What if Conan leaves d20 for anotehr system?

[KemperBoyd]

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.

Yeah those and basically all feats that can only be used in overly specific circumstances, i just consider them to be a bit of character fluff even if they're rarely important.

 

[Krushnak]

3.0 had a bloody terrible list of feats in the core book. each class would pretty much only want like 3 of them and the rest would just be pretty useless for them. This was especially true for fighters who's class ability was to get feats, and by like lvl 6 you would have them all.

Besides Hackmaster with its involved character creation i've always found cyberpunk and shadowrun to be the longest to create a character for. all thos choices of cybernetics, skills, guns, armour and possibly magical abilties really gives you something to ponder over. do i think its a bad thing? hell no, variety is the spice of life without it the game would get very dull and boring damn fast.

I GM Conan for my group and ive always helped new characters create their characters, pointing them in the direction of good feats/skills for their character idea. When your new to any rpg character creation always takes long, so much to take in that its always best to play a few trial games before make your proper characters.

 

[rabindranath72]

3.0 had a bloody terrible list of feats in the core book. [...] This was especially true for fighters who's class ability was to get feats, and by like lvl 6 you would have them all.

Uh how? By 6th level, a fighter could have 8 feats (if human) vs. an allowable list of 17 (not counting the feats which depend on others)
By 20th level, the fighter could have 17 or 18 feats, vs. a total grand of fighter specific feats of 37.
I found the 3.0 list of feats to be flexible and imaginative enough to create varied characters without being overwhelming in terms of choices.
Oh well, YMMV, as always.

 

[kintire]

Uh how? By 6th level, a fighter could have 8 feats (if human) vs. an allowable list of 17 (not counting the feats which depend on others)

But there are a subset of feats that are actually worth getting, depending on what sort of fighter you are. A Dex 10 Full Plate wearer is unlikely to be interested in Point Blank Shot, for example. An archery specialist will not be bothering with Great Cleave. What's more, you get sharply diminsihing returns because you have a limited ability to use multiple feats. Improved Disarm and Improved Sunder, for example, do essentially the same thing: deprive an armed opponent of their weapon, and you can't do both at the same time. Its unlikely anyone will bother to get both. The above mentioned Dex 10 fighter won't get much mileage from Combat Reflexes... and so on. Given this, and the fact that any fighter can have around half the availiable feats at any given moment its easy to run out.

 

[Clovenhoof]

I have made the observation that Fighters/Soldiers run out of reasonable Feat choices around level 10, or maybe 12.

 

[rabindranath72]

The Dex 10 fighter is not bound to stay as such for ever. If he increases his Dex, many other options open. I guess the point is that there are so many possible combinations that at 6th level it is hardly the case (if not impossible) that you do not have options anymore. At least in D&D 3.0 it is quite easy to make informed choices, since there are fewer feats.

 

[kintire]

The Dex 10 fighter is not bound to stay as such for ever. If he increases his Dex, many other options open.

The vast majority of fighters... in fact of all classes... will establish a strength, and play to it. Someone who hasn't bothered with Dex early will probably not bother with it later.

I'm not bothered by mere quantity of feats. There aren't THAT many in 3.5 or Conan, and if a feat looks good, it usually is good. In 3.0 my observation is the same as Clovenhoof's, and I've observed sharply diminsihing returns from 6.

 

[Hervé]

There aren't THAT many in 3.5 or Conan

:shock: What would you call MANY, then?

There are more than 120 Feats in the Conan rulebook, and an average of 10-20 new Feats per supplement and the Conan line is some 30 books strong. And you don't call that many?
Boy, you're scaring me!

 

[kintire]

There are more than 120 Feats in the Conan rulebook, and an average of 10-20 new Feats per supplement and the Conan line is some 30 books strong. And you don't call that many?

I wasn't including the supplements: I wouldn't bother a new player with those. And no, I don't call that many: because, of course, any given character conception will be interested in a tiny proportion of them.

 

[Valsgarde]

Sure, as a player you only need to know the feats that work with your concept, but as a GM you will have know all of them, including the ones in the supplements, unless you want to look up rules for most of the combat.

It's just to much for me. The rules take over the focus from telling a good story. I have left D20 all togehter now, which is sad since the "no-rules" material is great.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Screw the supplement feats. For ym group I have decreed that by default, no feats from supplemental books are allowed. Most of those I know miss the balance anyway, either too powerful or (more often) way too weak to be worthwhile. Or creating strange (and totally broken) synergies using addon rules from different books together. Safest bet is not to go there.

 

[Hervé]

If even D20 players don't use Feats from supplements, why do editors keep on putting this crap, wasting good paper?

 

[B_Steele]

If even D20 players don't use Feats from supplements, why do editors keep on putting this crap, wasting good paper?

To be honest, it's because for every player that does not like d20 or the feats/prestige class system features of it, there are ten that do. It is why most books are a good mix of fluffy goodness and crunchy rules stuff; to try to make both sides of that debate find something of worth in every sourcebook. Sure, some are going to be more rules or fluff-heavy than others, but it is a pattern that the industry shows us is successful.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled d20 vs. Other Systems debate.

Cheers all,
Bry

 

[flatscan]

If even D20 players don't use Feats from supplements, why do editors keep on putting this crap, wasting good paper?

I allow some feats from other books and disallow feats as well. I look at feats from supplements like 2nd edition AD&D. They are OPTIONS to supplement the rules. They are treated like a buffet. Pick the ones that are right for your game and ignore the rest. But having more options is never a bad thing.

 

[Ichabod]

The reason, assumedly, for so many feats in supplements (and classes) is to generate variety, something largely lacking in core books.

Not that they do a particularly good job of it. In our D&D 3.5 campaign, I could never find anything, even in the Book of Feats, that interested me enough. I'd much rather design my own, but GMs don't seem to like that much even when the feats I design are clearly inferior to stuff out of the main books. I chalk that up to the tyranny of rules.

In Conan, I always look at the feats in supplements. Too many are awful. Lot are too specific to a certain character (Pict this, Asshuri that kind of stuff). Some are a bad idea. Some are badly worded. Some are pretty much necessary for providing some much needed variety, assuming only published feats are allowed.

 

[kintire]

I allow some feats from other books and disallow feats as well. I look at feats from supplements like 2nd edition AD&D. They are OPTIONS to supplement the rules. They are treated like a buffet. Pick the ones that are right for your game and ignore the rest. But having more options is never a bad thing.

Exactly. Except that I would say "never a bad thing once you are comfortable with the rules." Beginners should stick to the main rules.

Sure, as a player you only need to know the feats that work with your concept, but as a GM you will have know all of them, including the ones in the supplements, unless you want to look up rules for most of the combat.

Why? If the PCs don't have the feat, and the NPCs don't have the feat, who cares what it does?

 

[KemperBoyd]

I never bother giving NPC's any feats

 

[flatscan]

I never bother giving NPC's any feats

Oh man, then you're missing out. The PCs in my game will treat an NPC with wary respect in combat after he's delivered an attack with Steely Gaze followed by a Power Attack. I don't mind giving NPCs Feats or Combat Manuevers, but I set up their combat tactics before game with a list of possible attack options. This prep means I can give my NPCs distinction in combat while remaining fluid to PC tactics. Many a memorable combat has resulted.

 

[KemperBoyd]

Oh man, then you're missing out. The PCs in my game will treat an NPC with wary respect in combat after he's delivered an attack with Steely Gaze followed by a Power Attack. I don't mind giving NPCs Feats or Combat Manuevers, but I set up their combat tactics before game with a list of possible attack options. This prep means I can give my NPCs distinction in combat while remaining fluid to PC tactics. Many a memorable combat has resulted.

I do give them special abilities, but I never bother to look up if there's actually a feat for what they do. I'm a lazy GM.

 

[Azgulor]

At 16 pages in, the whining, teeth gnashing, and hair pulling has me wondering how many people played Conan OGL for a reasonable period of time. For those keeping score at home, IMO that would be 6+ sessions, not 2 sessions over 6 months... So, in no particular order, here are some additional broad-stroke replies to latest pages of posts.

<Begin Azgulor's rant>
I know it's the Internet and all, but WTF? 90% of what I'm reading is coming across as either poor GMing, insufficient understanding of the rules, or your average d20-hate, plus the surprisingly frequent "the fluff is good, but the crunch sucks so would anybody use that crap" (paraphrased - no offense intended).

The first time I ran Conan? Yep, I had to look up the rules a lot to ensure I was running things correctly.

When learning an RPG, I've always found it easier to take the cow in choice cuts rather than trying to eat the whole cow (to use an example) in the first session. Of course, I've been playing various RPGs for 20+ years, so my experiences may be a statistical anomaly.

A few months & several sessions in, I might have to look up a rule 3 or 4 times over the course of a session. You see, the more you play, the more familiar you get with the rules... If you don't like reading the rules or using the rules because you have a crunch-allergy, may I suggest the rules-light RPG section...

Those rules supplements, the ones with feats, yes those ones... you don't HAVE to use all of them. You didn't know you can pick and choose? Well you can if you're the GM. No, you're not cheating your players. See it's YOUR game. Oh, and they're called SUPPLEMENTS for a reason. See, they're SUPPLEMENTAL. If you're not sure what that means, may I direct you to the Dictionary section.


Ah, so any game based off the D20 framework is akin to a how-to manual written by the AntiChrist? I see. We're gamers and this is the Internet, so hyperbole is par for the course (so's sarcasm for those playing along at home). May I ask you a question, however?

When you rail against the OGL "crap", if you honestly think Mongoose is putting out rules-crunch crap what leads you to believe it will be rules-crunch "gold" under a different system? I mean, they're professionals, right? Seeking to make a profit doing something they love/enjoy, right? And, for the sake of argument only, let's say that they take pride in their products and strive to satisfy the most customers possible. Still with me? Ok, if those statements are true, what epiphany will overtake the staff that will enable them to stop writing "crap" and start writing "gold" if they switch to another system?

What's that? Yes, yes, of course it's understood that they would only switch to your RPG system of choice. That goes without saying...

But back to my crap vs. gold question... why do you have that cornered rat look? Let me ask it another way - is the crunch crap b/c Mongoose wrote it or because it's an OGL game?

If the former is true, logic would dictate that crap will not spontaneously become gold if the developer stays the same. If the latter is true, you credibility for leveling objective criticisms is ZERO.
<End Azgulor's rant>

No gamers were hurt in the making of this message. BUT BY CROM I'D LIKE TO USE "TO THE HILT" TO BURY MY BROADSWORD IN THEIR PET PC AFTER POWER-ATTACKING THEIR CANDY A$$ES! (I would have gone Decapitating Slash, but I figure since they're unarmed, they're probably unarmored.) AND YES, MY BAB IS THAT HIGH, YOU STYGIAN DOGS!!! OH AND BY THE WAY, WHINING PROVOKES AN ATTACK OF OPPORTUNITY IN MY GAME!!

You may now return to your regularly scheduled bashing of the Conan RPG.

(Retrieves sword from corpse, takes corpses coin, and strides off in search of ale and women.)