TheRPGSite

It is with a heavy heart and a plate full of crow that I approach this post/thread.  I know that I'll be laughed at and the jeers will range from good-natured to vindictive, but I must confess...

...I played Star Wars D20 on Friday...

...and I liked it.  :o

Mind you, it was a bit harsh to have the player of the 7th level Jedi Knight wannabe (he hadn't made it back to the Temple for his trials) tell me all about his +33 to this and +27 to that and how he could track a Wookiee through the forests of Kashyyk after 12 days of continuous rain while blindfolded, wounded and drunk.

I think the GM (Damnit, I will not call it a "DM" because that's got to be the stupidest name for a GM short of a "Storyteller" or "Bard"!) was what made the game so cool.  He played "minigames" with each of the characters that were tailored to their class.  The Noble was in a heated negotiation to gain worker rights on an industrial planet while the Jedi and the Clone Trooper fought against a Confederation plot (both returning vastly different reports, I might add!), the Force Adept, who really didn't like the way the Jedi handled things, had tossed in his loyalty with the Clone Trooper (mind you, this is pre-Order 66 stuff...).

And that's when my character, a Scoundrel, gambler, smuggler, fence, B&E specialist, entered the picture with a security expert (Tech Specialist) asked to retrieve plans for a secret weapon being developed by the Geonosians, but the plans had been removed from Geonosis and we were being contracted to find them and get copies.  

It was a cool tie-in to all the old familiar places and although I'm not really a fan of levelling or the cumbersome and heavy-handed mechanic that is D20, I had a very good time and even (:::gulp:::) ...bought the book.

My friend, who dragged me into the game, laughed at me quite a bit and kept handing me candies with a note wrapped around it that said, "crow."  

I just had to be honest with you all, though.  As someone who had been a vocal anti-D20 voice, I just had to be honest.

(I'm not sure if I feel like a member of a 12-step "Anti-D20" group or a newly corrupted member of a nasty cabal bent on gameworld conquest...) :D

Somewhere in a room full of people...

"Hi. My name is Ian Vellore, and... uh... I play d20."

"HI ANDY!!!"

:p

I'm very glad you had a good time; it means the game isn't completely useless.

*rimshot*

Seriously, good goin'.  If you had fun, then you were awesome.

You had fun?
As in great time while playing because of playing?

More Power to you.
D20 is not evil. It just is.

I had such a good time that I came home (at 3:30am, mind you) with the new book and spent two more hours reading it.  The next day (evening), I created half a dozen characters to learn better how the system worked and how to make a character that was actually good at something (without min/maxing it to death).

Spurred by her love of Star Wars, my daughter also made a character and I'm going to attempt to GM the (cumbersome) D20 mechanic with her, to help learn it a bit more and have an opportunity to play Star Wars with my favorite gamer.  :)

Personally, I'd prefer not to play d20, but in the end, a game lies in the hands of the GM and players no matter the system.

GM always trumps Designer. A good GM -especially with good players! - can make a terrible game sing, let alone a solid game like D20.

-clash

One of my favorite D20-hate stories has to do with a guy I worked with.

He had actually been playing the D20 version of starwars for a couple of weeks, but didn't realize that there was an earlier version of it. So when he heard that there was this new hated d20 bandwagon, he merrily jumped on, and espoused how great *his* Star Wars game was and how any AD&D revision of it could never compare to the original. Then he made the mistake of describing what feats his Jedi Consular had.

Someone had to explain to him that he had been playing the d20 version all along.

Stop thinking of the system at cumbersome, because it really isn't.  You can resolve almost anything with a roll of a d20, add your bonus (skill or attribute), and compare it to a difficulty.

That's it. That's the core of the system. And the only times it gets much more complicated than that is during combat.

Also, because D20 is not point-buy, its very hard to make a character that isn't any "good" at things. You don't have to be afraid, like you do in other games that don't have classes or levels, that you will make a character that will be utterly useless just because you don't know the rules well enough (of course, knowing the rules really well can let you make better characters, but that's true in any system).  If you're worried about not knowing the system well enough, those classes and levels so many people bitch about are actually your best friend.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Abyssal MawSomeone had to explain to him that he had been playing the d20 version all along.

That's priceless!!!

Quote from: RPGPunditStop thinking of the system at cumbersome, because it really isn't.  You can resolve almost anything with a roll of a d20, add your bonus (skill or attribute), and compare it to a difficulty.

That's it. That's the core of the system. And the only times it gets much more complicated than that is during combat.

Okay.  I shouldn't keep doing that and calling it "cumbersome" without explaining what I mean.

Coming into the game from the outside, it feels cumbersome because you have to remember how to use this Feat with that action and this skill when combined with that maneuver gives a bonus to the other Feat that has a bearing on some miniscule little element of combat ...

... and while the GM is looking up all the rules, the players are reminding him of the modifications of this maneuver and that Feat from this other source book ...

... and 20 minutes later he says, "Roll a D20 and add your skill levels +2."

Honestly, I'd rather he'd wing it and just say, "Oh, I think that's about a +1 or +2, take the +2 and roll so we can keep the action going..."

That's what I mean by "cumbersome."

Having players tell the GM that some new rule has come out that changes things and spending 20 minutes looking up the minutiae is a serious waste of time and fun.

QuoteIf you're worried about not knowing the system well enough, those classes and levels so many people bitch about are actually your best friend.

I made this point to my game-developer friend who smiled and said, "That's why we included 'concepts' in our new mechanic.  D20 isn't useless, mind you.  There's some diamonds in the rough in there for the wise miner."

Quote from: RPGPunditAlso, because D20 is not point-buy, its very hard to make a character that isn't any "good" at things. You don't have to be afraid, like you do in other games that don't have classes or levels, that you will make a character that will be utterly useless just because you don't know the rules well enough (of course, knowing the rules really well can let you make better characters, but that's true in any system).  If you're worried about not knowing the system well enough, those classes and levels so many people bitch about are actually your best friend.

Truth be told the only real problems I've ever seen with useless characters are ones that were made, for whatever reason, in issolation from or in spite of what would be happening in the game and the GM choosing to just go ahead and punch through with with their initial plan, effectively cutting the PC out of the game.  The PC is still "good" at something, they just aren't good at anything relavent at that particular table.

It has little to do with class/no class, seen it in both in roughly equal measures.  Especially considering how much class systems have openned up to become defacto point-buy systems.  In fact it seems more to do with GMs screwing around with house rules or with wildly differing understandings/interpretations of rules or settings.

Glad you enjoyed it :) . Welcome to the other side ;) .

Quote from: Vellorian... and while the GM is looking up all the rules, the players are reminding him of the modifications of this maneuver and that Feat from this other source book ...

... and 20 minutes later he says, "Roll a D20 and add your skill levels +2."

Honestly, I'd rather he'd wing it and just say, "Oh, I think that's about a +1 or +2, take the +2 and roll so we can keep the action going..."

"Winging it" is exactly how I run my own d20 games (primarily D&D, Arcana Evolved, and CoC).  Life's too short to waste precious game time looking up fiddly rules bits.  If I have a table handy, or don't need to drag a book out, I'll use the actual rule.  Failing that, if it takes me 10 seconds to make a rules decision, that's too long.

Usually, anyway.  One game I'm running now, I am specifically running primarily as a tactical wargame.  In that case, I'll look up a rule for up to 20 seconds before winging it. :)  I also expect my players to have all relevant rules for their characters at-hand - particularly oddball feats or non-SRD spells.

-O

Quote from: Vellorian... and 20 minutes later he says, "Roll a D20 and add your skill levels +2."

Honestly, I'd rather he'd wing it and just say, "Oh, I think that's about a +1 or +2, take the +2 and roll so we can keep the action going..."

That's well and good, but if every roll was resolved that way, I would wonder what the system was for. I like some cause and effect in the game, and like some character definition that means something.

Though situations like you cite come up occasionally, I find that a function rule of thumb is, if you can't quickly resolve the roll...

- make something up (like you said).
- jot it down and read (and possibly bookmark) the relevant rule AFTER the game so you know how to do it the next time.

That way you don't have to sacrifice the cause-and-effect modeling on the altar of "keeping things flowing." There is a compromise to be had.

Caesar Slaad hit the nail on the head.  

After a few more games, you generally have a grasp of the feats and how they interact.  A little expertise makes the d20 flow that much smoother.

And hey, you could be adjudicating Charm Combos in Exalted (which is an engine of nightmare and dread.)

Quote from: VellorianComing into the game from the outside, it feels cumbersome because you have to remember how to use this Feat with that action and this skill when combined with that maneuver gives a bonus to the other Feat that has a bearing on some miniscule little element of combat ...

Dude.. there's this thing, called a character sheet... use it.

Most feats aren't like fucking charms from exalted. Most feats will do ONE specific thing, that will always be on, and that you can write down on your sheet (ie. "gives me +1 to hit with lightsaber").  On a good character sheet, there's a space for "miscellaneous bonus", which you just write down and then not worry about anymore.

Most skills have no effect in combat. You don't have to worry about things like using bluff to taunt or something like that unless you intend to do that, and that's when you'd look it up.

Most feats that are combat maneuvres are only relevant to themselves; that is, even a feat that has another feat as its prerequisite isn't something that CHANGES the older feat, its just something that you had to have step A before getting step B.  For example, you need power attack to take Cleave; but Cleave doesn't change Power Attack; Cleave is a totally seperate thing.  So really, feats don't affect each other nearly as much as you're making it sound, and skills barely enter into combat at all; and almost anything that really is complicated about D20 can be solved by having it all written down beforehand on a good character sheet, and already summed up in the form of the "bonus you get to your roll to do x", which is the only thing that really matters.

Quote... and while the GM is looking up all the rules, the players are reminding him of the modifications of this maneuver and that Feat from this other source book ...

... and 20 minutes later he says, "Roll a D20 and add your skill levels +2."

Honestly, I'd rather he'd wing it and just say, "Oh, I think that's about a +1 or +2, take the +2 and roll so we can keep the action going..."

That's what I mean by "cumbersome."

I think this is a fantasy scenario you've built up in your head, rather than something that actually happens very often at all. It certainly doesn't often happen with me, and its definitely NOT because I "know all the rules by heart" or some shit like that. I'm actually an awful DM in that regard, I know barely any of the rules by heart, and my players usually know the mechanics part of the rules much better than I do.

But the kind of debates you're talking about usually don't really happen, especially not in the midst of combat.

QuoteHaving players tell the GM that some new rule has come out that changes things and spending 20 minutes looking up the minutiae is a serious waste of time and fun.

What kind of fucking swine are you playing with??  The Players don't tell the GM squat. Nor do the "almighty game designers" get to decide what the rules will be for the GM.  Aside from the corebook, anything else is utterly up to the GMs total and absolute discretion.
New rules that change things don't have any impact unless a GM is a sucker weakling who lets players manipulate  him, in which case the problem is with your GM not with D20.  

Also, last time I checked Mike Mearls wasn't chained to a teletype machine being forced to constantly add by-the-second revisions to the D20 SRD, with players having to patch into radio signals to receive the latest versions of how to roll your skill checks, and tanks outside every gamer's home threatening to blow up your house if you don't immediately apply all new changes to the holy D20 bundle o' rules...

I mean shit, do you live in an alternate universe or something?

RPGPundit

QuoteWhat kind of fucking swine are you playing with??

Wow Pundit, back up! You are into swine country now.

Adhering to the rules to ensure a fair and solid resolution of an important fight is not swiney at all: It´s the heirloom of the wargamers.
Because the GM is a referee in games like OD&D and Traveller.

This has never been a part of RPGs, though. In RPGs, the authority of the DM always supercedes the rules themselves, through tradition.  Though very early RPGs tried to present this "players can use rules against the GM" vantage point, no one actually bought into that.  That's what Hackmaster mocks when it presented that kind of rule.

Swine like to paint D20 and D20 fans as a set of complicated rules run by a bunch of rules lawyers, and that D20 is "broken" because there are 400 rulebooks and "everyone knows" that you MUST use all 400 rulebooks and errata all at once and that any player can demand that his Gm use "obscure broken feat #430" from the Obscure Book of Feats and in that way nuke the entire game.

Its nonsense.  GMs have absolute authority over their games. The rules are there FOR the GM, not the GM for the rules.

RPGPundit

I played Star Wars d20 as my first long term d20 campaign. The fact is, I don't really like using d20. But my current group are d20 fans. Big fans. I've introduced them to other systems, but they like d20 and wish I would run all my games with it.

Now, I'm not really a systems guy, but because they are all so familiar with d20 the game moved pretty smoothly. And I as become more familiar with the rules, less time (on my part) was spent figuring out the rules aspect of the game.

I would have much preffered to use another system - but because they were so familiar with the rules, I learnt to adapt, the campaign went great, and a good time was had by all.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RPGPunditGMs have absolute authority over their games. The rules are there FOR the GM, not the GM for the rules.

Earlier flyingmouse mentioned the The Cult of the Designer.  Well right there is the exact D&D prattle that underpins The Cult of The DM. :(

Quote from: blakkieEarlier flyingmouse mentioned the The Cult of the Designer.  Well right there is the exact D&D prattle that underpins The Cult of The DM. :(

It's "mice" not "mouse!" I'm plural, dude! :D

I prefer to say the rules are there for the group, not the group for the rules.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceIt's "mice" not "mouse!" I'm plural, dude! :D

I grew up on a farm, and used to do things like run around behind a wagon picking up stooked bales and loading them.  Every once-in-a-while you'd come across a mouse nest and....well lets say you name evokes a very vivid visual for me.  Especially the "flying" part. The only difference between 'mouse' and 'mice' is extra stomps. :shovel: :mourn:

;)

QuoteI prefer to say the rules are there for the group, not the group for the rules.

-clash

Which is something different. ALL HAIL THE CULT OF THE GROUP! :D  So, ummm, meetings are the 2nd Tuesday of every month. You bring the cookies I'll bring the Koolaid, Ok?

Ah, but the way I put it is this:

The rules are there for the GM, the GM is there for the players.

What happened was that White Wolf brought the "game designer" into the mix as something other than a mere author of rules, and tried to make him into a figure in that formula when he had no business being so, and all of a sudden RPGs became a relationship between the GM and the Designer, and the players were little more than fucking spectators; essentially, "the players were there for the GM and the GM was there for the Designer via the Rules".

Blackie's issue, like those of most Theory Swine, seems to be in reaction to this, or I should say an extreme over-reaction, which was to lose all trust in the GM and thus try to create a "playertariat" where the Players get to push the GM around, and designers are meant to be the stars who create rules that allow the players to do this.
So in theory (pardon the Pun), so-called "indie" games are supposed to be "the designer is there for the players via the rules, and the GM is no one of importance".
More often, in practice (due to the fact that Theory Swine designers are no less egomaniacal than Story-based Swine designers) it seems to turn out to be "everyone is there for the designer via the rules, the players are there to witness the designer's genius, and the GM is there to witness the player's enactment of the designer's genius".

That's fucked up, right there...

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditAh, but the way I put it is this:

The rules are there for the GM, the GM is there for the players.

What happened was that White Wolf brought the "game designer" into the mix as something other than a mere author of rules, and tried to make him into a figure in that formula when he had no business being so, and all of a sudden RPGs became a relationship between the GM and the Designer, and the players were little more than fucking spectators; essentially, "the players were there for the GM and the GM was there for the Designer via the Rules".

Blackie's issue, like those of most Theory Swine, seems to be in reaction to this, or I should say an extreme over-reaction, which was to lose all trust in the GM and thus try to create a "playertariat" where the Players get to push the GM around, and designers are meant to be the stars who create rules that allow the players to do this.
So in theory (pardon the Pun), so-called "indie" games are supposed to be "the designer is there for the players via the rules, and the GM is no one of importance".
More often, in practice (due to the fact that Theory Swine designers are no less egomaniacal than Story-based Swine designers) it seems to turn out to be "everyone is there for the designer via the rules, the players are there to witness the designer's genius, and the GM is there to witness the player's enactment of the designer's genius".

That's fucked up, right there...

RPGPundit

Well, I pretty much agree to the general description - it's why I call it the Cult of the Designer - except your ever-so-much-more-so is cranked up to eleven. :D

-clash

Quote from: RPGPunditAh, but the way I put it is this: (snip)

Most sense you've ever made, Pundit. Abso-fucking-lutely. I flip through something like MLwM, or Mountain Witch, and I'm thinking "So, great. This guy figured his bad module was too awesome to be shackled to a fun system? This is a short story with a die mechanic."

It's very, very strange when they go around proving you right.

Quote from: SettembriniWow Pundit, back up! You are into swine country now.

So are you just now noticing that he is just as arrogant and condescending and eager to deride those with tastes different than him as inferior as those he attacks?  It's the biggest case of the kettle calling the pot black I've ever seen and both he and his followers seem completely immune to it.

You're about to break his spell Settembrini, come into the light...

QuoteAh, but the way I put it is this:

The rules are there for the GM, the GM is there for the players.

What happened was that White Wolf brought the "game designer" into the mix as something other than a mere author of rules, and tried to make him into a figure in that formula when he had no business being so, and all of a sudden RPGs became a relationship between the GM and the Designer, and the players were little more than fucking spectators; essentially, "the players were there for the GM and the GM was there for the Designer via the Rules".

Blackie's issue, like those of most Theory Swine, seems to be in reaction to this, or I should say an extreme over-reaction, which was to lose all trust in the GM and thus try to create a "playertariat" where the Players get to push the GM around, and designers are meant to be the stars who create rules that allow the players to do this.
So in theory (pardon the Pun), so-called "indie" games are supposed to be "the designer is there for the players via the rules, and the GM is no one of importance".
More often, in practice (due to the fact that Theory Swine designers are no less egomaniacal than Story-based Swine designers) it seems to turn out to be "everyone is there for the designer via the rules, the players are there to witness the designer's genius, and the GM is there to witness the player's enactment of the designer's genius".

That's fucked up, right there...

This is so retarded I don't really know where to start.  Playertariat?  You have to be taking the piss.  The game designers don't have an agenda beyond "Hey, maybe this'll be a cool game that people will buy.", and the only egomaniac here is you.