The rule of the game is that you pick an RPG, could be one you like, or not. But you mention one and only one thing that you could change in it. What would you pick and why?
For example, in 3e D&D I would get rid of feats (replace them with series of more rigidly-defined escalating powers). To me that would go a long way to improving the game. There's a lot of other things I might like to change, but to me that would be one single thing that would go a huge way to making the game more appealing to me.
RPGPundit
That Green Ronin developed DH. Maybe we would still have BI if that were the case.
I'd give Unknown Armies a skill list.
Not hard to do, but it's worth mentioning.
I would change initiative in GURPS. For some reason, I've always found GURPS to be really cohesive except for initiative, which I find bland.
Quote from: One Horse TownThat Green Ronin developed DH. Maybe we would still have BI if that were the case.
How so?
I would clean up True20's damage condition track, replacing it with one of the cleaner, more intuitive fan-made alternatives available.
Rework the Spheres in Mage: The Ascension. Get rid off Prime, make Spirit the Sphere of the Unconscious and Mind the Sphere of the Conscious, get rid of Entropy's death part and put the rest into time.
Take the Kult skill list and cut it down. Combine skills together, get rid of some, make a few blanks lines for skills players may want but aren't in the book (up to the GMs discression for their game). Basically the skill list is to broad and most things are hardly used.
That would really take a bit bulk out of there.
GURPS, rework dodge so it happens during an attack or before. The way it works now seems as if the characters have some sort of foreknowledge about a shot hitting them or not.
Star Wars d20 Second Edition would work OK if you ripped out the entire skill system and burned it.
Because it is completely, utterly broken to the point of being nonsensical. As one of my players said, "When you start talking about a +40 bonus on a twenty-sider, something is seriously wrong."
Interesting question.
Quote from: Old GeezerStar Wars d20 Second Edition would work OK if you ripped out the entire skill system and burned it.
Because it is completely, utterly broken to the point of being nonsensical. As one of my players said, "When you start talking about a +40 bonus on a twenty-sider, something is seriously wrong."
I was going to say a similar thing about 3e D&D, rip out the Skill system. Although I'm not sure what to do about it [and still use a d20] other than make it more consistant across the skills. Maybe shorten the list up a bit too.
If I could change one thing about Castles & Crusades, it's that I'd be a PLAYER and not the goddamn GAMEMASTER for a motherfucking change.
Quote from: Dr Rotwang!If I could change one thing about Castles & Crusades, it's that I'd be a PLAYER and not the goddamn GAMEMASTER for a motherfucking change.
LOL. Next session get there early and get a seat other than the designated "GM" one. Then look around surprised as people ask you why you aren't GMing. :D
P.S. I like the new avatar graphic. I never did dig the coneheads that much.
I'd slightly rewrite combat in NWoD, mostly to separate accuracy and damage on the attack roll (probably using autosuccesses for damage).
KoOS
Oh, a better one yet. Shadowrun 4 I'd remove the Edge option to reroll all dice that weren't hits. It's just silliness that makes large pools even more powerful.
I would have said let Thresholds be greater than 4 but I already ignore that assinine stipulation in the rules...since FanPro did elsewhere in the book. ;)
I'd pick Shadowrun 4th and change the combat resolution so that it's either evasion or soaking, or that evasion and soaking are the same roll. That would cut down combat to three rolls per exchange.
I've picked Shadowrun because it's a game I really try hard to love and for that players are easy to find, but that includes still quite some dumb decisions to put me off. The division between evasion and soaking is just one that costs me the most nerves, and one of the rules that most often comes up during play.
Rules that were close to be regarded, but no cigar:
- The complex character creation restrictions: They are a bigger pain in the butt then the proposed change, but as they only come up once during game-prep they wouldn't have the same overall effect on the actual play experience.
- Essence division between cyberware and bioware: That also only comes up during downtime (though it's still a dumb complication).
- Race costs: Either raise them to reflect the actual effect of the attribute changes, or make racism again a _hard_ part of the rules.
- Technomancer rules: They'd need a total revamp (cost of complex forms, resonance decrease from cyberware, the dominant strategy of turning the 'mancer into an ordinary hacker who's also a sprite summoner etc.), but as this only affects one character type while the soak/evade-division affects everyone the change of the latter would improve the game more.
- Dikote and FFBA as dominant strategy: I'd include this from my knowledge from former editions, but as I don't know yet if Arsenal has changed anything about that I won't nominate this, and it wouldn't be a deal as big as the soak/evade thing.
I would ditch common magic in HeroQuest.
In Amber, everyone gets Basic Pattern for free. This could be exchanged for points, powers and other things, but the default assumption should be that a basic Amberite should get Pattern from the get go.
Quote from: droogI would ditch common magic in HeroQuest.
So you'd have to declare a specific keyword to use any kind of magic? Hmm...I could live with that.
!i!
I'd take Castles and Crusades skill system... oh wait. Right then.
SilCore.
Dump Skill Complexity. Replace with new dice mechanics using d10s (or d8s) for finer grained resolution without the ambiguity of Complexity. This would probably create a cascade of changes, but it's where I would start.
Quote from: Consonant DudeI would change initiative in GURPS. For some reason, I've always found GURPS to be really cohesive except for initiative, which I find bland.
What???
I have never even had this come up in my games.
Character with the highest move score is the first one to go into motion.
Eithjer that or the brightest player that thinks of the best plan and mentions it first to the GM.
- Ed C.
Well, it's a Campaign Setting, not a game, but...
I wish the Greyhawk rights were in the loving hands of Paizo and Erik Mona, instead of being unsupported and cherry-picked for the familiar bits as it stands now.
Include real spell lists in Talislanta 4E.
The current system where you're assumed to know thousands of spells, but you have to invent and mechanically build a new spell every time you cast, is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen in an RPG. Which is a shame, because the rest of the Tal/Omni system is spun gold.
I would take Weapons of the Gods and massively change the combat system - specifically, I'd rip out all of the martial arts styles and come up with a system for coming up with martial arts special effects in an ad-hoc manner (so you pick from a list of defined system effects what you want a particular stunt to achieve, and that gives you the amount of chi you have to spend on it), and I'd massively reduce the bonuses to Strike, Speed and Damage you can get from weapons.
I'd add 5-10% to every starting attribute in Warhammer FRP to cut back on the starting characters' whiff factor.
Quote from: RPGPunditFor example, in 3e D&D I would get rid of feats (replace them with series of more rigidly-defined escalating powers). To me that would go a long way to improving the game. There's a lot of other things I might like to change, but to me that would be one single thing that would go a huge way to making the game more appealing to me.
You took mine - I've started bloody threads about it here and at D20 Haven. Take the feats out of d20 - not the powers necessarily, just the mechanism.
Quote from: Zachary The FirstWell, it's a Campaign Setting, not a game, but...
I wish the Greyhawk rights were in the loving hands of Paizo and Erik Mona, instead of being unsupported and cherry-picked for the familiar bits as it stands now.
Not that I have doubts those you mention would be great - I just have no opinion on the specifics other than WotC is out.
Then again, I wouldn't be having the fun of doing Dunfalcon (http://www.d20haven.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=13). :D
Quote from: Ian AbsentiaSo you'd have to declare a specific keyword to use any kind of magic?
Yeah, or have unique magic as part of your character's extra Abilities. CM is just too fiddly, though I appreciate the idea.
I'd take all the "kill" type results out of Marvel Superheroes / FASERIP and replace them with "out of commission", "coma" etc. Kill results for player's characters, or the unlucky thug they forgot to pull their punches with, really weren't in keeping with the genre / source material. Unless you were playing the Punisher. :)
Quote from: James J SkachNot that I have doubts those you mention would be great - I just have no opinion on the specifics other than WotC is out.
Then again, I wouldn't be having the fun of doing Dunfalcon (http://www.d20haven.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=13). :D
Hey, I can think of a few folks that would do a great job with it. But I think Erik and the Paizo folks really care for the GH setting. But if we going by what they've done (and haven't done) with it, yeah, WotC definitely does not deserve to be its caretaker/holder (pity about the whole IP rights business). Too bad "deserve" doesn't factor into it.
And yeah, what would you do w/out Dunfalcon (decided to keep the name for now, eh?). :D
If I could only change one thing that'd spoil the fun. :D
Castles & Crusades -- a unified experience point chart for all classes (i.e., all classes progress levels at the same rate, like in 3e).
Rolemaster Classic -- all the rules used to simplify the system for RMX (fixed body development points, fixed power points, spell acquisition by level instead of 'picks', etc.) should be part of the core rules.
True 20 -- combat uses hit points (or some number-based vitality/wound system) instead of damage saves.
D&D 3.x:
I would release modular monster and prestige class construction development kits.
Quote from: AkrasiaTrue 20 -- combat uses hit points (or some number-based vitality/wound system) instead of damage saves.
Really, with all the great HP variants they've thought up on the True20 boards, I'm surprised they don't just publish one of them in the upcoming revised edition.
Quote from: Zachary The FirstQuoteTrue 20 -- combat uses hit points (or some number-based vitality/wound system) instead of damage saves.
Really, with all the great HP variants they've thought up on the True20 boards, I'm surprised they don't just publish one of them in the upcoming revised edition.
I didn't mind the True 20 system (it reminded me of SW d6) -- any chance you could post a link to one of those great HP variants?
Quote from: StuartI didn't mind the True 20 system (it reminded me of SW d6) -- any chance you could post a link to one of those great HP variants?
My pleasure!
Try this. (http://true20.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1536) I don't have my bookmarks on this computer, but that's a great thread I remembered right off. I'll try to find and post the other variants as soon as I can. :)
D&D, I'd make the Black Company book by Green Ronin core.
Quote from: darD&D, I'd make the Black Company book by Green Ronin core.
Great product.
World of Darkness, I'd never allow the games to be played as LARPs.
I've come to the realization that everything that I truely hate about those games and that setting comes from my experiences with LARPers. Because, for instance, Vampire is a good idea executed by idiots when its a LARP.
I'd change the XP system for most WW products.
It just comes across as something very weird in actual use. ex. "I've been shooting guns every adventure for 6 weeks, I wish I could hit something...but I'm saving all my XP for blood potency."
I would change D&D 3.5 so that each class had its own separate experience point track.
So that you COULD be a third level cleric while somebody else was not quite a second level magic user.
Damn it, that was not a "design flaw" or "oversight", that was a FEATURE.
Quote from: Old GeezerI would change D&D 3.5 so that each class had its own separate experience point track.
So that you COULD be a third level cleric while somebody else was not quite a second level magic user.
Damn it, that was not a "design flaw" or "oversight", that was a FEATURE.
I remember that was a big part in choosing what character class to be in Basic D&D. One of the benefits of choosing the Thief was that you'd get to 2nd level faster than the other classes.
Quote from: Old GeezerI would change D&D 3.5 so that each class had its own separate experience point track.
So that you COULD be a third level cleric while somebody else was not quite a second level magic user.
Damn it, that was not a "design flaw" or "oversight", that was a FEATURE.
And then I'd level you all up at the same time. :p
I would not recommend you do that, SL. In old editions of D&D, a thief, a cleric, and wizard of equal levels were not balanced at all. Hell, a cleric, a wizard, and a fighter of equal level in 3E aren't balanced at all.
I'd take D6 Star Wars and ditch the Force rules... all of them.
Replace it was something using the D6 Mechanics but not at all like the way it was originally implemented (and somewhat outdated today all things considered).
I found this thread on google while posting a similar thread on RPGNet. Like Consonant Dude, I'd change initiative in GURPS. Here's what I'd do:
Instead of having initiative being invariable, I'd have players roll a perception check (to see how fast they take the situation in), take their margin of success, and add speed (for reaction time). The highest total would go first, then everyone else in descending order. From then on it would work as it usually does. Surprise is another matter, and would work as it does in the rules as written.
Another change I'd make:
In Ars Magica (current edition) I'd fiddle with the way that spell penetration works. Currently, the penetration of the spell is based on how much you beat the spell difficulty by - which means that the less powerful the spell is, the greater penetration you can get on it. In the last ArsM campaign I played in, this led to the ludicrous situation of the PCs researching the most low-level demon-hurting spells they could get in order to exorcise demons, because they were having trouble getting a high enough penetration on their current demon-zapping spells.
To my mind, this is precisely the reverse of what you want - if you're dealing with something with powerful magical protections, you should be busting out your most powerful magic. So I'd change it round such that the penetration was based on the number you roll (this will entail changing the numerical amount of spell protection people get out of Parma Magica and other forms of magical protection, but it'd be worth it), the effects of the spell depend on the difference between the dice roll and the spell difficulty (so if you only barely make the roll the spell doesn't do as much as if you ace it), and spells need to be a level of at least equal to half the required Penetration in order to have any effect at all.