The difference between D20 and D&D is in the presence of the so-called "sacred cows", certain rules elements that exist in D&D mostly as anachronisms to earlier editions (stuff like the spell system).  True20 demonstrated that, in fact, there were many sacred cows that had been ported from D&D unnecessarily into regular D20, that could be done with out (including things like actual ability scores, hit points (though I'd call that more a personal preference, than a "sacred cow"), rules on armour, etc).  It also got rid of some of the NEW "sacred cows", things like skill points and attacks of opportunity.

The question is: how many of these sacred cows should be gotten rid of for D20? Are there any that should always be kept? Are there any that you wouldn't want to see in the next edition of D&D?
Finally, what are D20's own new "sacred cows", and which are you praying will eventually be phased out of the game?

RPGPundit

Sacred cows of D&D, Jeff's personal list

1) A standard orc should be an equal match for a first level fighter
2) Quasi-Vancian spell preparation
3) Classes
4) Levels
5) A 5th level Wizard/Mage/Magic-User must be able to cast fireball
6) Hit points
7) Different weapons do different damage ratings by die type*

Things that could be dropped, and Jeff would not miss them much
1) Alignments
2) The arcane/divine divide
3) The 3.x skill system
4) The assumption that NPCs are built using the same rules as PCs
5) Rolling for hitpoints

*I would accept different damage by class as an alternative.

That's off the top of my head.  I'm sure I could come up with others with some more thought.  For any other d20 based product I don't consider anything sacred.  I'd be more inclined to play something with levels and classes, but even then I'm open to other options.

After attacks of opportunity I think feats and prestige classes are sacred cows in D20. I really can't think of describing D20 without them, especially feats. Feats cannot be emphasized enough as a recognizable part of the system.

Quote from: JamesVAfter attacks of opportunity I think feats and prestige classes are sacred cows in D20. I really can't think of describing D20 without them, especially feats. Feats cannot be emphasized enough as a recognizable part of the system.

I'd be ok dumping all 3.  (Which I'm doing with C&C).

Quote from: Zachary The FirstI'd be ok dumping all 3.  (Which I'm doing with C&C).

Maniac. :crazy:

Quote from: Zachary The FirstI'd be ok dumping all 3.  (Which I'm doing with C&C).

Yup, James just named the three things I like LEAST about D20.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditYup, James just named the three things I like LEAST about D20.
 
RPGPundit

See now, I'm ok with the resolution system for skills, but not so much in how they're handled by class.  With C&C, I'm considering going with their secondary skills system (pdf link), or perhaps just porting over D&D skills without the cross-classing skills limits, etc.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstI'd be ok dumping all 3.  (Which I'm doing with C&C).

Given that C&C doesn't have AoOs, feats, and skills, 'dumping them' should be rather easy.  

(Unless you meant: I would like to see them dumped, C&C does this already, hence I'm going to play it instead of 3e/d20.  My apologies if I misunderstood you.  In any case, I certainly share your preferences.)

Quote from: Akrasia(Unless you meant: I would like to see them dumped, C&C does this already, hence I'm going to play it instead of 3e/d20. My apologies if I misunderstood you. In any case, I certainly share your preferences.)

(Yep, that's what I meant!  Actually, you helped convince me to check out C&C, so thank you!)

Attacks of opportunity, feats and prestige classes are definitely the sacred cows of d20.  They're ok in small doses... but I can generally do without.  When taken to extremes (as seen in any character optimization discussion) I can definitely do without. :/

I think "Saving Throws" are a good example of a D&D sacred cow that never got expunged from D&D 3.x OR D20. When you think about it, there's really nothing that you need Saving Throws for that you couldn't replace with either ability checks or skill checks.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditI think "Saving Throws" are a good example of a D&D sacred cow that never got expunged from D&D 3.x OR D20. When you think about it, there's really nothing that you need Saving Throws for that you couldn't replace with either ability checks or skill checks.

I suppose, as a sacred cow, this is also one of those things that lends the distinct D&D flavor to D&D.  There are many other games out there that use your very suggestion, skill or ability checks in lieu of an abstraction in the form of a Saving Throw.

At what point, though, does stripping away sacred cows make the game "not D&D"?  I'm caused to think of when Avalon Hill was designing RuneQuest: Slayers and adapting a lot of elements to fit the D&D 2e model more closely.  There were characteristics of the old game still there, but it was RuneQuest in name only.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaAt what point, though, does stripping away sacred cows make the game "not D&D"?

That's what I'm wondering.

I would love to see D&D establish an encounter design system where the GM builds a general encounter scene and can place monsters into it as needed. Basically tighten up the hit dice/challenge ratings/levels system and maybe turn monster abilities into the equiavelnt of feats (basically, what I'm asking for it D&D to have sex with Burning Wheel so that I can be Angelina Joile to their hideous lovechild ).

Quote from: RPGPunditYup, James just named the three things I like LEAST about D20.

RPGPundit

Yeah, and for me feats are the only one out of the three that I like. But I really do like them. I think feats do a good job of creating extra diversity and complexity within classes, and if the player keeps them straight, I've yet to see a feat that was too awkward to use in play.

But either way all three are quite distinctive to D&D and D20.