ideas... I like the classless systems, with complex record keeping you could keep track of individal actions as they pertain to subsequent actions. It also makes more sense than suddenly, you know a lot you didn't 1 minute before. I'd worry the loss in acievement, however, might be a bit much for the typical player. It's important that any system not be so complex that the average user will not want to learn it.

 

When I wrote a combat system modification to DnD for my PnP campaign it was based on the idea that we all can take approximately the same actual amount of physical damage. Experience reduces the liklihood of being hit, armor prevents a hit from doing actual damage (or reduces the severity), but in the end if it hits, penetrates, and causes a given level of damage to an area it doesn't matter if you're 1st or 50th level. Then again, a high level character would be able to adjust to damage and not let it affect their performance as much as a lower level character. Of course, the last part adds a level of complexity that could not be used effectively in PnP, and there are other greater things that could be done.

 

I always play some mage variant in CRPGs (and PnP) also. The random effects of the system with magic make far better sense in a DnD system than the hack, hack, hack, death of the typical fighter class.

[Sammael]

I wish, that once and for all people would stop making D&D games with D&D locales and D&D rules.

As opposed to D&D games set in Shadowrun and using Palladium Fantasy rules? Whut?

[Sammael]

(I'm fine with most of other aspects of the 3E rules though, just not classes).

Check out the "generic classes" in Unearthed Arcana. That's as close as D&D is going to get to "classless," methinks.

[MrBrown]

I'd worry the loss in acievement, however, might be a bit much for the typical player. It's important that any system not be so complex that the average user will not want to learn it.

I think we've discussed this alot of time in various forums related to BIS/IP...

 

I think the best way of fixing this problem (classless systems being harder to approach than class-based ones) is having templates, guidelines (or whatever you want to call them) that can choose the skills and abilities for the player. These templates should be created according to familiar stereotypes. Using DnD types as an example, the Fighter template would choose only combat stuff, Ranger mostly combat plus a little nature/survival, Rogue a little combat and alot of thievery type skills, etc. In an ideal case, these could be turned off or on at anytime.

 

I think Arcanum had something like these, but I don't remember anymore (and I didn't use them in the 1st place ). BTW, talking mostly about CRPGs here.

[MrBrown]

Check out the "generic classes" in Unearthed Arcana. That's as close as D&D is going to get to "classless," methinks.

Will do.

 

BTW, I don't think turning 3E into classless would be that much of a hassle. Most of the variant systems, however, seem to also want to turn it into leveless, point-based, and what-not. That's too far IMO, and you'd be better of making your own system at that point.

 

Here's a somewhat simple idea I had for classless DnD: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?...light=classless

 

It does require 'some' work in balancing the numbers, and changing class abilities into feats, though. :ph34r:

[POOPERSCOOPER]

No more DnD please, i cant take it anymore. OMG I DONT CARE ABOUT f***ING ELFS AND DWARVES GOD DMANIT I HATDONT WANJT TO PLAY SOME GAY RULES> Keep DnD to tabletop and have developers actually make something original like perhaps *gasp* make their own system?

[Judge Hades]

They wouldn't even dream of doing that, Poopie. Just wouldn't be marketable.

[Ellester]

That

[Slammy1]

They wouldn't even dream of doing that, Poopie. Just wouldn't be marketable.

Yes, unfortunately most CRPGs are based on the DnD system due to product recognition, and I also don't think we'd see great commercial success in a non-DnD venture. I remember in grad school I got together with a couple of friends (a CS grad student and a graphics designer) and we designed a game. We decided just to make it for ourselves as to try and make a marketable product involved too many compromises on what we wanted to do. Never finished it, but it really wasn't about finishing the game.

[Lord Daemon]

I can't imagine being in the CRPG field, and not doing a D&D game... or at least that kind of a game.

That shows - in my honest opinion - a lack of imagination on your part rather than an intrinsic difficulty in doing something other than D&D. Every system has strengths and weaknesses; or, more accurately, every system is usable for some types of games but not for others.

 

D&D is meant for heroic games with archetypical characters doing a lot of fighting. I'll explain the three key terms. Heroic: the characters are heroes, which means that they have powers greater than those of average human beings, grow to ever higher levels of power through experience and fight and triumph against powerful enemies. Archetypical: the characters are defined by certain archetypes, such as 'elf' and 'mage'. Furthermore, these archetypes are tied to the heroic aspect: they tell us what kind of powers the characters have, how they overcome their foes. (One could also have archetypes tied to story, for instance 'the doomed hero', or to personality, for instance 'the brave leader'.) Fighting: this should be obvious, D&D is about crawling dungeons and fighting monsters.

 

But why should every computer-RPG be such a heroic game with archetypical characters fighting their way through hordes of monsters? It is merely a complete lack of creativity to hash up the old thing again and again - there are more themes than 'good destroys evil after getting strong through many hardships'.

 

I would agree that D&D has been used in CRPGs that did not conform to this tired old scheme. Most notably, of course, Planescape: Torment. Torment was not heroic (there was no evil to fight, it was a story of guilt and redemption, of facing your own actions); it was not archetypical (which is why we actually remember the characters, but cannot describe them in three easy words); and although there was a lot of fighting, this was never the important part of the game. And what is important to notice is this: Torment was hampered, not helped, by the D&D system. Regaining memories could have been modelled _much_ more powerfully than gaining experience points, had another system be used. The major part of the game mechanics was concerned with fighting, even though fighting was only a minor part of the game. And so forth. And the brilliant insight of the developers was that they wold have to work around this kind of thing: hence the immortality (to de-emphasise fighting), hence the incredible ease with which you could become level 50 (to de-emphasise heroism), henc the impossibility to create your own character (because the story was built around one person, and not one in which just any D&D archetype could be plugged). Think of the game it could have been with an appropriate mechanics. (But that's a bit like saying "think of the composer Mozart could have been had he lived 30 years longer".)

 

There is an entire world of games to explore which do not conform to the heroism - archetype - fighting paradigm. And exploration must not be guided by foolish adherence to a system which may be great for one thing, but is certainly not great for others.

[Signum]

I have successfully migrated from the black isle boards. woot!

[roshan]

Its w00t, not woot!!!

[chaosprism]

I want a game with the rules implementation (WITHOUT BUGS) of TOEE and the storyline and roleplaying of Icewind Dale 1 or BG series. That would satisfy me. I really like the tactical options that D&D gives you. Make it FR, Eberron or Greyhawk. I guess preferably Greyhawk or Eberron so it would be something new.

Yep I have no problem with a new game , set in a new setting as long as it is in the end a decent game . Something the creators are proud off as if it was a work of art.. not something they just throw out the door to make some money.

 

Greyhawk is hardly new, it just hasnt had much treatment in CRPG's.

 

Theres a lot of areas in the f.realms they could place adventures as well.. even if people are supposedly sick of that setting.. theres nothing really a setting in greyhawk or eberron can give you that a strange place or plane off the realms couldnt give you.

 

As an example they could set something in Halruua or in Muholrand/thay theres buckets of source material already made for many areas of the realms and a lot of it is very ineteresting.

 

Theres even the city of calimport in calimshan.., Maztica or Kara-Tur.

 

see here for downloads direct from WOTC themselves..settings cities etc.

 

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/downloads

[Signum]

I think much of the strength of D&D comes from the depth of the campaign worlds as opposed to the mechanics. I like the mechanics a lot more now than I did in the days of 2e, but i think it's the "fluff" of the settings which really sells the games.

[PrinceofTheives]

I think much of the strength of D&D comes from the depth of the campaign worlds as opposed to the mechanics. I like the mechanics a lot more now than I did in the days of 2e, but i think it's the "fluff" of the settings which really sells the games.

hey do people from obsidian even read these messages

[Sargallath Abraxium]

I think much of the strength of D&D comes from the depth of the campaign worlds as opposed to the mechanics. I like the mechanics a lot more now than I did in the days of 2e, but i think it's the "fluff" of the settings which really sells the games.

hey do people from obsidian even read these messages

...not when they sees me name as the topic-starter, usually...guess it be an ol' carry-o'er grudge from the ol' BIS Boards...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[tripleRRR]

I think much of the strength of D&D comes from the depth of the campaign worlds as opposed to the mechanics. I like the mechanics a lot more now than I did in the days of 2e, but i think it's the "fluff" of the settings which really sells the games.

hey do people from obsidian even read these messages

...not when they sees me name as the topic-starter, usually...guess it be an ol' carry-o'er grudge from the ol' BIS Boards...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

Not so much grudge as overexposure.

 

 

TripleRRR

[Lord Daemon]

I think much of the strength of D&D comes from the depth of the campaign worlds as opposed to the mechanics. I like the mechanics a lot more now than I did in the days of 2e, but i think it's the "fluff" of the settings which really sells the games.

I think its the marketing techniques.