Possible new Hyborian age campaign.....What system to use...

[Azgulor]

Vincent wrote:

My group probably would not play Conan the Roleplaying Game if it were not OGL material.

Exactly what I've said before: most of the D20 defenders are D20 players BEFORE being Conan players. Hence the lack of objectivity when reviewing the rules.

I want to play Conan games, not conan flavored D&D games. I hadn't anything against d20 rules when I started to run the game. My experience with them just showed it didn't fit our gaming group's vision of hyborian gaming. These rules were designed for power playing and munchkinisation, never for RP...

In my case, Conan OGL led me to other D20 games. Once I saw D20 could be modified to do swords-n-sorcery rather than just D&D uber-high-fantasy (thanks to Conan), I started checking out other d20 games, esp. OGL ones.

Also, IMO, it severely strains credibility when you try to claim the objectivity high-ground and then close out your post with that last sentence.

 

[Yogah of Yag]

I'm gonna risk stepping into a bear-trap and contribute...

As sourcebooks for the world info the MGP books are pretty much great, but as for the rule-system, d20 bogs down into too many details (esp. combat), slowing the flow down to a halt. I've heard good things about Savage Worlds (although never played it...yet :wink: ), and First Edition D&D is good and simpler but the magic system needs to be overhauled. I'm tempted to engineer something simpler like a fantasy version of 2d6 Classic Traveller (some have created homebrew attempts in this vein). YMMV.

 

[Hervé]

Azgulor wrote:

Also, IMO, it severely strains credibility when you try to claim the objectivity high-ground and then close out your post with that last sentence.

Quite right. I try to do my best, but sometimes I can lose my patience. Sorry about that.
I could have said it in a smoother way, but it won't change the fact that D&D rules were designed for power playing, even if they can be used in other ways. I don't say the "tactical wargaming" approach is bad, I simply say it does exists and that the system aims in that direction.

This is another point where I find them unfit to Hyborian gaming. I don't feel the "Power Curve" in REH stories. Conan's fighting prowess doesn't seem to improve much in the stories, as he is a formidable fighter from the start. After all, he kills two frost giants very early in his carreer, a feat that would have been impossible for a lone low level character by following D20 rules.

Power leveling also often fails to capture the semi random structure of REH stories. No chronology, no bigger stuff, no greater standing, (even if he ends as a king, the mood is more 'chief today, slave tomorrow'). Quite the contrary of what we can find in the rules.

Kintire wrote:

So everyone who disagrees with you has a "lack of objectivity"?

No, not everyone. Only you, actually...

 

[kintire]

Quite right. I try to do my best, but sometimes I can lose my patience. Sorry about that.

Alternatively, you could accept the fact that your dislike of d20 is not objective, but down to your personal tastes.

I could have said it in a smoother way, but it won't change the fact that D&D rules were designed for power playing,

Power playing? The whole idea that developing characters in a system and role playing are in any way contradictions is one I encounter often and have never understood. Role playing is not done using the system: how can the system affect it, one way or the other? The system is used for resolving all the system based bits. And all systems have methods for character advancement. All systems, all of them, can be power played if the players choose to do so. There's nothing unique about d20 in this.

I don't say the "tactical wargaming" approach is bad

But you do. And you also say that games with tactical wargaming aspects are inferior for roleplaying, which is not the case.

I don't feel the "Power Curve" in REH stories. Conan's fighting prowess doesn't seem to improve much in the stories, as he is a formidable fighter from the start. After all, he kills two frost giants very early in his carreer, a feat that would have been impossible for a lone low level character by following D20 rules.

It is certainly true that Conan, when he appears in the novels, is not a first level character by any means. I am a fan of starting the PCs at a reasonable level, and awarding levels slowly.

Power leveling also often fails to capture the semi random structure of REH stories. No chronology, no bigger stuff, no greater standing, (even if he ends as a king, the mood is more 'chief today, slave tomorrow'). Quite the contrary of what we can find in the rules.

He begins as a member of a barbarian warband, then a lone thief, then a mercenary serjeant. He then rises steadily in reputation and power, until he is routinely taking charge of whatever group he is in be they Kozaki horde, Zuagir band or pirate ship. He ends up as king of Aquilonia. Actually, I AM seeing quite a curve there!

You are correct that it is not so much his personal combat prowess (although I think that does improve) as his leadership, knowledge and cunning, but the feeling of advancement is there. One doesn't feel, for example, that the expert manipulator of the Black Stranger would have had the trouble with Nemedian law that the barbarian of God in a Bowl did.

No, not everyone. Only you, actually...

Herve. Take a deep breath. Step back. Just say it. "D20, while a system many people enjoy, just doesn't do it for me. I don't like it." Drop the pretence of objectivity. Relax. Accept that systems are a lot about personal taste, and the fact that people disagree with you about liking d20 doesn't mean either side are "wrong". Let go, Herve.

 

[warzen]

Role playing is not done using the system: how can the system affect it, one way or the other?

As law is trying to guide people in RL. It's that simple.

W.

 

[Demetrio]

As law is trying to guide people in RL. It's that simple.

I'm not so sure about that. The mechanics of an rpg actually have very little to do with the actual role playing aspect, and they certainly don't act as a guide except perhaps as to character concept as defined by the numbers.

What d20 mechanic impedes one's ability to act in character? None that I can see. What rule tells me as a player how I should act as my character?

There are exploitable flaws in the mechanics such that a player can gain an undesired (by the game writers) advantage for his character - for instance by devious Feat selection, but such things don't actually impede role play as such (this is to say in the sense of acting a part, which is what Kintire means) though they do disrupt the mechanical resolution of certain acts (mainly combat).

The flip side of that though is that the multiplicity of Feats and Manoeuvers in fact allows a greater variety of character types than might otherwise be expected, which is an aide to roleplay (in the acting sense).

So pretty much d20 doesn't impede roleplay at all and in fact allows plenty of character related flavour that can enhance roleplay opportunities, if only by a trifle. But that comes at the cost of rules abuse which we can see in the frenzied attempts to score 20+ damage as often as possible and suchlike. But that only impedes roleplay if you let it, it does not in itself detract from the ability to roleplay.

 

[warzen]

What rule tells me as a player how I should act as my character?

You should try Burning Wheel rpg. You'll understand how a system can impact your willingness to roleplay, or not.

The flip side of that though is that the multiplicity of Feats and Manoeuvers in fact allows a greater variety of character types than might otherwise be expected, which is an aide to roleplay (in the acting sense).

On the contrary, the more rules the less roleplay you usually have. Wushu will force you to roleplay or quit (not necesseraly a good thing, it's just something you have to accept when you're using this system).

DD4 can even be played without DM (rules are included for that in the core books !)

Take computer RPG as another example. You are so constrained by the "rules" that you can't seriously call that an RPG.
The more rules, the less liberty for the players to describe his actions.
After that, each group must find its best middle ground were the players have enough system rules to be confident and enough liberty to feel like their not playing a boardgame. Some will feel that DD4 is the perfect system, on the opposite, some people will only use Wushu and most of the crowd will fall between that.

W.

 

[Demetrio]

the more rules the less roleplay you usually have.

Really? If you mean 'the more time you spend on combat then the less time you have for character interaction', then yes, generally that's so. But it doesn't actually affect the quality of roleplaying. And d20 is actually less time consuming from a combat pov than many games (RQ for instance - and I have considerably more RQ experience than d20...).

 

[Lord Jolly the Scribe]

Just giving my 2 cents and letting you know my opinion, I played WOD, BRP via Cthulhu, pre-Savage Worlds Deadlands, Palladium's megaverse, WEG's old Star Wars, and 2nd ED AD&D all before I played D20, and I will say that D20 has some pros and cons:

Pros: rules meant to allow for a plethora of different abilities, multiclassing, adventures, different skill uses, styles of play and genres

Cons: lack of drama, bogged down rules, at times too many options its hard to decide, a complete need for mastery of some rules to do certain simple skill checks

So when I first heard of the D20 OGL and saw many of my fave games nearly die from their D20ification, I started to despise the corporate corruption.

Then Mongoose saved me. Conan removes a lot of junk in D20 other games were doing, adds the ability to be rewarded for playing in character, makes magic a lot more ritualized and not so crazy. ("Poof you are back from the dead" and "I wish my Strength went up by 6" is a little too uberfantasy for me.)

So I would have to say that even though D20 is not the best system in the world, it is very well done when tweaked and changed to take into account the world you are playing in by a good company. Cause in all honest no system is perfect.

Remember just my opinion.

 

[Hervé]

A good point.

 

[quigs]

I ran a very successful Conan game (about 4 sessions) using Savage Worlds with 2 players.

The loved the game system, and we didn't need to convert anything really, the rules book stood on its own.

Now that I have it, the Savage Solomon Kane book has an excellent magic system in it that you can easily port into Conan. It also has some new Edges that work really well.

The Savage Sword of Conan pdf that is out on the web isn't very good IMO. I would stay away from it.

 

[rabindranath72]

Jason Durall (one of the authors of the new Basic Roleplaying system) has a nice adaptation of the Elric! rpg to the Hyborian Age:
http://basicroleplaying.com/forum/downloads.php?do=cat&id=25

 

[ryhopewood]

Well I've converted the Conan RPG to both GURPS and HERO System.

GURPS is for a more realistic campaign. HERO for a more cinematic one. Both are highly customisable.

SW is also worth a look but as someone said previously on this thread, the conversion notes are pretty crap.

 

[Sir Hackalot]

Hey, I love Hero System, its my favorite so you think you could PM me your Conan conversion rules? Please? Pretty please? With hot fudge?