Or is it just me?
:deviousgrin:
It's just you.
Just you. True20 is much shorter to write than "Everything Maddman would do to fix D&D."
I guess "can't stand" might be stronger than what I intend to say. More like...underwhelmed and don't see what all the fuss is about.
Ever since d20 came out there's been a desire to have something with the same basic idea, but with the needless complexity stripped out. A 'd20 lite' so to speak. True20 delivers on that desire. That's about all there is to it really.
Quote from: MaddmanEver since d20 came out there's been a desire to have something with the same basic idea, but with the needless complexity stripped out. A 'd20 lite' so to speak. True20 delivers on that desire. That's about all there is to it really.
I see. And don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade or anything. And I've looked over the rules, they just didn't do anything for me. Plus I look at all the d20 books I've amassed over the last half a decade and...well, meh.
True20 strikes a chord with all those folks who thought D20 was a good idea that was overly complicated, which happens to be quite a few people. I think it's a good system.
D20 is very simple. It's only as complex as people wish it to be. At it's core is beating a number with your D20 roll, whether that target is fixed or variable (such as with an active defense). I saw no reason for a streamlining of an already streamlined system. That is why True20 doesn't appeal to me. Well, that and the fact that I need another game system like I need a bag on my hip.
Quote from: King_StannisD20 is very simple. It's only as complex as people wish it to be. At it's core is beating a number with your D20 roll, whether that target is fixed or variable (such as with an active defense). I saw no reason for a streamlining of an already streamlined system.
Apparently the people who like True20 wish it to be less complex. Sure, the d20 System core is streamlined. Green Ronin is just streamlining everything else. Personally True20 is still too rules-bloated for me but I can see the appeal.
To be honest, for me the attraction of True20 is not so much the streamlining (although that doesn't hurt), it's 3 specific things...
1) I like having 3 basic classes and making what would be class features into feats. It allows for a greater degree of character customization without adding complexity IMO
2) I like the Grittier (potentially more deadly) combat system, although I actually add back in the AoO rules because I like a tactical game.
3) I greatly prefer the magic system over the Vancian-influenced system of DnD.
Is True 20 OGL? Is it online? I haven't seen a copy in my town, yet. Ergo, no opinion.
I generally like d20, and can't say that I'd consider it a complex game. Still, since it bugs me to not have an opinion on something, I'd love to look at the True 20 rules.
Quote from: King_StannisD20 is very simple. It's only as complex as people wish it to be. At it's core is beating a number with your D20 roll, whether that target is fixed or variable (such as with an active defense). I saw no reason for a streamlining of an already streamlined system. That is why True20 doesn't appeal to me. Well, that and the fact that I need another game system like I need a bag on my hip.
I like the saying that the core mechanic of d20 is very simple. It's all the stuff around it that eats your brain. :)
Quote from: MaddmanI like the saying that the core mechanic of d20 is very simple. It's all the stuff around it that eats your brain. :)
I guess that entire premise I simply can't relate to. D20 itself, the entire ruleset is so easy and quick I just don't see any reason to "improve" upon it. A different set of rules you like, I can understand that. Thing is, I really liked Green Ronin's 3.x stuff and I certainly hope they don't stop producing it because of this whole True20 thing.
I thought it was a terrible decision for them to use classes instead of the straight point-buy system from Mutants & Masterminds. As it is, just buying M&M and ignoring the superhero artwork gets you a better generic d20 game than True20, which is a shame.
Quote from: SigmundTo be honest, for me the attraction of True20 is not so much the streamlining (although that doesn't hurt), it's 3 specific things...
1) I like having 3 basic classes and making what would be class features into feats. It allows for a greater degree of character customization without adding complexity IMO
2) I like the Grittier (potentially more deadly) combat system, although I actually add back in the AoO rules because I like a tactical game.
3) I greatly prefer the magic system over the Vancian-influenced system of DnD.
#1 & #3 are the big selling points for me. On the other hand, #2 is the only thing about it I don't like. The "more deadly" part doesn't bother me, it's the way they did it that I don't like.
Quote from: YamoI thought it was a terrible decision for them to use classes instead of the straight point-buy system from Mutants & Masterminds. As it is, just buying M&M and ignoring the superhero artwork gets you a better generic d20 game than True20, which is a shame.
I believe Yamo has a +5 Wisdom bonus.
Quote from: YamoI thought it was a terrible decision for them to use classes instead of the straight point-buy system from Mutants & Masterminds. As it is, just buying M&M and ignoring the superhero artwork gets you a better generic d20 game than True20, which is a shame.
Given that the classes (warrior, expert, and adept) are incredibly broad and open, what exactly is it that you feel is so awful about the class system in True20? Or is it just that you're one of those people with a fashionable dislike of classes in general, even though classes are proven to fix far more problems than they cause?
RPGPundit
Quote from: RatatoskPersonally True20 is still too rules-bloated for me but I can see the appeal.
Have you seen Core Elements (http://zombienirvana.sitesled.com/core.htm)
"Core Elements is a stripped-down, rules light version of Wizards of the Coast's popular d20 System, originally written by James Hargrove and expanded upon by me. This expansion, the Core Elements Toolbox Edition, includes a number of new options like an expanded section on supernatural powers, a new insanity system, rules for vehicles and car chases, and more! It's got everything you need (more or less!) in under 20 pages"
And it's Free :) It reminds me of a Fudgified d20
Quote from: RPGPunditGiven that the classes (warrior, expert, and adept) are incredibly broad and open, what exactly is it that you feel is so awful about the class system in True20? Or is it just that you're one of those people with a fashionable dislike of classes in general, even though classes are proven to fix far more problems than they cause?
RPGPundit
They are proven to do no such thing. I find classes rather constraining and distasteful, but True20's are so broadly defined they're more like a general type rather than predefined role. They can be used to match the rules and character abilities to the concept, something that often requires a lot of gymnastics in D&D.
Quote from: MaddmanThey are proven to do no such thing. I find classes rather constraining and distasteful, but True20's are so broadly defined they're more like a general type rather than predefined role. They can be used to match the rules and character abilities to the concept, something that often requires a lot of gymnastics in D&D.
If you don't have classes, you have an open invitation to min-maxing. So yes, for that reason alone, classes are a mechanic where the fix is far more important than the side-effects. Of course, some class systems are done better than others.
I think the open-endedness of True20 works much better, for example, than D&D's class system.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPunditOr is it just that you're one of those people with a fashionable dislike of classes in general, even though classes are proven to fix far more problems than they cause?
RPGPundit
I didn't know you posted here. Nice. I've commented in your blog as willmistretta.
Anyway, I think classes have their strengths, but also potentially their weaknesses. I wouldn't consider playing D&D without them because of the way the game is structured around the archetypes of D&D fantasy. True20's classes seem more like d20 Modern's to me, just broad enough to be both flavorless and pointless. d20 Modern did have some nice prestige classes, though, which sort of made up for it.
Quote from: RPGPunditIf you don't have classes, you have an open invitation to min-maxing.
Again, though, execution matters. Classes, by their mere presence, don't ward-off min-maxing like a magic talisman.
If you start-up a D&D game and allow any published prestige class from any source, there's huge min-maxing potential in selecting the most unbalanced ones.
GM scrutiny can never be taken-out of the picture.
Quote from: RatatoskPersonally True20 is still too rules-bloated for me but I can see the appeal.
You want smaller?
How's 40 pages sound?
http://members.shaw.ca/LeviK/Perfect20_2005.pdf
Quote from: RPGPunditIf you don't have classes, you have an open invitation to min-maxing.
You say that like it's a bad thing that should be purged from gaming. For some people, half the fun is in making their character as uber as they can.
Any system can be abused to min-max. If that goes against your group's philosophy, it shouldn't be a problem even if the system does allow it. Just don't do it.
Quote from: Levi KornelsenYou want smaller?
How's 40 pages sound?
http://members.shaw.ca/LeviK/Perfect20_2005.pdf
Has this been updated again, Levi. The copy I have is about 3 months old.
Quote from: TechnomancerHas this been updated again, Levi. The copy I have is about 3 months old.
Not yet.
I'm at work on some very different stuff, right now.
Quote from: YamoTrue20's classes seem more like d20 Modern's to me, just broad enough to be both flavorless and pointless.
IMO True20's classes are meant to be (and also IMO are better off that way) flavorless and pointless. They are meant to be a base, upon which a player, using feats and skills, can build flavor and a point. Remember too that unlike DnD D20, True20 is meant to be a rules system for any kind of genre....more like D20 Modern than D20 DnD. Don't get me wrong, I play and thoroughly enjoy D20 DnD, but I prefer to build and run a game in True20 using both a modified Blue Rose setting and homebrew setting I'm building for the reasons I've already listed. I guess it's just a personal choice thing. Oh, yeah, another thing I like about True20 is that it's really very simple to port a great many things from D20 DnD over to True20 with very little effort.
Quote from: SigmundIMO True20's classes are meant to be (and also IMO are better off that way) flavorless and pointless. They are meant to be a base, upon which a player, using feats and skills, can build flavor and a point. Remember too that unlike DnD D20, True20 is meant to be a rules system for any kind of genre....more like D20 Modern than D20 DnD. Don't get me wrong, I play and thoroughly enjoy D20 DnD, but I prefer to build and run a game in True20 using both a modified Blue Rose setting and homebrew setting I'm building for the reasons I've already listed. I guess it's just a personal choice thing. Oh, yeah, another thing I like about True20 is that it's really very simple to port a great many things from D20 DnD over to True20 with very little effort.
A "virtually classless" class system is, to me, just as pointless as a supposedly universal point-buy game where you can only spend the points in four pre-set ways. Necromancer is a class. Jedi Knight is a class. Expert Sniper is a class. "Guys who is, you know, really good at...uh, certain skills" (expert) doesn't cut it.
Also, Boingo! Hells, yes! I even have a "Danny Elfman is my co-pilot" license plate frame. :)
Quote from: YamoA "virtually classless" class system is, to me, just as pointless as a supposedly universal point-buy game where you can only spend the points in four pre-set ways. Necromancer is a class. Jedi Knight is a class. Expert Sniper is a class. "Guys who is, you know, really good at...uh, certain skills" (expert) doesn't cut it.
Also, Boingo! Hells, yes! I even have a "Danny Elfman is my co-pilot" license plate frame. :)
Whelp...as the saying goes, YMMV. The Almost classless classes work for me I guess. I've played GURPS too and I just like the simple classes better.
WOOT! Boingo rules. One of the best shows ever. I have my avatar inked into my flesh :) I want one of those license plate frames! Where can I get one?
Quote from: SigmundWhelp...as the saying goes, YMMV. The Almost classless classes work for me I guess. I've played GURPS too and I just like the simple classes better.
WOOT! Boingo rules. One of the best shows ever. I have my avatar inked into my flesh :) I want one of those license plate frames! Where can I get one?
Have it custom-made like I did. :)
Quote from: YamoHave it custom-made like I did. :)
Ack! Who does that? Can ya order them online? I've never seen anyone around here that makes custom plate frames.
Quote from: SigmundAck! Who does that? Can ya order them online? I've never seen anyone around here that makes custom plate frames.
There's a shop at the mall near me that does it, but I did find these guys: http://www.licenseplatesonline.com/
Quote from: YamoA "virtually classless" class system is, to me, just as pointless as a supposedly universal point-buy game where you can only spend the points in four pre-set ways. Necromancer is a class. Jedi Knight is a class. Expert Sniper is a class. "Guys who is, you know, really good at...uh, certain skills" (expert) doesn't cut it.
So your problem is essentially that the classes aren't concepts. I don't want Necromancer or Jedi Knight for a class. I want to come up with my own concept and plug in the rules to make it happen. True20's classes remind me of Unisystem's Character Types - in AFMBE Survivor, Inspired, and Norm. Roughly translated as "Tough Guy", "Magic Guy" and "Normal Guy".
Nothing wrong with preferring that classes be concepts, just that this is a feature, not a bug. They made the three True20 classes very broad on purpose.
Quote from: MaddmanNothing wrong with preferring that classes be concepts, just that this is a feature, not a bug. They made the three True20 classes very broad on purpose.
Agreed. I'm in the "classes with purpose" camp, though. I'd like to see semi-broad, but not flavorless, classes by genre with guides for adjusting them to sub-genre/setting.
What I don't understand is trying to make d20/D&D "classless". I understand point-buy systems. Some of my favorite games (Hero) are pure point buy. d20/D&D ain't it, though. By the time you get there from here, you probably would have been better off starting from scratch.
Quote from: RPGPunditIf you don't have classes, you have an open invitation to min-maxing. So yes, for that reason alone, classes are a mechanic where the fix is far more important than the side-effects. Of course, some class systems are done better than others.
Even with classes Min Maxing is rampant. Classes or classless if a game has rules you can find min maxing. The degree of min/maxing is entirely based in the complexity/simplicity of the rules. Warhammer has many classes yet min/maxing is fairly minor. D20 has a handfull of classes and min/maxing is huge. Champions has no classes and min/maxing is huge. Classes and min/maxing are irrelevant.
QuoteI think the open-endedness of True20 works much better, for example, than D&D's class system.
RPGPundit
Agreed.
Quote from: YamoAgain, though, execution matters. Classes, by their mere presence, don't ward-off min-maxing like a magic talisman.
If you start-up a D&D game and allow any published prestige class from any source, there's huge min-maxing potential in selecting the most unbalanced ones.
GM scrutiny can never be taken-out of the picture.
Yup, classes only help somewhat to contain min-maxing, they aren't a panacea. Likewise, the problem becomes more serious when you add prestige classes and unlimited multiclassing.
RPGPundit
Quote from: YamoThere's a shop at the mall near me that does it, but I did find these guys: http://www.licenseplatesonline.com/
Woot! Thanks.
Another potentially kick-ass concept that True20 could be bringing to the table is the implementation of "Framing" that's going to be more fully explained in the upcoming Caliphate Nights setting book. I like what I read about it in the True20 Adventure Roleplaying pdf and if it pans out could be a really cool addition to a game.
Quote from: RPGPunditYup, classes only help somewhat to contain min-maxing, they aren't a panacea. Likewise, the problem becomes more serious when you add prestige classes and unlimited multiclassing.
RPGPundit
The best solution to min-maxing is not to play with munchkins, but call me crazy. I'd rather the system just let me do cool stuff, rather than put a bunch of constraints on the system to try and stop people from breaking it. The game rules will never be able to stop someone from being an asshole.
Quote from: MaddmanThe best solution to min-maxing is not to play with munchkins, but call me crazy. I'd rather the system just let me do cool stuff, rather than put a bunch of constraints on the system to try and stop people from breaking it. The game rules will never be able to stop someone from being an asshole.
Thank the gods I am not the only one who feels this way. Maddman, despite your Buffy fetish, you're not half bad. :heh:
Quote from: MaddmanThe best solution to min-maxing is not to play with munchkins, but call me crazy. I'd rather the system just let me do cool stuff, rather than put a bunch of constraints on the system to try and stop people from breaking it. The game rules will never be able to stop someone from being an asshole.
Most people who minmax are not really assholes, though. Most of them are regular players, who, being good gamers, will try to make their character as uberpowerful as possible. Things like classes and levels serve to help put a framework on that instinct to prevent a game from becoming unplayable too quickly, which tends to be what happens with point-buy no-limits games where people start out unbalanced and quickly spiral into the absurd.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPunditMost people who minmax are not really assholes, though. Most of them are regular players, who, being good gamers, will try to make their character as uberpowerful as possible. Things like classes and levels serve to help put a framework on that instinct to prevent a game from becoming unplayable too quickly, which tends to be what happens with point-buy no-limits games where people start out unbalanced and quickly spiral into the absurd.
RPGPundit
I don't really disagree with you on the merits of class-based systems. However, I disagree that "min-maxers" are "good gamers". I mean, the evidence is overwhelming to the contrary... all you have to do is pick up a random thread of DM exasperation. The problem isn't min-maxing itself, but rather the players who strive to do such things. Statting out a character to the limits of the rules is fine, but more often than not, the folks who do that are trying to manipulate the system in order to make their characters dominate the game. That is a direct result of min-maxing, and that is not good gaming IMO. A good gamer can take a 1976 Gremlin and make it shine. It doesn't take very much skill or imagination to make a Ferrari look good.
Quote from: ZalmoxisStatting out a character to the limits of the rules is fine, but more often than not, the folks who do that are trying to manipulate the system in order to make their characters dominate the game.
Huh?
Seriously, that doesn't match my own experience at all.
In my experiences, odd as they may be, most min-maxers are looking at the system, in a lot of ways, as a kind of assemble-it-yourself toy. They want to build the coolest toy possible. Some would like more parts, to build a cooler toy, some find it challenging to use only the parts at hand, or even a more limited selection.
And sure, they're somewhat competitive. But there's a good country mile of distance between firendly competition and bullying. "Dominating the game" strikes me as being on the bullying end of that mile, and that's not what I see at all.
Quote from: Levi KornelsenHuh?
Seriously, that doesn't match my own experience at all.
In my experiences, odd as they may be, most min-maxers are looking at the system, in a lot of ways, as a kind of assemble-it-yourself toy. They want to build the coolest toy possible. Some would like more parts, to build a cooler toy, some find it challenging to use only the parts at hand, or even a more limited selection.
And sure, they're somewhat competitive. But there's a good country mile of distance between firendly competition and bullying. "Dominating the game" strikes me as being on the bullying end of that mile, and that's not what I see at all.
They certainly seem odd to me. My experience with min-maxers has general been that they seek to dominate the game (or hog the spotlight in the story). IMO there's a huge difference between a min-maxing jerk-off and someone who seeks to create a strong, yet flawed character who's flaws they actually roleplay. There's nothing wrong with playing an int 4 super-strong and fast CG half-orc barby if you actually play him as the bumbling, means well but always ends up getting the group into jams, pony-loving retard, who only rages when someone hurts a kitten, that he's supposed to be, instead of just a really strong and tough fighter who might as well have an int of 10 by the way he's roleplayed.
Let me amend what I said about min maxers being assholes. This only happens when people do it to disrupt the game. I mean if four people are trying to tell involved stories, and a fifth is dominating the game with his twinked out uber ninja of doom, he's being thoughtless at best and an asshole at worst.
However, if all five players want to twink and munch out their characters to their heart's content, more power to them. It's only a problem when it becomes disruptive and interferes with other people's fun.
Quote from: MaddmanLet me amend what I said about min maxers being assholes. This only happens when people do it to disrupt the game. I mean if four people are trying to tell involved stories, and a fifth is dominating the game with his twinked out uber ninja of doom, he's being thoughtless at best and an asshole at worst.
However, if all five players want to twink and munch out their characters to their heart's content, more power to them. It's only a problem when it becomes disruptive and interferes with other people's fun.
Very true. I have to echo this as well. If the DM don't mind, and the players don't mind, then pretty much anything goes really.It's all about fun in the end. All I can say is it's not the kind of game I prefer.
Quote from: MaddmanLet me amend what I said about min maxers being assholes. This only happens when people do it to disrupt the game. I mean if four people are trying to tell involved stories, and a fifth is dominating the game with his twinked out uber ninja of doom, he's being thoughtless at best and an asshole at worst.
However, if all five players want to twink and munch out their characters to their heart's content, more power to them. It's only a problem when it becomes disruptive and interferes with other people's fun.
Well said. Some of the most memorable games I have played in were done this way, with an entire party of uber-characters.
Not to mention that logically just about every D&D character that doesn't have skills like Craft, Profession, Perform, Area Knowledge, etc representing things like hobbies, their family's profession and knowledge of where they grew-up can be considered "min-maxed."
Quote from: MaddmanLet me amend what I said about min maxers being assholes. This only happens when people do it to disrupt the game. I mean if four people are trying to tell involved stories, and a fifth is dominating the game with his twinked out uber ninja of doom, he's being thoughtless at best and an asshole at worst.
However, if all five players want to twink and munch out their characters to their heart's content, more power to them. It's only a problem when it becomes disruptive and interferes with other people's fun.
And now we agree, mostly.
I've also seen "mixed-group" games work, where the one guy has a completely optimised character, and the others don't and they were totally honest about it. In both of the games where it really flew, there were special things for those characters to do - one was a Jouster, a lot like in the (lame, but funny) movie A Knight's Tale; the other was the group's bruiser in a 1920's crime family game. If a player like this finds themself in a group that works differently, and speaks up, it's entirely possible to actually integrate their fun into everyone else's.
If they speak up.
Quote from: MaddmanThis only happens when people do it to disrupt the game.
I think that's the core concept, right there. Assholes disrupt games. Seems like quite a few assholes are also man-mixers/min-maxers. But, I've met drama whore assholes, bitch about politics instead of playing assholes, never-know-the-rules assholes, and a few other flavors, too.
Personally, I'm in it for the story, first. I've come to realize, though, that twiddling numbers can be kinda fun.
Also, the exasperated DM's are the ones who are going to post about their nightmarish experiences with min-maxers. Those of us who have had min-maxers who are not dumbasses aren't going to be posting. I have had both the asshat (and been the asshat) min-maxer and had the good player min-maxer. The former was a nightmare, while the latter still unintentionally caused me some grief (but it was tolerable).
So, I will say that the min-maxer isn't always the problem, but at times limits do help the sanctity of the game (er...I mean sanity of the gamemaster).
Quote from: YamoNot to mention that logically just about every D&D character that doesn't have skills like Craft, Profession, Perform, Area Knowledge, etc representing things like hobbies, their family's profession and knowledge of where they grew-up can be considered "min-maxed."
Actually, I usually give a couple of these things to characters for free IMC. It would be the unusual character who didn't have at least a basic knowledge of his native culture and the area in which he was raised, as well as basic knowledge of the profession/craft of his family.
The one thing that puzzles me about True20 is how easy it is for new players when it sounds like you've got a feat for every possible class ability and then some - leading to new players having to look over another long list to pick out what they can do, which seems to get in the way of the benefit of classes for new players, which is that there aren't as many choices to make to get started?
Admittedly, in d20 you still need to pick a feat, but the phb has suggested feats (and not as many feats).
Thanks.
Quote from: jcfialaThe one thing that puzzles me about True20 is how easy it is for new players when it sounds like you've got a feat for every possible class ability and then some - leading to new players having to look over another long list to pick out what they can do, which seems to get in the way of the benefit of classes for new players, which is that there aren't as many choices to make to get started?
Admittedly, in d20 you still need to pick a feat, but the phb has suggested feats (and not as many feats).
Thanks.
In True20 the character gets 1 feat each level, plus a handfull at the start, so it's not like ya hafta pick all the feats at once, plus I've never had any trouble at all choosing feats because I started out with a character concept in mind. It's even easier for D20 vets because most of the feats are the same as DnD feats/abilities. Plus, without PrC a player doesn't have the headache of trying to take feats and skills just to qualify for a PrC. I'd say the greatest flexibility of the system benefits rogueish characters. I can want to design and play an assassin, take the stealth and sneak attack, forget about trap finding and concentrate on social skills, poison-making, maybe some unique weapons. Or I can want to play a pickpocket and simply take sleight of hand, escape artist, bluff, etc, and once again not worry about trap-finding or sneak-attack. It's really nice to have the flexibility to design pretty much any kind of character I want, without losing the utility of class-abilities that don't apply to my character concept just because that's what the class comes with. It's not an original arguement I know, but it's definiitely a valid one.
Oh, and in Blue Rose, there are "paths" for each role (class) that list a suggested feat progression with which to build that character concept. I would imagine that many settings that will be created for True20 will have similar aids for new players. I know that even in the small taste of the Caliphate Nights setting that's in the True20 book, there are "archetypes" that give a suggested feat and skill list with which to start the character out in order to play that character concept. I imagine when Paradigm releases the full setting book for Caliphate Nights they will include expanded archetype progression lists just like Blue Rose did with paths. Players can deviate from the lists to develop their own character concepts if they wish of course...it's beautiful really :) The flexibility brings a tear to me eye ;)
Quote from: MaddmanThe best solution to min-maxing is not to play with munchkins, but call me crazy. I'd rather the system just let me do cool stuff, rather than put a bunch of constraints on the system to try and stop people from breaking it. The game rules will never be able to stop someone from being an asshole.
Ok, you're crazy.
When you play chess, do you also complain about the "restrictiveness" of not being able to move the pieces any way you like?
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPunditOk, you're crazy.
When you play chess, do you also complain about the "restrictiveness" of not being able to move the pieces any way you like?
RPGPundit
No, not really, but there's more than one way to play chess, you know. Steve Jackson's
Knightmare Chess comes to mind.
Quote from: OddveigNo, not really, but there's more than one way to play chess, you know. Steve Jackson's Knightmare Chess comes to mind.
hmm. so rollmaster would be like star-trek 3d chess?
Quote from: RPGPunditOk, you're crazy.
When you play chess, do you also complain about the "restrictiveness" of not being able to move the pieces any way you like?
RPGPundit
No. I'm not playing chess. Actually in D&D when a player was taking too long to figure out exactly where he wanted to move I've said "This ain't chess man, just move your guy where you want him to go."
In RPGs, I'm very much a Yes kind of GM.
Quote from: TechnomancerHas this been updated again, Levi. The copy I have is about 3 months old.
Now it has.
http://members.shaw.ca/LeviK/Perfect20_2006.pdf
Quote from: Levi KornelsenNow it has.
http://members.shaw.ca/LeviK/Perfect20_2006.pdf
Looks good, Levi. :win:
Do you have a summary of the main changes and tweaks?
Quote from: JongWKLooks good, Levi. :win:
Do you have a summary of the main changes and tweaks?
Thanks!
I have two lists, actually.
Changes I already made:-Folded toughness into fortitude.
-Folded defense into reflex.
-Gave a pupose to will.
-Ripped out origins; turned most of them into kinship feats.
-Added numinous feats.
-Rebuild the health track to allow for really nasty results - Like one-hit kills.
The next set, which will be drastic enough to rename the game.-Rip out advancement traits as they exist, changing them into skills.
-Attach the "advancing by level" trick to
ability scores instead.
-Strip combat down to pure bones, and rebuilt it to allow the group to treat other kinds of situations as conflicts. So, I'm sneaking across the courtyard, the guard is trying to catch me, and that would be "a fight" of sorts.
-Change health into conditions at set levels (Light, Moderate, Serious, Critical, Incapacitating, Deadly), and make a set of such conditions for things other than health - like sanity.
And that sounds like this hugely insane thing. But it's actually almost paralyzingly simple in my head. Putting it on a page is another thing.
I see True 20 as nothing more than a set of published House Rules which costs you money.
Most DMs would house rule their game anyway.
Quote from: LawbagI see True 20 as nothing more than a set of published House Rules which costs you money.
Most DMs would house rule their game anyway.
Then this could be said of any of the D20 games released since 3.0 came out, including 3.5. That said, lets give it to ya. True20 is a set of houserules. It just happens to be a well thought out, streamlined, flexible, interesting set of houserules that I personally happen to like, so I'm perfectly willing to pay the money for them. If you're not, then suit yourself.
I think True20 is a fine system, well constructed, and well thought out, and a much more sensible take on a "streamlined d20" than C&C.
And I am entirely not in the market for it. Some of the things it aims to take out are things I find desirable in a game, and after my experience with HERO (which is not bad, mind you), I understand that there is real value in having stuff build for you instead of building everything yourself. Having three classes that you can twist and bend is not a huge selling point for me... I prefer more classes that take less tweaking.
So no, you are not alone. I can understand why some people are excited by it. But I'm not.
Quote from: LawbagI see True 20 as nothing more than a set of published House Rules which costs you money.
Most DMs would house rule their game anyway.
I play neither True20 nor D&D3/3.5E. I think that pretty much 99% of the supplements/products made for 3E is exactly what you say True20 is as well--however, there is a point at which people simply don't have or want to spend the time having to cut up a rule set to "house rule" it to work for them, and build something simpler for them to start with--money spent saves them time--just like money spent to buy oh, some prepackaged adventure, or the Epic Level handbook, or the Complete Adventurer book--saves someone else time.
That being said--it offers significant changes (magic system, combat system) that makes the game play different as well---enough so that if its just house ruled 3E, then 3E is just house ruled AD&D2E which is just 1E which...you see where I'm going right?
I don't currently play either (and don't currently plan to) but its pretty simple that some people want a rulebook they can refer to that has just what they WANT--without having to do a lot of extra work. This is a HOBBY, not a job, for most people.
Quote from: LawbagI see True 20 as nothing more than a set of published House Rules which costs you money.
Most DMs would house rule their game anyway.
You could say that about...well, not only all d20 game and supplements, but pretty much all OGL games and most of the entire GURPS line, as well. I have to admit I don't understand your reasoning.
Quote from: ColonelHardissonYou could say that about...well, not only all d20 game and supplements, but pretty much all OGL games and most of the entire GURPS line, as well. I have to admit I don't understand your reasoning.
You could pretty much say that about any game ever written. The GM being able to change things is not the point. THe point is how close is where the game starts off to what you like? I don't think I've ever run anything by the book.
Quote from: MaddmanYou could pretty much say that about any game ever written. The GM being able to change things is not the point. THe point is how close is where the game starts off to what you like? I don't think I've ever run anything by the book.
Indeed. Well said.
Quote from: MaddmanYou could pretty much say that about any game ever written. The GM being able to change things is not the point. THe point is how close is where the game starts off to what you like? I don't think I've ever run anything by the book.
I also agree with you, I bought True20 and Blue Rose because I like the changes the rules/settings bring to the D20 game. The fact that it's so easy to convert monsters, skills, feats, and characters from base D20 to True20 is a huge bonus, making easy work of the houseruling by quite a bit. Like the Col., I don't understand Lawbag's reasoning.