Quote from: RPGPunditWho the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

I suspect quite a few people actually.  And it's a real example, some folk on rpg.net tried to create a d20 version of it (which I think could work fine potentially) but the thread kept getting crapped on until they gave up.  A lot of posters seemed to find the possibility of the game somehow threatening, which was kind of sad.

Also, bear in mind that although our hobby tends to overlap with sf and fantasy fandom, it doesn't have to be that way.  We can keep all the sf and fantasy fans and get fans of other genres too, some of whom may well end up getting into the sf and fantasy stuff anyway if that matters.

Quote from: RPGPunditSomeone I don't particularly want in the hobby, to start with.  I think your example is absurd.

Why?  What the fuck do you care if a bunch of people you're not playing with play something that doesn't interest you?  I don't see the point of mecha, but I've no desire to chuck the mecha fans out of the hobby.  What business is it of mine that they like giant anthropomorphic robots?

Anyway, I'll bet you in that Pride and Prejudice group there will be one player sitting there thinking "you know, this is fun and all, but it would be better if we could kick Mr D'Arcy's ass.  I wonder if anyone has created a game similar to Pride and Prejudice but with more action and none of this historical romance crap."  

Quote from: RPGPunditYou could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Yeah, because nothing will persuade someone to join the hobby better than my running a game for them that I don't particularly enjoy or know that well.  Most rpgs have pretty similar concepts, if they're down with Runequest or whatever I don't think it will boggle most minds to see afterwards what other games are about and if they want they can get into d20 then.

Quote from: Abyssal MawBreaking the Ice?

See, this is why I laugh at you guys.

I think the point being made is to tailor the game to the person.  If the potential new gamer is into romance stuff and is interested in rpgs, then Breaking the Ice might be a good choice (I don't really know it).  If they're into WoW, then I would personally go for DnD and Breaking the Ice is a crap choice.

I think that's the only point being made, that there isn't one answer and that for some people who currently don't consider the hobby at all there may be games that would get them in that aren't quite as obvious as the ones that got us in.

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonRegency romance sounds like a fantastic gaming genre and I know two of my players would practically squeal with delight if I proposed it.

Well, there's always Tromeur's Wuthering Heights Roleplay...

Character generation: "choose a feature floating in the wind (hair / coat / scarf / kilt)" and "check the boxes corresponding to 'Worried' & 'Tired', the default mental & physical states".

Quote from: BalbinusI think the point being made is to tailor the game to the person.  If the potential new gamer is into romance stuff and is interested in rpgs, then Breaking the Ice might be a good choice (I don't really know it).  If they're into WoW, then I would personally go for DnD and Breaking the Ice is a crap choice.

I think that's the only point being made, that there isn't one answer and that for some people who currently don't consider the hobby at all there may be games that would get them in that aren't quite as obvious as the ones that got us in.

I remain unconvinced that such people will be interested in gaming at all. I've introduced hundreds of people to playing, but those people either came to me, visited a demo, or showed up at an event. They expressed interest in gaming first. We got around to genre later.  

My wife is one of those people who doesn't game. She is totally cool with it, but it's not her thing. I kinda think most non-gamers are like her. And further, I think even if you can somehow trick/lure/coerce/convince a non-gamer to trying out gaming, they aren't going to become part of the hobby unless they really want to be.

Part of the loaded question "what game would you use to introduce non gamers into the hobby" is "what non gamers are we talking about here?"

Here's what I think:

People who express interest in gaming (online, crpg, neopets, whatever, otherwise) can probably become gamers.

People who never express interest in gaming but are fans of certain dramatic or literary genres are simply unlikely to pick up the hobby. Even if they get tricked or convinced into trying it once or twice.

Things I Have Seen Bring Most People Into the Hobby (In descending order of magnitude).

These are the significant ones.
1. White Wolf LARP Games.
2. Vampire.
3. Fighting Fantasy
4. A shared interest in the greater hobbysphere (SF/Fantasy).

D&D hovers around the same level as computer RPGs.

Quote from: Abyssal MawPeople who never express interest in gaming but are fans of certain dramatic or literary genres are simply unlikely to pick up the hobby.

On the other hand, I've been requested to run Nob for librarians and lit students who had never played RPGs before but became intrigued after seeing the book, so those preferences definitely can play a role in the matter.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadSpoiled how? Sheesh... if anything I consider D20's skill system underplayed in D&D and am glad that other game were developed that made better use of it.

Mostly I think the problems flow from Skills being a side-stat that increases with each level instead of at the center of the system. The way it tends to work out is you have cappy little skills to start with, instead of having a mix of pretty good skill in some areas and weaker in others.  Another thing I miss in D20M (and some other games), and this should have been in that features of systems you'd like to see more of, is how Shadowrun has cheap Knowledge skills in a different pool. Having a pile of different types of knowledge skills really gives characters, well, character and are useful for forwarding a game in an info-intense setting without making the characters uber powerful.

To be fair part of my issue also is with how the probability curves work, and this ties back into the level ups. The single d20 roll just lays this huge swing out there, and when you want to handle graduants of success it's kind of a pain because you've got to identify the increments (because increments of 1 basically make zippo sense) and then determine which increment with the result of whatever bonus+d20 roll.  It feels clunky to say the least.  I suppose if you don't roll very often then it's fine, but that goes back to Skills being off to the side of the game. Or perhaps running closer to 'diceless', which just isn't my personal cup of tea....as far as I know of.

Then you have opposed rolls, and once again that probability curve is just yuck, and degrees of success become clunkier yet.

QuoteAnd feats somehow inappropriate outside D&D? Don't tell Steve Jackson or Pinacle.

Sorry, I was just talking about D20M here and how it reads like those initial little "gamelets" that first came out from the SRD. You know, the bullies in school things and stuff like that.  I just stared at it and blinked when I saw those.  You really have to do serious rewrites of tracts of the SRD to even have a chance. As flyingmice pointed out, 3e is wound too tightly to easily mould.

QuoteFortunately, but the time d20 modern came out, several other d20 authors put out decent takes on firearms, which were fairly easy to swap in.

Which ones of these do you find work better, and why?  I've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

P.S. Thanks for a far more informative, or even sapient, response than Abyssal Maw seems capable of. :rolleyes:

Quote from: GrimGentWell, there's always Tromeur's Wuthering Heights Roleplay...

A word of warning guys - that link had a popup that tried to install something.  I'll check again when I'm on a machine with Mozilla

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonA word of warning guys - that link had a popup that tried to install something.

Really? I'm not seeing anything.

...And Mozilla only shows two cookies, one from the site itself and one from "person.estat.com".

Hmm. Ad-Aware and AVG didn't turn up anything, either. Perhaps I should remove the link as a precaution, though: I've had the page bookmarked for a good long while, but it's easy enough to find through Google.

Quote from: blakkieMostly I think the problems flow from Skills being a side-stat that increases with each level instead of at the center of the system. The way it tends to work out is you have cappy little skills to start with, instead of having a mix of pretty good skill in some areas and weaker in others.

Well, I'll meet you halfway on this one.

As I alluded to in the old point-gen thread, I prefer systems that limit the over-specialization. This is one of the appeals that d20 has for me.

That said, I can sort of see where you are coming here if you are talking about first level characters. I don't share the loving of starting with 1st level characters that much of the d20 fanbase has. I find that the distribution of a mixed bag of skills similar to that you see in other systems is pretty common when you are talking about 4th+ level character.

Another thing to keep in mind is that while you can do a lot with the d20 skill system, it's really a skill system built for a class based game. In games that don't bank a lot of the skill system, it's not going to be leveraged a lot. Games like Traveller d20 and Spycraft 2.0 leverage the skill system more, and there is more "behind the scenes support" for the skill system in those games. (Frex, both of those games feature classes with class abilities that extend how many ranks go into a skill. Even d20 modern gets its digs in here; the savant talent makes for a good knowledge specialist.)

QuoteAnother thing I miss in D20M (and some other games), and this should have been in that features of systems you'd like to see more of, is how Shadowrun has cheap Knowledge skills in a different pool. Having a pile of different types of knowledge skills really gives characters, well, character and are useful for forwarding a game in an info-intense setting without making the characters uber powerful.

I can't argue with that. Again referring back to the point-gen thread, I like pooled resources in character gen, and this sounds like a good example of exploiting that. I don't think that structure is necessarily compulsory, but it sounds like a nice feature.

FWIW (yeah, it's always back to a Spycraft example with me...), Spycraft features focuses, fortes, and interests, which are basically little skill areas and adders, instead of splitting your skill ranks between divergant skills. I think that sounds somewhat similar to what you are getting at here and resembles the separate pool you speak of in shadowrun.

QuoteTo be fair part of my issue also is with how the probability curves work, and this ties back into the level ups. The single d20 roll just lays this huge swing out there, and when you want to handle graduants of success it's kind of a pain because you've got to identify the increments (because increments of 1 basically make zippo sense) and then determine which increment with the result of whatever bonus+d20 roll.  It feels clunky to say the least.  I suppose if you don't roll very often then it's fine, but that goes back to Skills being off to the side of the game. Or perhaps running closer to 'diceless', which just isn't my personal cup of tea....as far as I know of.

I can't relate to that at all, sorry. Linear odds are, to me, the easiest to manage odds with in the game. I don't run diceless. Quite the contrary. Having the odds layed out in a linear manner make me much more confortable in invoking odds on the fly. OTOH, I see running "near diceless" to be the result of using a dice system with nearly inpenetrable odds. (OWOD stands as a shining example of this... they even go so far to give you diceless guidelines for what different pip-levels mean. Exalted 1e did too, come to think of it.)

QuoteSorry, I was just talking about D20M here and how it reads like those initial little "gamelets" that first came out from the SRD. You know, the bullies in school things and stuff like that.  I just stared at it and blinked when I saw those.

Not sure what you are talking about here, so I'll move along...

QuoteWhich ones of these do you find work better, and why?

The one I swapped in for d20 modern was the one in a little third party product called Arsenal. (Fumbles around for a link... ah, here.) It used about the same number of feats as d20 modern did in its autofire tree. But
1) Instead of the rule that makes it so untrained characters get zero benefit from burst fire, it uses the same autofire rule that every d20 third party and its dog used since Deadlands d20 came out. To wit: One additional hit every 5 points you roll over the base, every 3 if you have the feat.
2) Instead of an autofire spray being modeled as a box that requires reflex saves (thus bypassing armor) as in d20 modern, Arsenal models a spray as a cone, with to-hit rolls against targets in the cone.

Traveller d20 also had a pretty slick autofire mechanic as well, but it's been a while since I ran it so I don't remember the specifics. As I recall, traveller had things like gauss weapons that had highly varying ROFs. To model this, a certain ROF gave you a certain number of potential targets, and a bonus that you could either apply to hit (representing spraying an area, thus having a better chance that one bullet would hit) or to damage (representing concentrated fire.) This worked because Traveller d20 let armor reduce damage.

Spycraft 2.0 also uses the old Deadlands/Dragonstar burst mechanic, but for sprays, uses the "pick targets/waste bullets between targets" sort of thumb rule I've seen in non-d20 games.

QuoteI've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

Yeah, it's OGL. Accordingly, they've changed things they couldn't have under the d20 STL (i.e, chargen basics and conditions). The skill system is something they could have changed under the d20 STL; I think it was more a matter of opportunity and experience about what works. I personally think that the skill cap thing they add goes overboard for what it acheives (it's effectively munchkin management), but it's fairly easy to ignore.

Quote from: blakkieWhich ones of these do you find work better, and why?  I've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

P.S. Thanks for a far more informative, or even sapient, response than Abyssal Maw seems capable of. :rolleyes:

Man. Picking on you is too easy.

But yeah, Spycraft 2.0 is OGL. I don't know if it still carries the d20 trademark, but it's totally OGL.

It's "medieval", hoho.  

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11724.phtml

Quote from: GrimGentReally? I'm not seeing anything.

It was one of those ads for a computer clean-up program that wouldn't close until you killed IE.  No biggie