Does anyone else share my dislike of d20?

[Lancer]

You are mistaken there.  Let's say I'm only rolling 1 dice, and I have to hit a 6 (a 7 in my game).

 

I have a 50% chance of getting a success, and a 10% chance of rolling a 1.  With more dice, you don't have a greater chance of failure as the 1's have to outnumber the successes.  With each new dice, again you have a 50% chance of success, and 10% chance of rolling a 1.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Mathematically, it works but in play and with an arbitrary die roll you can conceivably get a result n which you get 4 1's out of 6 or 7 die even with odds against it happening.

It doesn't make sense that someone far less skilled in that same task roll say 4 die and succeed in the same task easily whereas the highly skilled character couldn't. This effect is multiplied precisely because you have some dice that cancel out successes. This effect wouldn't be so bad if you were only counting the number of successes, per se like in other games.

 

 

In addition, if you have a specialty, you get to reroll a 10 and possibly get multiple successes on one die.

 

You can also reroll some more ones.

[Lancer]

How is that different from 2e or 3e D&D? Those characters are not just overpowered, they're virtual gods next to the common people!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly.. I am not saying it is any different from AD&D. My point is precisely to illustrate that AD&D is not the only broken system in this multiverse.

[Jediphile]

You know, Ender, I like you despite the ridiculous "class based systems are for those inferior role-players" attitude.  Class based systems are not inferior.  A lot of folks like them because they provide a template.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You don't need a class-based RPG system to have templates. Any game can have templates. GURPS has a number of books only with templates for how to build characters. They are a bit boring to read through, but they are there if you need them.

 

Or take a game like Last Unicorn Games' ICON system for Star Trek - it had templates, in the form of the various branches of Starfleet, merchants, klingon warriors, and what not. But you didn't need to use them, and if you didn't want to, you were perfectly free to use points to create your own template from scratch. That's much better game design.

 

GURPS sticks with the point system in the core books because creating example characters would take up too much space and because they presume people will want their own unique characters, but if you want to make up examples and then have players form their characters on that basis, then that is certainly possible and perfectly valid.

 

And that being the case, there really is no need for doing fixed classes in any system.

[Lancer]

We might reach a majority concensus however that it is not D&D.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you knew how much D&D loves you!

[EnderAndrew]

Mathematically, it works but in play and with an arbitrary die roll you can conceivably get a result n which you get 4 1's out of 6 or 7 die even with odds against it happening. 

It doesn't make sense that someone far less skilled in that same task roll say 4 die and succeed in the same task easily whereas the highly skilled character couldn't. This effect is multiplied precisely because you have some die that cancel out successes. This effect wouldn't be so bad if you were only counting the number of successes, per se like in other games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A 20th Level Fighter can roll a 1 and whiff 5% of the time.

 

Let's say I am some insane fighter in WoD and I have 12 dice to roll to hit. (Really twinky characters might actually even roll say, 15 dice, but that's rare).

 

You are five times more likely to get a success than a 1. So, 1 in 5, 15 times over again is a .000000016384% chance of botching.

 

Compare that to a 5% chance of failure for a Level 20 Fighter botching and tell me which rule is broken now.

 

You suggested you are more likely to botch with more dice, but mathmatically, you are less likely to botch with each dice. Mind you the chance for failure isn't so drastic. The chance for success if 50% for each dice. If you need one success, then chances are, on 2 dice you will succeed. With 7 dice, you will more than succeed. Multiple successes increase damage, or add to the effect. However, that's partially why I make the base difficulty instead of 6. It brings the power level down a bit, without changing a bunch of rules.

 

I can alter the style and challenge of play simply by altering the difficulty, but the overall rules aren't broken. And as far as I know, both Exalted, Abberant, and the brand new WoD systems all went with a base 7 as well. So my one house rule is actually a standard rule in the newer versions of the Storyteller/WoD rules.

[Jediphile]

How is that different from 2e or 3e D&D? Those characters are not just overpowered, they're virtual gods next to the common people!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly.. I am not saying it is any different from AD&D. My point is precisely to illustrate that AD&D is not the only broken system in this multiverse.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nobody has argued that GURPS or any other system is perfect. We've only argued that it or other skill-based systems like it are inherently better than class and level-based systems like d20.

[Lancer]

Nobody has argued that GURPS or any other system is perfect. We've only argued that it or other skill-based systems like it are inherently better than class and level-based systems like d20.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No argument here. Any skill-based system is better than 3E

 

 

And with that, I am tired as hell it is 5am here EST (LOL!) and I am no longer capable of making coherent sentences at this time so I will come back fresh tomorrow.. or the day after to continue this...But it has been fun talking to you Enderwiggin, Jediphile, and several others. Good Night!

[EnderAndrew]

Yes, thanks for the debate! Night!

[Lancer]

One more thing.. Vampire:Dark Ages that is the setting in the WoD that catches my eye the most.. ok.. really good night!

[EnderAndrew]

They have a full Dark Ages line now with Dark Ages Mage, Vampire, Werewolf, Fae, and Inquisition!

[Cantousent]

Well, I was in bed already. Of course, having slept almost a full hour, I was awakened by some more suffering. Son of a two bit prostitute.

 

Anyhow, we might have broad consensus that DnD isn't the best system, but it seems to enjoy quite a bit of comercial success. Why is that? If it is an inferior system, must we conclude that most players are simply foolish to prefer it? I'm sure there are a number of factors that contribute to the sales, and quality need not be the primary reason. Still, I enjoy Dungeons and Dragons, and I have some specific reasons why.

 

I can get a group of people together for regular sessions.

 

It is a familiar setting for most folks. The brandname has survived for a long time.

 

It is easily accessible in every hobby shop and most book stores I visit.

 

I can actually get a group of people to play Dungeons and Dragons regularly.

 

I know the rules well enough that every session isn't an exercise in searching through the rulebooks.

 

I have fond memories of more than two decades of playing the Dungeons and Dragons brand name.

 

Folks in my gaming groups are happy to get together regularly for Dungeons and Dragons.

 

It's fun.

 

Why should I throw to the wayside a system just because some folks think classed based rulesets are less elegant?

[EnderAndrew]

Again McDonalds is the most popular burger chain on the planet. That does not mean they make good burgers. I always wonder why people don't eat a better burger elsewhere, but people seem content to eat there.

 

D&D was an innovator, and I give them props for that. D&D is a very recognizable brand name.

 

Most players I know that have played a variety of systems, prefer not to go back to D&D. If you really take the time to try and embrace other systems, I think you might enjoy them even more than you enjoy D&D.

 

The hard part isn't leaving the old rules behind. It's leaving the settings behind.

[Jediphile]

Well, I was in bed already.  Of course, having slept almost a full hour, I was awakened by some more suffering.  Son of a two bit prostitute.

 

Anyhow, we might have broad consensus that DnD isn't the best system, but it seems to enjoy quite a bit of comercial success.  Why is that?  If it is an inferior system, must we conclude that most players are simply foolish to prefer it?  I'm sure there are a number of factors that contribute to the sales, and quality need not be the primary reason.  Still, I enjoy Dungeons and Dragons, and I have some specific reasons why.

 

I can get a group of people together for regular sessions.

 

It is a familiar setting for most folks.  The brandname has survived for a long time.

 

It is easily accessible in every hobby shop and most book stores I visit.

 

I can actually get a group of people to play Dungeons and Dragons regularly.

 

I know the rules well enough that every session isn't an exercise in searching through the rulebooks.

 

I have fond memories of more than two decades of playing the Dungeons and Dragons brand name.

 

Folks in my gaming groups are happy to get together regularly for Dungeons and Dragons.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

All good reasons, except that my two decades of good memories stopped at 3e - it was just not the same game. But yes, it's a brand name, and WotC is making damn sure it stays that way - if people ever found out there are games out there that are infinitely better than D&D, then WotC would have a real problem.

 

It's fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, that's a matter of opinion. Personally I don't find 3e fun, and even 2e is showing strain a lot - I only play 2e because I cannot switch my system mid-game.

 

Why should I throw to the wayside a system just because some folks think classed based rulesets are less elegant?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Who says you should? Nobody here is going to send mob squads to your house to make you play GURPS or WoD or whatever instead. If 3e is your cup of tea, then more power to you. I find it it be a horribly flawed and inferior system, however, and I argue why. That's about it, really...

 

If you want to embrace a better system, then there are many reasons why you might want to, though. Many of these have already been mentioned here. However, that is your choice to make.

[Cantousent]

Hell, Ender, I do enjoy other systems better than Dungeons and Dragons. ...But I enjoy having a group better than playing other systems.

 

I also agree that it's the settings and not the rules. Even though they're all home brewed, all the campaigns, both the ones I've run over the years and the ones other folks have run, are DnD. Sure, we could change the rules, but familiarity is a strong advocate.

 

As for the McDonalds thing: maybe McDonalds provides the best value for folks between price and food. Maybe their burgers aren't so bad for what I pay. I dunno. I don't tend to eat fast food, but I know that I'm reluctant to say that the vocal minority is any better than the cash spending majority.

 

Still, I'd really like to get into a Call of Cthulu game in a big way. I don't know that I prefer the setting so much as I just don't ever get to play it and so I never get my Cthulu fix. That's why I'm jonesin' for the game that's alegedly coming out this year.

 

At any rate, I don't hate d20. I just see it as fitting a particular niche in the RPG world. My only real area of disagreement with Jediphile regarded the dominance of d20. I'm positive there will be other systems from which to choose. d20 is convenient, but it is not and probably won't ever be the only choice. McDonalds is popular, but it has a long way to go before it has driven away all the competition.

 

Anyhow, maybe I can get some more sleep. I enjoy reading the arguments when I come back.

[EnderAndrew]

Again, I'm happy that people enjoy their games. I think they might enjoy their games more with a better system. And I'm not encouraging people to switch systems mid-chronicle. But next time, consider another system. You might really enjoy it.

[Jediphile]

At any rate, I don't hate d20.  I just see it as fitting a particular niche in the RPG world.  My only real area of disagreement with Jediphile regarded the dominance of d20.  I'm positive there will be other systems from which to choose.  d20 is convenient, but it is not and probably won't ever be the only choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I know what you mean, but I still think that the niche you refer to could be filled by games that are much better than D&D. No, GURPS lite probably isn't it, but are certainly other possibilities. A GURPS like variant where templates are set up akin to D&D and where the rules are simplified might be a good beginning, for example.

 

And hopefully d20 won't be the only choice, but WotC do indeed try to make d20 the industry-wide standard by getting other companies to accept the d20 standard. They said so themselves here. And though they carefully avoid saying it out loud, the end effect of their strategy is to smother everything else into submission in the same way Microsoft does...

[EnderAndrew]

Are you suggesting there are alternatives to Microsoft products?

 

[Jediphile]

Are you suggesting there are alternatives to Microsoft products?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My point exactly.

 

Do we want that practice in the RPG market? I don't, but WotC is working towards it.

[Loof]

Of course they are they are a company isntead of the collection of rpg maniacs that traditionaly is the kind of group that has stood for most rpg development.

[EnderAndrew]

I thought WotC was pure evil. I really want to hate them, as they are owned by Hasbro, and they put stupid restrictions on D&D CRPGs. However, the Open Gaming License is a double-edged sword that I'm not sure I have a problem with.

 

Furthermore, when everyone accused WotC of being evil money-grabbers with the 3.5 upgrade, they not only released the new material for free, but the entire core rules are in the public domain.

 

Releasing your three core books for free is pretty nifty.

[Loof]

Yeah most companys aren't evil per see (even if hasbros buying of avalon hill and then more or less leveling it with the ground comes close). But I still agree with Jediphile that we don't want any one company dominating the gameing market as it kills inovation and diversity.

Even if said company has several different games and settings, games from the same origin tend to have the same flavour, which in my opinion is bad if taken to far.

[EnderAndrew]

Oddly enough, with the OGL, WotC lets White Wolf take a crack at D20. Engel, a German D20 game is quite good, despite my disdain for D20. The concept is great, and the artwork is incredible. White Wolf has translated the game to English for us English speakers.

 

White Wolf also did GammaWorld D20, Ravenloft, and their own entire line of Sword and Sorcery, including all of Monte Cook's books.

 

If I were convinced to playing 3E, I'd want to go with Arcana Unearthed, which is basically an alternative or supplemental player's guide with alternate magic systems, new classes, new races, new feats, etc. It's really good.

 

Rituals and Relics also presents some neat alternate magic rules.

 

Basically, WotC is allowing someone else to show them up at their own game.

[Jediphile]

Basically, WotC is allowing someone else to show them up at their own game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, but only so that d20 will permeate the market and push out the competition. Once that happens, they'll control the industry, and then those licences can disappear fairly quickly, since it will no longer be in the company's interest to allow them.

 

Besides, WotC sells the core mechanic separately together with FR stuff. FR has always been a seller, and nothing sells like rulebooks. Of course, people also need some adventures to play with, but that is a notoriously dangerous market (as TSR discovered...). So why should WotC take that risk if they can get others to do it for them? Yes, there is method to the madness...

[EnderAndrew]

WotC is also pushing the Dragonlance setting, Oriental Adventures, and Ebberon.

[Archmonarch]

If I were convinced to playing 3E, I'd want to go with Arcana Unearthed, which is basically an alternative or supplemental player's guide with alternate magic systems, new classes, new races, new feats, etc.  It's really good.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Warlock and fanmade variants are pretty much my favorite class.