What if Conan leaves d20 for anotehr system?

[warzen]

Never ever go to DD4 then. You'll be quiet displeased by this new version of D&D.

I have gone to DD4, and its even more like that. You can't even multiclass as much.

You can't imagine how wrong you are. But since you haven't understood the "build" concept of DD3x, it's normal to not notice how multiclassing is working in DD4. If you interested, WoC posted some level 1 to 30 build of multiclassed PCs (if I had the link, I would have posted the URL) that show you how multiclassing is working in DD4.

On the real subject, I won't convince you since we are not talking about the same thing. You think that rolling a d20 and adding a bonus IS the d20 system where I add all the feats, skill, options.

And as a side effect, you won't convince me

W.

 

[First Age]

I'm slightly torn on the systems question regarding the Mongoose Conan line.

I run Mongoose Conan material at UK Conventions; it's of a very high standard. I quickly dispensed with the D20 implementation, which has some nice ideas tied to a clunky system IMHO, and use my own (to be published next year).

Runequest is a better option, in my view, but even better would be linking the awesome Mongoose line to a different engine entirely. There are a number of great existing candidates (Fate runs high on my personal wish list).

I will continue to consider buying Mongoose Conan books and would be delighted not to have to buy D20 stat blocks. Having said that I am not that interested in RQ stat blocks either!

 

[warzen]

off topic

I managed to get the link for DD4 multiclassing:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drtoc/365

Download the whole issue as the article is not available.

Yes it's free and it's on page 46.

W.

 

[kintire]

You can't imagine how wrong you are. But since you haven't understood the "build" concept of DD3x, it's normal to not notice how multiclassing is working in DD4.

I have understood the build concept in DD3.x thanks: I just don't bother to use it. I also understand the build concept in DD4: and I doubt I'll bother to use that either. It is more likely that I will, since you can play games at higher than 10th level in 4e, so builds might be worth it.

On the real subject, I won't convince you since we are not talking about the same thing. You think that rolling a d20 and adding a bonus IS the d20 system where I add all the feats, skill, options.

Actually, in many ways that's a side issue. The main problem is you don't seem to grasp what a rules heavy system really looks like. Maybe you've never seen one, or maybe you have blotted the horror from your memory... no bad move. Even if we add every feat from every splatbook all together, it still looks like Topsy and Tim Climb The Hill next to Rolemaster or Harn

 

[rabindranath72]

Even if we add every feat from every splatbook all together, it still looks like Topsy and Tim Climb The Hill next to Rolemaster or Harn

Are you kidding? Choosing which feats apply in which situations, what situation warrants AoO, how to move on the map to avoid AoO etc. is not complex? Ok, let's not use the word complex, since it seems everyone has his concept. But TIME is a good variable, here. And doing all of the above takes TIME.

 

[warzen]

Even if we add every feat from every splatbook all together, it still looks like Topsy and Tim Climb The Hill next to Rolemaster or Harn

Taking Rolemaster as an example of a complex system is clear sign that you don't know what a complex system is.
d20 is rather complex, RM is cumbersome.

You want an heavy system rule ? Take Timecontrol (or Timelord, I can't recall the exact name of this horrible game where you play time traveller).

W.

 

[rabindranath72]

I might add that time to solve actions is exactly the reason why my players decided they did not want to play Conan with d20 anymore. That, coupled with the extremely tactical nature of the combat system (maneuvers, DR etc.)
Oh, and grapple...the rules make you want to not attempt it at all.

 

[flatscan]

I might add that time to solve actions is exactly the reason why my players decided they did not want to play Conan with d20 anymore. That, coupled with the extremely tactical nature of the combat system (maneuvers, DR etc.)
Oh, and grapple...the rules make you want to not attempt it at all.

Dude, the players have only as much time as the GM allows them. If you know your character's strengths and weaknesses you can make decisions very quickly. Don't treat this like a turned-based strategy game, but by a life or death situation where all you have is 6 seconds to decide the best course of action. Set your players to the same restrictions as their characters and they'll make a decision. Will it always be the best tactical decision? Of course not. But if we're playing a game based on REH's Hyborian Age, your characters have to make decisions based on guts and experience. As of now, AP and DR are second nature for my players. Attacks of Opportunity are as well. Speaking of Chess earlier upthread, applying a chess rule such as 'as soon as you let go of the mini that's where your character ends up' will add to the drama.

 

[Sutek]

Even if we add every feat from every splatbook all together, it still looks like Topsy and Tim Climb The Hill next to Rolemaster or Harn

Are you kidding? Choosing which feats apply in which situations, what situation warrants AoO, how to move on the map to avoid AoO etc. is not complex? Ok, let's not use the word complex, since it seems everyone has his concept. But TIME is a good variable, here. And doing all of the above takes TIME.

Oh good grief.

If AoAs are slowing yout game down...don't use them. Problem solved.

Buncha whiney little girls. (lol)

D20 isn't complex. It's just got a lot of pieces. People who sit around for hours optimizing (be it avoiding AoAs, allocating skill ranks, choosing feats, trying to find rules loo holes to exploit, etc.) are just making this system harder than it is. Further, it makes the game harder than it is, a point, I might add, voiced not too many PAGES AGO by the dude who started this very thread.

I think some of you D20 haters just have problems with "lot of options" and spend far too much energy trying to play with of all the pieces of the puzzle instead of concerning yourselves with the picture.

off topic

I managed to get the link for DD4 multiclassing:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drtoc/365

Download the whole issue as the article is not available.

Yes it's free and it's on page 46.

W.

Another problem with the crap DD4 version that Wizards tryied to trick everyone into buying into. I see you bit, warzen, but many of us recognize DD4 for waht is is: cheap pandering to the WOW kids, and, frankly, a poor legacy to a great hobby.

Word for everyone wondering: (A) You can't download unless you sign up and register something like three times. I know. I went through it. It sucks. So, you will havea rough time downloading the issue of Dragon that warzen has linked to (even the pilaging of that magazine sucks). (B) there is no multi-classing in DD4. Z-E-R-O. You simply get to glom on class abilities and access special feats, but there's no true blending of classes. The reason why Wizards is showing you character builds from 1-30 is because true fans of the game and the fun of combining two character classes into a fun combo hate the hell out of what DD4 has done to the concept. You no longer have a Fighter-Mage, as the tease for the article claims, but instead have a Fighter with a few Wizardy bits stuck on him.

Lame.

 

[Oly]

I think some of you D20 haters just have problems with "lot of options" and spend far too much energy trying to play with of all the pieces of the puzzle instead of concerning yourselves with the picture.

I'm not a D20 hater, as I've said repeatedly I like the system and have GMed long Star Wars and Conan campaigns using it.

However when compared to all the other systems that I run it is more complicated, I don't see that as a bad thing just a statement of fact.

Yes we could leave a lot of the options out, cut out AoOs, remove the attack manoeuvres, remove feats that affect combat and cut out the special attacks like trip.

That would certainly speed up the system no end. However at that point we're no longer playing D20 and end up with something far more akin to Pendragon or some other far simpler game.

You also end up nobbling certain class features and skills that depend on some of those rules to give any value. The complexities of the game are woven through from top to bottom and are not easy to unpick.

The reason that I chose D20 was that I wanted those options, details and complexity.

If I wanted really simple "move and attack" type combat then I would have picked some other system where I wouldn't need to tell my players "oh don't pick that feat, it's of no use because option X has been removed. No don't pick that skill either, it's real use is against option Y which we're not using so it might not be the best purchase."

The rules and options are just some extra add ons bolted on to a light system as some games will do, rather they're integrated from top to bottom as a whole and cohesive part of the system by some good design work.

I recommend D20 to people because it's tactical and full of options, though I will point out that that comes at a cost of time, both in and out of game, and speed.

I won't recommend D20 to someone who's looking for a light game, I'll point them towards Stormbringer, Pendragon or something.

Saying that "Conan D20 can be a great light game if you remove half of the rules from it" just isn't the way to go.

Saying "Conan D20 is a detailed game that takes some work but doesn't descend into table lookups and calculator based combat" is more accurate.

Boasting "Conan D20 is a great game that gives you loads of combat options and tactics to use and yet it still flows along at a good pace" seems to me to be the way to go.

 

[rabindranath72]

Yes we could leave a lot of the options out, cut out AoOs, remove the attack manoeuvres, remove feats that affect combat and cut out the special attacks like trip.

That would certainly speed up the system no end. However at that point we're no longer playing D20 and end up with something far more akin to Pendragon or some other far simpler game.

Oh, well, that's it. If one is not going to play btb with 90% of the book, it is better going to another system at all. Remove all those things, and you get Classic D&D or C&C.

 

[rabindranath72]

Slightly OT, do you guys see DragonWarriors as a good system to play Conan?

 

[kintire]

Are you kidding? Choosing which feats apply in which situations, what situation warrants AoO, how to move on the map to avoid AoO etc. is not complex? Ok, let's not use the word complex, since it seems everyone has his concept. But TIME is a good variable, here. And doing all of the above takes TIME.

A first level character has at most three feats. How long does it take to figure which one to use? As for AoOs, I've never understood the problems people have with them. If your with someone's reach and doing something other than fight them you get an AoO. How hard is that?

Taking Rolemaster as an example of a complex system is clear sign that you don't know what a complex system is.
d20 is rather complex, RM is cumbersome.

Oh please. You can play semantics all you want, but take a quick glance at the combat round examples above and tell me RM is less complex for a beginner.

Saying "Conan D20 is a detailed game that takes some work but doesn't descend into table lookups and calculator based combat" is more accurate.

More detailed than the other games you play, perhaps, but you ain't seen nothing if you think d20 is detailed...

 

[rabindranath72]

A first level character has at most three feats. How long does it take to figure which one to use? As for AoOs, I've never understood the problems people have with them. If your with someone's reach and doing something other than fight them you get an AoO. How hard is that?

It's not the "three feats", but the number of possible choices which may result to be worthless in the development of the character, and the effects of all those feats.

Regarding AoOs...I guess I can safely point you to the other thread

 

[kintire]

It's not the "three feats", but the number of possible choices which may result to be worthless in the development of the character, and the effects of all those feats.

I've never had that trouble. I've always picked feats based on what I need now, and I've never felt my characters are especially weak!

 

[Clovenhoof]

Yeah, I have to say that feat selection is a trap for newbie players. They tend to go by what sounds cool and end up with some real crappy choices. For instance, I think so far _every_ new player I assisted with making their character totally jumped at Combat Reflexes - "yeah that sounds cool, I want that". I did the same thing when creating my very first 3.0 character back in 2000 (it was a Ranger). If you don't have someone to point out to you that Combat Reflexes really only make sense with Reach Weapons, your character is already mis-skilled. (*)

*) mis-skill: this is my attempt at translating the weird "denglish" (German-English) verb "verskillen", which means making bad choices in your character development, in short, messing it up. Is there an actual English jargon word for this concept?

 

[Sutek]

It's not the "three feats", but the number of possible choices which may result to be worthless in the development of the character, and the effects of all those feats.

That's it right there. The theory that a character is "worthless" if you don't pick all the best feats or whatever.

The "worth" is that this is a game and it should be fun. If you find you don't have a feat that's working out, ask the GM if you can change it. No harm done. This stuff isn't written in stone, people.

Plus, it's all part of learning the game and having fun exploring what you can do. I think your complaint here sounds more like "we don't have fun because we don't know the game inside and out right away and have to make wrong decisions and fail sometomes vecause of that."

To which I say: So waht? Try a differnet comno next character. The favt that there are lots of choice and you made some that didn't work out the way you wanted in the long run...well, it definitely doesn't mean the system is flawed.

 

[KemperBoyd]

Yeah, I have to say that feat selection is a trap for newbie players. They tend to go by what sounds cool and end up with some real crappy choices.

You can always use the method used in 4th Ed. D&D, namely allowing people to swap out feats whenever they gain a level.

I also give out some of the crappy feats as story awards for players.

 

[Clovenhoof]

You can always use the method used in 4th Ed. D&D, namely allowing people to swap out feats whenever they gain a level.

Yeah, as a GM I've never been fussy about that, especially with new players. I didn't formulate that into an official rule, but basically I say we can always talk about things if you want to retroactively change your character (i.e. swap out feats). I prefer to run long-term campaigns and don't want to make a player drop their character and bring in a new one because of a triviality like this. Again, I also try to assist them at char creation so this situation doesn't arise in the first place.

I also give out some of the crappy feats as story awards for players.

I think I remember discussing that before, but I forget what feats you consider crappy. For me, the crappy feats are stuff like "+2 to Skill X and Y checks" (like Alertness). If they are class skills, they are high enough anyway, and if they aren't, they'll still be too low to cut anything.

 

[rabindranath72]

It's not the "three feats", but the number of possible choices which may result to be worthless in the development of the character, and the effects of all those feats.

That's it right there. The theory that a character is "worthless" if you don't pick all the best feats or whatever.

The "worth" is that this is a game and it should be fun. If you find you don't have a feat that's working out, ask the GM if you can change it. No harm done. This stuff isn't written in stone, people.

Plus, it's all part of learning the game and having fun exploring what you can do. I think your complaint here sounds more like "we don't have fun because we don't know the game inside and out right away and have to make wrong decisions and fail sometomes vecause of that."

To which I say: So waht? Try a differnet comno next character. The favt that there are lots of choice and you made some that didn't work out the way you wanted in the long run...well, it definitely doesn't mean the system is flawed.

First of all, I am not usually playing, but GMing, and that is a problem I have faced many times, when a player starts. He usually has an idea of what his character is and can be, and it is always nice to make informed choices when playing. The same happens when one chooses to play, e.g., a Soldier instead of a Scholar. Imagine if you did not know what distinguishes a scholar from a soldier? It would be hard to choose. When you choose a class, you choose based on what it can do at all levels, I suppose, not just at 1st (unless you know you are only playing a one shot).

The same happens with feats, but things are much more complex: 120+ feats (only in the core book) are WAY too many to make any informed decision at the game table in a reasonable time (i.e.: at character creation, without expending tens of minutes to try to fit them all into a "concept"). And also as a GM, I have trouble figuring out what to suggest.
Sure, not all feats are open or desirable to everyone, and then there are feat trees, but even then, the choice can be daunting.

That's why for my d20 Conan online game I have drastically reduced the feat choices. All the 3.5 feats are gone (those stupid feats which add bonuses to pairs of skills), and also all the "Improved over Improved over Improved" kinds. I essentially went with the feat list in d20 Call of Cthulhu, and it works reasonably well both for me and my players.

D&D 3.0 had a nice feat list, each feat addressed more or less one "limitation" imposed by the rules on the character, or was designed to give an advantage bonus to a single rule. That's why there was Skill Focus, and it covered all skills. Alertness covered the skills which were used for Surprise, so it was really a bonus to surprise checks. And so on.

Then, some genius thought that 3.0 needed "improvement"...and we ended up with endless lists of crappy feats which are only "noise" or create exceptions to exceptions or are contradictory etc. What a mess :evil: