What if Conan leaves d20 for anotehr system?

[rabindranath72]

A very interesting take for Conan would be something akin to what Green Ronin is doing with Freeport:

1) A core "setting" guide, statless, with only descriptive material.
2) A "companion" with the "rules crunch".

I easily see a companion for d20, one for True 20, one for Savage Worlds, one for Castles & Crusades and one for Runequest. If Green Ronin can do it, I guess also Mongoose can do it, isn't it?

 

[GamerDude]

A very interesting take for Conan would be something akin to what Green Ronin is doing with Freeport:

1) A core "setting" guide, statless, with only descriptive material.
2) A "companion" with the "rules crunch".

I easily see a companion for d20, one for True 20, one for Savage Worlds, one for Castles & Crusades and one for Runequest. If Green Ronin can do it, I guess also Mongoose can do it, isn't it?

As long as Mongoose is putting it out, I like the idea. Even WotC has gotten smart doing the same thing with the 4th ed books for their setting "forgotten realms". While I think the Campaign Guide is not as good as the stuff under 2nd and 3rd ed, it is ok. A significant portion of the material is repeated between it and the Player's Guide, and the information is a bit skimpy overall, but there are some nice GM-only tidbits in the CG that are really nice.

 

[AKAmra]

A very interesting take for Conan would be something akin to what Green Ronin is doing with Freeport:

1) A core "setting" guide, statless, with only descriptive material.
2) A "companion" with the "rules crunch".

I easily see a companion for d20, one for True 20, one for Savage Worlds, one for Castles & Crusades and one for Runequest. If Green Ronin can do it, I guess also Mongoose can do it, isn't it?

I agree with this and would not hesitate to buy a systemless Conan and system Companions. The guide could include generic character descriptions so GM's could create the characters in their system of choice.

This would seem to be a win/win idea for Mongoose. Any gamer interested in running Conan would buy the core books/guides and then the system books would sell according to the level of interest in the systems offered.

I own the Freeport guide - which I wouldn't have bought with any of the systems offered so far. I would buy a system Freeport Companion for GURPS, BRP (MRQ) or WFRP.

 

[rabindranath72]

It seems this "setting model" is getting some support, as also shown by Goodman Games' Points of Light setting book.

I volunteer to write a Castles & Crusades companion

 

[Azgulor]

A very interesting take for Conan would be something akin to what Green Ronin is doing with Freeport:

1) A core "setting" guide, statless, with only descriptive material.
2) A "companion" with the "rules crunch".

I easily see a companion for d20, one for True 20, one for Savage Worlds, one for Castles & Crusades and one for Runequest. If Green Ronin can do it, I guess also Mongoose can do it, isn't it?

This is the only model for non-exclusive Conan OGL support whereby Mongoose could keep my patronage. If the book has stats for systems other than Conan OGL, they would be useless to me. Systemless, I can use.

 

[Sutek]

So we have now, what....NINE PAGES...of chatter about what system Conan should change to and the current wave of resolution is washing up on the shores of...nothing???

Holy Crom, people.

Look, there's already tons of use that one can get out of the Mongoose publications for a non-system specific person to utilize. Besides being off topic, the desire to have "campaign world material that can be used for any system" already exists in the core rule books. Sheesh.

I still contend that this is D&D4e jibber-jabber, and the majority of the people decrying use of OGL as a base for further publications on the Conan license from Mongoose comes down to knee-jerk elucidating or the usual crowd-following evaluation that OGL D20 sucks, is passé, or is inferior to whatever the system du jour in your group is.

Personally, I think OGL D20 as flawed as it is, captivates the genre and functions admirably if played and managed with some degree of sensibility and not somewhere in the realm of Find City Bomb style of play.

Take a look at Pathfinder if you want to see how a specifically engineered Conan sticking with OGL D20 might appear. This system is still viable, and unless someone comes up with an actual system to rival it for what it is intended to do (which maybe BRP handles, I'll admit), I'm gonna continue to advocate that Mongoose stick with it as the core Conan system mechanic.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Nice post, Sutek. =)

I'm actually trying to cobble together a complete revision of the rules, made up of Conan OGL and Pathfinder, with some extra rule changes to make it work well together.

 

[rabindranath72]

Look, there's already tons of use that one can get out of the Mongoose publications for a non-system specific person to utilize. Besides being off topic, the desire to have "campaign world material that can be used for any system" already exists in the core rule books. Sheesh.

Not at all. If a book I buy contains relevant rules material (as it happens with d20 stats, which can fill pages and pages), I am not enticed to buy it at all. I do not want to pay 100% the price for 70% of fluff. Besides, separating the crunch from the fluff would keep the prices lower, and overall, the potential audience of the setting would be larger.
I guess the stats of the poll speak quite clearly (and btw, there is not a statistically significant difference between the two)

 

[Clovenhoof]

Not at all. If a book I buy contains relevant rules material (as it happens with d20 stats, which can fill pages and pages), I am not enticed to buy it at all. I do not want to pay 100% the price for 70% of fluff.

I used to think the same way, reversed, i.e. when I was looking for Crunch instead of Fluff. I've been on various RPG forums for about 7 years or so and, when discussing a homemade rule, often got the recommendation to buy this-and-that book. I never saw the point in buying a full book for maybe 30 bucks just to get a half-page of information that might help my game.

The stats in the poll speak quite clearly that MGP would lose half of their (forum-visiting) customer base if they switched to a new system (if they all put their money where their mouth is).

Separating crunch from fluff entirely is also problematic, because crunch and fluff often go hand in hand. When describing a country, you also need to describe the inhabitants. And in a game that features different races, you also have to name those differences. IMHO it would be way too complicated and inconvenient to have one book say "Cimmeria is inhabited by the Cimmerians [fluff text], for stats see Conan D20 Compendium p.32f", repeating that a few dozen times for each race. I wouldn't want that.

 

[The King]

The results of the poll are quite balanced but I wonder whether if it would reflect the reality if Mongoose decide to publish Conan under new rule sets.

 

[Sutek]

I do not want to pay 100% the price for 70% of fluff. Besides, separating the crunch from the fluff would keep the prices lower, and overall, the potential audience of the setting would be larger.
I guess the stats of the poll speak quite clearly (and btw, there is not a statistically significant difference between the two)

So, you contend that the publication and printing costs of two books will be cheaper than the publication and printing costs of just one? I'd like to see that math.

Secondly, a fluff book plus a crunch book wouldn't even work because, since it's OGL D20 (lets asume that switching systems isn't the route to go, following the current "page 9"suggestions), the people who like the system would never switch. Worse still, the people who don't like the OGL rules would never buy the crunch book. That means that the cruch book publication and printing costs are down the drain except for a few die-hards. No. You pick a good, easy, well selling system and then you operate under that premise until the market swings a differnet way. Right now, OGL D20 is still alive because of Conan and Pathfinder, and I can't wait to see the sales number for those two versus 4e at the end of the quarter.

Thirdly, the asertion that a market audience would grow by a publisher produciong two necessary books instead of one all-encompasing book is...well...acute. I don't even get how you come up with that one, and I'm not trying to be mean here. Two books means that two books are necessary, not either one optional. That's one of the big beefs I have with 4e - multiple core books to get the whole picture (all classes, races, etc.), Nope, multi-book sets that are reliant on each other are good for nothing except very expensive gift packs that your FLGS orders a minimum quantity of only to sell two all year long.

And lastly, polls mean nothing, particularly when (a) we're only given two choices (one presupposing abject obstinance and the other assuming change for change sake), and (b) everyone ignores those choices in favor of other options to post about. (take our current US election as a perfect example! :roll: )

Nice post, Sutek. =)

I'm actually trying to cobble together a complete revision of the rules, made up of Conan OGL and Pathfinder, with some extra rule changes to make it work well together.

Thanks, Hoof. just trying to keep it real. (lol)

On your revamp, I'd say look at the PF classes and see whrere augmentations are done. The rules changes are crucial, but fairly insubstantial (except for Grapple). I'd be interested to see what you come up with. :wink:

 

[Axerules]

Just a remark: the poll has only two possible answers. I didn't vote, because none represents MY opinion.

"I will never buy the Conan books in the new system." IMO it depends of what kind of system is chosen by the game designers...

"I will buy the new Conan books, whatever the system" NO, usually I won't buy a RPG book if I don't like the rules within (or MAYBE, IF it's light on rules and mostly fluff).

"one presupposing abject obstinance and the other assuming change for change sake"

Very true, Sutek. For me too, this Poll means nothing. I simply can't vote.

 

[Sutek]

I didn't vote either. :wink:

 

[Ranzadule]

Conan OGL fixes pretty much everything bad in d20. I like it just fine and the non-gaming parts of the book are ace. That said, if Mongoose decides to release Conan in a new ruleset rather than giving us 3.0 to buy, I'll support it, buying the new system, but I'll play whichever I like or whichver my group wants to play. There is enough out that those who are all worried about a new ruleset can ignore anything they don't like and play the current system.

 

[AKAmra]

So we have now, what....NINE PAGES...of chatter about what system Conan should change to and the current wave of resolution is washing up on the shores of...nothing???

Holy Crom, people.

Look, there's already tons of use that one can get out of the Mongoose publications for a non-system specific person to utilize. Besides being off topic, the desire to have "campaign world material that can be used for any system" already exists in the core rule books. Sheesh.

I still contend that this is D&D4e jibber-jabber, and the majority of the people decrying use of OGL as a base for further publications on the Conan license from Mongoose comes down to knee-jerk elucidating or the usual crowd-following evaluation that OGL D20 sucks, is passé, or is inferior to whatever the system du jour in your group is.

Personally, I think OGL D20 as flawed as it is, captivates the genre and functions admirably if played and managed with some degree of sensibility and not somewhere in the realm of Find City Bomb style of play.

Take a look at Pathfinder if you want to see how a specifically engineered Conan sticking with OGL D20 might appear. This system is still viable, and unless someone comes up with an actual system to rival it for what it is intended to do (which maybe BRP handles, I'll admit), I'm gonna continue to advocate that Mongoose stick with it as the core Conan system mechanic.

I would say that after "NINE PAGES" of discussion, a systemless Conan core with system companions was suggested as another option, that's not "nothing", it's supplying gamers with Conan fluff, maps and information that they can use with whatever system they want. That suggestion goes far beyond the current members of this forum and renders the poll useless, but not the idea. There are a whole lot of gamers out there, Savage Worlds, World of Darkness, BRP, Traveller, GURPS, HERO, D&D 4e, etc, etc, etc, that don't frequent this forum that would be potential customers if this happened.

As I said in my post up-thread, I bought the new systemless Guide to Freeport, I would not have made this purchase if it was d20. If Green Ronin publishes a Companion with a rules system I like I'll buy that too, if they don't at least I have a book that doesn't waste any space on a system I'll never use.

That said, I don't honestly think Mongoose will go the systemless route. I think it's far more likely that they will use their in-house MRQ rules. Personally, this works for me, since MRQ is close enough to BRP for me to take the leap.

To suggest that OGL Conan already offers potential customers a percentage of usable fluff ignores customers like me, who simply will not buy d20 based games for fluff (anymore). Other systems maybe, but not d20; with levels, classes, feats, etc. d20 rules just take up too much space.

 

[rabindranath72]

I do not want to pay 100% the price for 70% of fluff. Besides, separating the crunch from the fluff would keep the prices lower, and overall, the potential audience of the setting would be larger.
I guess the stats of the poll speak quite clearly (and btw, there is not a statistically significant difference between the two)

So, you contend that the publication and printing costs of two books will be cheaper than the publication and printing costs of just one? I'd like to see that math.

No, I am just saying that Green Ronin are a bunch of idiots :roll:

EDIT:
Like:
I bought the Freeport guide AND the C&C companion. There is no way I would have bought it if only the d20 or True 20 versions were offered.

For the mathematically inclined, that's TWO books sold vs. ZERO sold.

 

[rabindranath72]

Conan OGL fixes pretty much everything bad in d20.

Which would be? The feats and skills systems are there, mutatis mutandis, together with the combat system, which has been made even more complex. Incidentally, these are the main causes of concerns for the people who do not like d20.
I sincerely wonder if people who make this kind of comments has ever played D&D 3.5. 90% (or more) of the rules are the same. It's only the "accessories" (like races and classes) which differ.
Again, it's that 90% that people who do not like d20 frown upon.
Now, if you are speaking about the "feel" of D&D, that is quite a different topic, and not directly related to rules (e.g. Vancian magic).

 

[rabindranath72]

To suggest that OGL Conan already offers potential customers a percentage of usable fluff ignores customers like me, who simply will not buy d20 based games for fluff (anymore). Other systems maybe, but not d20; with levels, classes, feats, etc. d20 rules just take up too much space.

We can always pretend that the roughly 50% of people who voted against d20 does not exist
I too bought the Freeport guide and the C&C companion. There is no way I would have bought it if only the d20 or True 20 versions were offered.

For the mathematically inclined, that's TWO books sold vs. ZERO sold.

And I regret to say so, there is no way I am going to buy further d20 Conan books.

 

[Ranzadule]

You can "sincerely wonder" all you want. Saying that only the classes are different from d20 to Conan makes me wonder if you have played Conan. I've played plenty of d20. People who complain that d20 is too complex have their own issues. My issues with d20 are the silly memorization of spells, the lack of a power point system for spell, the fact that hp outpaces damage output and that armour is used to modify AC instead of as DR. Conan is vastly superior to core 3.0 or 3.5 in all of those areas. d20 combat is stupid. Conan adds intelligence to a stupid core mechanic and makes it smart.

Conan OGL fixes pretty much everything bad in d20.

Which would be? The feats and skills systems are there, mutatis mutandis, together with the combat system, which has been made even more complex. Incidentally, these are the main causes of concerns for the people who do not like d20.
I sincerely wonder if people who make this kind of comments has ever played D&D 3.5. 90% (or more) of the rules are the same. It's only the "accessories" (like races and classes) which differ.
Again, it's that 90% that people who do not like d20 frown upon.
Now, if you are speaking about the "feel" of D&D, that is quite a different topic, and not directly related to rules (e.g. Vancian magic).

 

[rabindranath72]

You can "sincerely wonder" all you want. Saying that only the classes are different from d20 to Conan makes me wonder if you have played Conan. I've played plenty of d20. People who complain that d20 is too complex have their own issues. My issues with d20 are the silly memorization of spells, the lack of a power point system for spell, the fact that hp outpaces damage output and that armour is used to modify AC instead of as DR. Conan is vastly superior to core 3.0 or 3.5 in all of those areas. d20 combat is stupid. Conan adds intelligence to a stupid core mechanic and makes it smart.

I was one of the playtesters, and some rules in the game were my creations. So yes, I played d20 Conan, and quite extensively, at that.

That said, that is exactly the point I was making. Those are not complexity issues, but tastes as to how a rules system should model a setting and its assumptions. Your statements have nothing to do with the WHY people does not like d20.
I am not going to argue tastes at all, or whether d20 combat is "stupid" vs. "smart" Conan combat. But I may add that I actually LIKE the "silly" memorisation of spells, how AC works etc. They are abstractions, and should be taken as such (and to see and understand why they are as they are, one should give a good read to the source material). And that I used those "silly" things to successfully run Hyborian Age games in other game systems (hence the appeal of a setting-only book)