So why not let your agenda go?

[Mark Dunder]

So why not let your agenda go, avoid the rules discussions, and hop into the world discussions?

Because I want to discuss the rules. I have started playing OGL Conan (although I will always prefer playing my system, that won't change), and have questions also. There were several things about the game I found didn't seem to work very well. My experience on the whole has been with older AD&D rules, and I was somewhat confused as to why certain features were used in this game. Having Skills is a new thing as are Feats. Combat was also different. Even Saving Throws were different. They all seemed jumbled up together, totally separate from each other. I guess that's the way you prefer them to be, I like to intergrate and simplify things, or at least attempt to.
I know this is OGL (open gaming license) and not d20 itself, but they share many of the same features. Am I totally wrong on that?

Now someone said disparaging remarks about RuneQuest being ridiculous. I told him he obviously can't read, because lots of stories have many things in them that lots of people find ridiculous. I mistakenly misquoted to another poster, and apologized when he said that that was uncalled for. And he's right, of course. But I don't apologize to the poster disparaging RuneQuest as a ridiculous game, which it isn't.

And OGL Conan is not all it's cracked up to be. Do I have to end every statement with "IMO" or a smiley face?

Also my first post to the DB thread said at the top of the post that if you find critique of d20 and are not interested in TSR Conan, skip this post.

I buy Mongoose products, I play Mongoose products, I like what they are doing. My critiques are mild, you only take them badly. I don't call people nasty names. I leave that up to nasty people. I make suggestions on how I think (think is another way of say IMO) the game could be improved. Why is improving a game bad? Why is changing a game bad? Why is making suggestions bad? You say I'm bad mouthing the game. I say that's your opinion about my opinion. I say I can't abide by the game. I meant the miniature part, and I still mean that. I don't like the miniature rules, and I will stick by that part of my opinion.
Just because I dislike part of the system does not mean I don't like other parts of the system. Some (I said some) of you don't believe that, and you entitled to your opinion. I like the Skills. I like the Feats. I'm starting to think the Classes are looking pretty good. Still not happy with Scholar, but that's my opinion.

Been to The Forge way back, didn't interest me enough at the time. Might go visit it again. Almost forgot about it, having too much fun here.

I like to plug my game once in a while, so look askance at it, call me eccentric, and go on about your discussion.

So that's part of my agenda. I will not stop posting to other rule discussions, I think Vincent Darlage is wrong to say I should. I was discussiong the rules, I have done so throughout my posts. I feel I have meaningful discussions and I support more than I bash. Why I should be single out from others that are bashing I fail to understand.

I find nasty language and such rude. I find many things rude about many posts. I never mention it or even much defended such statements, because I know where my heart lies in all this, and it's with better Role-Playing.

 

[ricardo440]

re: half duck men

I must say that they do sound stupid.
Yeah they are no less believable than half lizard men dragonkin, but the half lizard dude is scary and cool.
The half duck chap isn't cool, he just seems a bit silly. even a goat is more scary than a duck.

Perhaps in context he is better.

Ricardo - half man - half humming bird

 

[Mark Dunder]

re: half duck men.

Actually, finding out he (the RQ creator) liked Howard the Duck, which I didn't know, I find amusing too.

I'm sorry, I may have been a wee bit too harsh on my critique of your post.

I never put that race into the few short sessions I played with RQ. I'm more or less supporting the Basic Role-Playing system itself, which I feel is pretty good.

Never checked out their Intelligence modifiers, perhaps they are stupid.

 

[Mark Dunder]

I think defensive blast captures the oft mentioned natural superstition and distrust Conan felt for sorcerers in just about every Conan story.

My post (on the DB thread) was in response to Strom mentioning "natural superstition and distrust." Which I felt having weaknesses addressed. No reason why anyone cannot add a weakness to their character.

I apologize for not referencing his post. I did not intend to go off subject, I responded to a previous post. You assumed I was intentionally trying to side track the thread. I wouldn't exactly consider Strom's post side tracking, but tying in natural superstition and distrust to DB as a reason for it's existence may not IMO be DB's intended purpose.

I will do better referencing my posts as I see this will be a continued issue on this forum (about my so called side tracking and bashing).

 

[Taharqa]

Its always been my suspicion (which you have now confirmed) that most people who bash the d20 system are about ten to twenty years out of date. In other words, people like to put up the straw man of the the massive hacked-together piece of dung that was 1st and 2nd edition D&D to compare their "perfect" system to. I saw that repeatedly in the old BRP vs. D20 Cthulhu flamewars and now I see it here (although the TSR conan game faction is considerably smaller ).

Let me be clear about my background. I played many of the same games as you, dunderm, in my youth: Marvel Super Heroes and Top Secret SI, for example. And after a few early experiences with D&D I stayed away because I found the system to be unrealistic and hacked-together. I mean why was everyone else zero-level except adventurers? I, like you, found the skill-based approach to be much more appealing.

But that all changed with D20. D20 was a very conscious effort to re-design the D&D system from the ground up to make it consistent and intuitive. It relies on one basic mechanic (d20+modifier>=DC) for all game resolution which is very intuitive and extremely easy to implement. (btw: it is also clearly superior to basic percentile systems like BRP where the difficulty of the task has to be completely fudged) Despite what you claim after your cursory reading of Conan OGL, the different systems are not pieced together - combat, skills, and save rolls all have the exact same basic mechanic.

But even better than having one basic consistent rule mechanic is the modularity and adaptability of the rules system, encouraged by the progressive use of the OGL. As others have pointed out to you, it is entirely possible to have a classless, skill-based D20 system: just look at Mutants and Masterminds or D20 Cthulhu. Damage system too unrealistic for you? Just adjust the MDT like Conan, D20 modern, or D20 cthulhu. Don't think armor should make you harder to hit? Make it DR like Conan and many other games are doing now. And so on.

Many of the games you trumpet on this board were major improvements in the 1980s in comparison to 1st edition D&D. But times change and frankly those games now look mediocre and almost as kloogy as D&D itself.

The basic point is that you are arguing from ignorance. I would be happy to ignore your eccentric, irrelevant comments for the most part, but (as in the Defensive Blast thread) they are often long-winded, incessant, and uninvited. Perhaps you should join the TSR Conan RPG forum (oh whoops, I forgot there isn't one because nobody else plays the game.)

 

[Etepete]

In defence of BRP

Really, I don't find the percentile system problematic. True, you focus on the characters ability rather than the circumstances, but it's no big deal to just apply a bonus or minus to the roll. I do this all the time. And there are good, up-to date systems out there: like Warlords of Alexander with its neat damage treshold system. And really, old-style CoC is a good solid system as well.

Let's not confuse modern with well-designed. It's not like the technical situation has been revolutionized since the early eighties games, so an old system _might_ be just as good as a new one. (At least with some adjustments)

EDIT: Having had a wee lookthrough this post and some others, I thought I'd just clarify: I'm defending BRP here, but not in contrast too Conan. Is it possible to love two game systems? I suppose I'm a polygameist. 8)

 

[Taharqa]

Really, I don't find the percentile system problematic. True, you focus on the characters ability rather than the circumstances, but it's no big deal to just apply a bonus or minus to the roll.

Yes, if you do this then it is basically equivalent to the DC roll from D20. However there are two issues: (1) It seems less clear what the standards for penalties should be and I suspect that the penalties Keepers hand out are correlated to the actual skill scores of the characters (2) It is technically a homebrew fudge because the rulebook does not deal with this issue. (this may have changed in more recent editions than mine - if so I stand corrected)

And really, old-style CoC is a good solid system as well.

Its a good system, no doubt - SAN was a great invention. But IMHO it is overrated. The beauty of CoC is the unique setting and playstyle, not the mechanic.

Let's not confuse modern with well-designed. It's not like the technical situation has been revolutionized since the early eighties games, so an old system _might_ be just as good as a new one. (At least with some adjustments)

Revolution, no. Evolution, yes.

EDIT: Having had a wee lookthrough this post and some others, I thought I'd just clarify: I'm defending BRP here, but not in contrast too Conan. Is it possible to love two game systems? I suppose I'm a polygameist. 8)

No worries. Despite coming off as a d20 fanboy in this thread, I am a polygameist myself.

 

[Etepete]

Yes, if you do this then it is basically equivalent to the DC roll from D20. However there are two issues: (1) It seems less clear what the standards for penalties should be and I suspect that the penalties Keepers hand out are correlated to the actual skill scores of the characters (2) It is technically a homebrew fudge because the rulebook does not deal with this issue. (this may have changed in more recent editions than mine - if so I stand corrected).

Oh, I'm not only talking about the actual game BRP, but all games that use the system, like Elric and CoC and a lot of swedish games, actually. (Note how this makes my position more ambiguos and less assailable: I'm a master debater :twisted: ). And in most cases these give you (1) a standard for penalties, (2) Yeah, well, I'm not very dogmatic, so I generally mod my games some.... But It's more of a rule of thumb than a rule revision...

 

[toothill man]

And really, old-style CoC is a good solid system as well.

Its a good system, no doubt - SAN was a great invention. But IMHO it is overrated. The beauty of CoC is the unique setting and playstyle, not the mechanic.

No worries. Despite coming off as a d20 fanboy in this thread, I am a polygameist myself.

CoC is unique and deserves its place in roleplaying history due to its setting and pure class(was a ref for over 15 years),most of us have a few games we play and love for me at the moment its Slaine,conan,MWWG,lone wolf and if as good as it sounds runequest :wink: so why can we all not just live togeather :wink: 8)

 

[Mark Dunder]

One of the best RPGs, and still is IMO, is Aftermath. This system uses d20 rolls, but you roll under the value you need to succeed. Aftermath also uses Attribute (abilities in d20) Saving Throws and Critical Saving Throws (AST and CST). Skills are figured from your attributes and unique talent abilities like Combative, Mechanical, Natural, etc. The Skills are from 0 to 100, and to figure what your Basic Chance of Success (BCS), you divide the Skill by 5.

Not a lot of difference in the gaming systems. So I'm not bashing d20's resolution system. I think Skills and Combat can be intergrated. Currently the combat and saving throws, as in original D&D, has 1 as an automatic miss and 20 as an automatic hit. Not so with most Skills. Small detail perhaps, but it's there. I suppose Skills that are used during combat, could adhere to the automatic hits and misses.

I think BRP has a greater range of success and failures due only to having 80 more values to pick from. I think Taharqa is correct that this gives a lot more room for fudging. Just a point nudge in either direction doesn't seem all that bad does it? But the consequences can be significant when the result could be the death of your character. You fudge on d20 and that's a 5% nudge, makes fudging something you have to be very careful about as a GM. Also having 80 less points to figure out your success margin would tend to make spur of the moment decisions for the GM a lot faster and easier for d20.

But for flexibility, BRP IMO gives you more latitude than OGL Conan at the moment. This is mostly only due to the use of Skills in the games. If some of the Class features were made into Skills (like Weapons), this may even the games out. I don't know. But that's my analysis at the present time.

 

[Sutek]

Currently the combat and saving throws, as in original D&D, has 1 as an automatic miss and 20 as an automatic hit. Not so with most Skills. Small detail perhaps, but it's there. I suppose Skills that are used during combat, could adhere to the automatic hits and misses.

A) Skills aren't used during combat in OGL and d20.
B) Most skills can be done automatically on a 20 - it's called "take 20" and almost always succeeds at moderately difficult tasks.

You fudge on d20 and that's a 5% nudge, makes fudging something you have to be very careful about as a GM. Also having 80 less points to figure out your success margin would tend to make spur of the moment decisions for the GM a lot faster and easier for d20.

Your argument is flawed because any fudging in d20 never takes place on the die (as it you suggest) but instead is applied to DCs. You've got it backwards. If I set a DC at 35 for a task and my player rolls a 33, well I may just give it to him with slightly edited results befitting a "near miss" - he succeeded, but also just barely made it and the actual resutls will reflect that by my own GM fiat.

But for flexibility, BRP IMO gives you more latitude than OGL Conan at the moment. This is mostly only due to the use of Skills in the games. If some of the Class features were made into Skills (like Weapons), this may even the games out. I don't know. But that's my analysis at the present time.

Not really. It generates exactly the opposite, in fact. Look at systems like BPRD's Time Lords or Columbia Game's Harnmaster. They provide a more finite and therefore inflexible system that has more points on the scale, that's all. Percentile systems affix everything within a more confined spectrum (everything is judged between 1 and 100), whereas in a d20 system, the 1-20 range is just the low end, with a completely open-ended top-end. DCs can go as high as you want them.

Now the problem with d20 D&D is the fixed XP award and level progression - it operates with far too much predictability, and leveling up is something players can too easilty anticipate. However, that's the bread and butter of the system - the creators wanted people who play the game to kno wthat they are on a path to being a super hero along a predictable curve. Conan take ssome of that away by not having set XP awards.

I will say I havent read all your posts, dunderm, but if you want to continue this discussion here, why not list, specifically, what is is about d20 and OGL that bothers you. Then the rest of us that want to will be better able to debate the issue. Simply saying "it's not as flexible" neither lends to your argument that PB systems are better or that OGL stinks.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Ok, lets take the open ended roll on d20. Lets say you have a Parry Defense of 16, (has a knife), (base 10 + strength 15(+2) + Parry bonus (8th level noble +4). You are attacked by a Noble (has a knife), also of 8th level. Base attack bonus 6 + strength 15(+2) + no added Feats = 8. Meaning the Noble has to roll an 8 or better on d20. A 65% chance to hit (8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20). Will hit, most likely. This means that Nobles have a better chance to hit than defend, all things being equal. Shields help a lot. Too bad the Nobles don't have any.

So tell me why it's unbalanced in favor of the attacker? I did this with my son, he attacked, I lost. It was a simple exercise. So help me out to play this game better. Am I figuring this all wrong?

 

[High Lord Dee]

In defence of BRP

What exactly is BRP?

HLD

 

[thulsa]

A) Skills aren't used during combat in OGL and d20.

At the risk of sounding like a nitpicker, what about Tumble, Bluff, Jump, Ride, Concentration, et al ? Those are used in combat all the time...

- thulsa

 

[Mark Dunder]

BRP stands for Basic Role-Playing, developed by Greg Stafford with Lynn Willis in 1980, to support the RuneQuest game by Steve Perrin and Ray Turney, and also Steve Henderson and Warren James.

Success or failure depends upon if you can roll under a certain percent set by the ability or skill used to attempt an action. Also, characteristics can be used to attempt actions, such as Strength against a door's strength. This is done using a Resistance Table. It is a matrix of 21 rows and 21 columns, crossreferenced to a percentage that has to be rolled under. Sometimes characteristics are pitted directly against another characteristic such as Strength against the Size of an object. The characteristic in this case is multiplied by 5, to get the percentage.

That's a little bit about BRP.

 

[Mark Dunder]

No, your not nitpicking. I kept as many Feats and action mods out to keep the values even. As soon as my values are varified by someone more familiar with the rule system, I have another point to make. I will then go over other questions involving Feats, and how that effects the open ended roll.

 

[Mark Dunder]

Your argument is flawed because any fudging in d20 never takes place on the die (as it you suggest) but instead is applied to DCs. You've got it backwards. If I set a DC at 35 for a task and my player rolls a 33, well I may just give it to him with slightly edited results befitting a "near miss" - he succeeded, but also just barely made it and the actual resutls will reflect that by my own GM fiat.

The nudge always occurs after the die is rolled. If the DC was 5 and the player rolled 4, you might drop the DC to 4. Does not matter if the die roll was increased by one to meet the 5 or if the DC was decreased by one, the effect is the same. I say the glass is half empty and you say the glass is half full. Who is right? But one level of nudge is 5% because the random roll still has only 1 to 20 in spread, regardless of the DC.

 

[Mark Dunder]

A) Skills aren't used during combat in OGL and d20.

Conan PE Page 241 Combat section. 2nd par.

Accelerated Climbing
You can climb one-half your speed as a move action by accepting a -5 penalty on your Climb check.

 

[Etepete]

This is done using a Resistance Table.

Probably the most unwieldly feature of BRP (though experienced GM:s would use a far swifter mathematic formula: basically setting (defending ability - active ability) x 5 + 50 as difficulty. Some BRP-derived systems have developed easier systems of resolution.

And it should be noted that quite a few games derive from BRP, so I'm not only talking about the actual game Basic Roleplaying, but a family of games with those same mechanics.

 

[Taharqa]

Your argument is flawed because any fudging in d20 never takes place on the die (as it you suggest) but instead is applied to DCs. You've got it backwards. If I set a DC at 35 for a task and my player rolls a 33, well I may just give it to him with slightly edited results befitting a "near miss" - he succeeded, but also just barely made it and the actual resutls will reflect that by my own GM fiat.

The nudge always occurs after the die is rolled. If the DC was 5 and the player rolled 4, you might drop the DC to 4. Does not matter if the die roll was increased by one to meet the 5 or if the DC was decreased by one, the effect is the same. I say the glass is half empty and you say the glass is half full. Who is right? But one level of nudge is 5% because the random roll still has only 1 to 20 in spread, regardless of the DC.

Let me be clearer about what I meant in my original post which started this fudging/nudging debate. My point is that D20 sets clear checkpoints for the difficulty of tasks (10,15,20,30,35,etc). BRP does not. Many people get around this by simply adding penalties to the roll. My concern is that when penalties are added ad-hoc is that they will be correlated with the actual percentile scores of the characters in question - it is likely the DM will give bigger penalties to more skilled players, most likely without realizing it. This is a speculation on my part, based on my role-playing experience. What I like about the D20 system is that setting those DCs up in a standard way prevents this sort of thing and simplifies the GM's task.