What if Conan leaves d20 for anotehr system?

What will you do if Conan leaves d20 for another system?

  • I will buy the new Conan books, whatever the system.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I will never buy the Conan books in the new system.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Sutek said:
D20 = 20oz glass

4e = shot glass

NICE!

I will also bring up the point that although the 4e rules system tries to stop power-gamers whose goal is to find a "game-breaker character mechanic combo" from being able to do that; the objective is fatally flawed...

The group I joined showed me just how broken they could make 3.5 look. Then 4e came out and they all signed relief b/c it would seemingly put an end to the groups "arms race" to find the most game-breaker combo. Then the "Adventurers Vault" 4e supplemental book came out. Now the players in the group are starting to find ways to break 4e.

It all goes back to the players.
 
It all goes back to the players.

Yes, players shouldn't be trying to break the system or gain unfair advantage through exploiting poorly designed and exploitable rules (like the more dubious feat combinations). Sensible cooperation between GM and players can avoid most of this. It's when players regard the GM as more of an opponent than an arbiter that this kind of thing often creeps in.
 
Demetrio said:
It's when players regard the GM as more of an opponent than an arbiter that this kind of thing often creeps in.

I couldn't agree more !! And that's why I wondering how stuff like West Marches could go anywhere if not limited to low level (ie about 6-7).

W.

PS: for those unaware of what "West Marches" is, have a look here:
http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/
 
What we've done in Conan is predesign our characters so we have sheets for our characters from levels 6 to 12 (there's only three of us so we need reasonably powerful characters but over level 12 seems a bit too powerful). Whoever is GMing a given adventure decides appropriate level and we play with the characters at that level.

This suits an episodic style and quite suits the Conan stories - being haphazard in their order. It also means we're not fussing about optimising our characters for future levels because we've already done that. It suits our episodic campaign and the fact that only two of the three character will play in any given adventure (because the third man is gming). On the rare occasions my partner plays, she can use a character of the appropriate level.

The only downside is 'what if a character dies?' which hasn't happened yet but to my mind is easily explained away. Should Artemo the Dueller die in a level 8 adventure, we'll just have to assume that the previous adventures he featured in at higher level are part of his myth, not the reality. Again, I quite like that idea as tales attach to heroes sometimes...
 
Spectator said:
It made "railroading the PCs" a lot easier. After all there were no such things as SPOT checks, search checks, or any other esky things that prevented my PC from going forward in the adventure.

One should never require a Spot check or Search check for things they need to see or discover in order for the plot to move forward. Those should just be to find short cuts, avoid ambushes/traps, get around obstacles more easily, or for extra finds.
 
Demetrio said:
Yes, players shouldn't be trying to break the system or gain unfair advantage through exploiting poorly designed and exploitable rules (like the more dubious feat combinations). Sensible cooperation between GM and players can avoid most of this. It's when players regard the GM as more of an opponent than an arbiter that this kind of thing often creeps in.

Agreed!! And this is true whatever the system! There ll be flaw in every system. Good player will help the GM find them not argue to exploit them.

I like the episodic campain idea not bad at all!
 
VincentDarlage said:
Spectator said:
It made "railroading the PCs" a lot easier. After all there were no such things as SPOT checks, search checks, or any other esky things that prevented my PC from going forward in the adventure.

One should never require a Spot check or Search check for things they need to see or discover in order for the plot to move forward. Those should just be to find short cuts, avoid ambushes/traps, get around obstacles more easily, or for extra finds.

Totally. GMs who are doing that are doing it wrong. DC 32 Spot check should need to be met to get 100% of the information, the full story, all the facts. If the charter rolls a 30, he gets enough to make decisions nased on what's really likely to be going on, and if he rolls a 5 then he things the shadow moving towards him is a bear when it's really his friend in a furry cape.

Skills are in there to help judge the game wihtout bias, and so they shouldnt' be used as imperical, hard, binary means of determining outcomes.
 
I've been toying too with Demetrio's idea of generating the PCs at various stages of their career to run a non linear campaign in the mood of the original novels. Let us know how it goes, D. :D

Sutek wrote:
Skills are in there to help judge the game wihtout bias, and so they shouldnt' be used as imperical, hard, binary means of determining outcomes.

I guess the same can be said about EVERY rule in the game, although it can be easier in some games than in others. The D20 structure is quite rigid and intricate, so it's not always easy to bypass the rules without repercussions on the whole system.
 
It works pretty well so far. We've played over a dozen adventures at various levels and encountered no problems with the approach (which wouldn't work so easily with a non level based system like BRP of course because progression is not so easily measured in discrete chunks - not to say it wouldn't work of course just that having levels does help).
 
Demetrio said:
It works pretty well so far. We've played over a dozen adventures at various levels and encountered no problems with the approach (which wouldn't work so easily with a non level based system like BRP of course because progression is not so easily measured in discrete chunks - not to say it wouldn't work of course just that having levels does help).

In BRP, you would just add around 30% to your skills "per level".

Not that hard... :lol:

W.
 
Well would you? One of the main drawbacks of a system without levels is that it's harder to gauge relative power, and I speak from more than a dozen years of playing Runequest. it's not impossible but adding a flat 30%, or even an approximate 30%, or any given % across the board doesn't really work. the point surely is that with a % system skills, including combat skills, improve irregularly. My Humakti Rune Lord was a whizz with a broadsword, and pretty lethal with almost any sword. He was relatively crap with most other weapons though. Because a % system uses very small incremetal increases in skills (including weapon skills) it seems to me to need more thought to come up with suitable 'levels' for different periods of a character's life. The cruder and broader levelling of d20, or even Rolemaster, makes that sort of thing easier.

It's obviously not impossible to do a 'varying level' episodic campaign with a level free system like BRP but it's going to need more thought.
 
Demetrio said:
It's obviously not impossible to do a 'varying level' episodic campaign with a level free system like BRP but it's going to need more thought.

I don't see why. The latest BRP book has info for different "level" of character at PC creation. Just apply this type of guidelines, without going up to superhero. ;)

W.
 
Hervé said:
I've been toying too with Demetrio's idea of generating the PCs at various stages of their career to run a non linear campaign in the mood of the original novels. Let us know how it goes, D. :D
This idea is fully explained in the Sorcerer & Sword sourcebook for the Sorcerer RPG, and it is actually encouraged to recreate the atmosphere of Howard's stories.
 
I think that no system prevents to create characters at various times of their lives and different levels of power. Using a level based system might take a lot of time spent on character creation, and requires a well planned campaign (Crap! I have a lvl 5 adventure and we didn't make the lvl 5 sheets!)... You never encounter these problems with systems that are less power leveling based...
 
I think that no system prevents to create characters at various times of their lives and different levels of power

Neither do I, I just think it's trickier with % systems to hit the right sort of point for a given 'level'. Because they don't have levels...

Using a level based system might take a lot of time spent on character creation, and requires a well planned campaign

It doesn't need a well planned campaign, that's the whole point we can run most adventures with little or no campaign planning. As to a lot of time spent on character generation - not really. As I say, we have sheets from level 6 to level 12. 7 sheets per character. And each additional sheet required less than 5 minutes work (mainly picking the next appropriate feat and adding the skill points). Fast and easy. Most of the time spend on character generation was taken up with backstory and personality - just like in any system.
 
and requires a well planned campaign (Crap! I have a lvl 5 adventure and we didn't make the lvl 5 sheets!)...

No, it requires a less well planned campaign because (obviously) You write the adventure to the level you want. And this is easy, for the reasons Demetrio gives.

systems that are less power leveling based...

You are obsessed with this idea that system dictates style of play, aren't you? ANY system can be power levelled. Any. At all. If you've never seen a player attack an enemy with a different weapon every round of a six round fight (to get an experience check in every weapon skill, to avoid the problem Demetrio's Humakti had) you have never seen true power levelling!
 
You never encounter these problems with systems that are less power leveling based...

What? You're saying that any % system adventure can be run for any given group of characters. I think not. For instance escorting the Giant's Cradle was a good deal of trouble for a group of Rune Lords/Priests/Lord-Priests and resulted in three character deaths. The same group would have waltzed through many other RQ adventures.
 
Ha! good ol' kintire is back, as mean as ever...

If you've never seen a player attack an enemy with a different weapon every round of a six round fight (to get an experience check in every weapon skill, to avoid the problem Demetrio's Humakti had) you have never seen true power levelling!

Fortunately, I never had that kind of player at a table, and it should it happen, that player wouldn't stay for long... Maybe the guy you're talking about had his mind formated from playing D&D too long...:twisted:

Anyway, when I run BRP games, I generally use broad weapon skills, like light weapons, one handed weapons or heavy weapons, rather than specific skills for each weapon.

You are obsessed with this idea that system dictates style of play, aren't you?
Not as much as you seem obsessed by my posts, anyway...
ANY system can be power levelled.
Of course. I didn't say otherwise. It's just that some games are far more 'power oriented' than others. Pretending D&D doesn't belong to that category would be so... well, so like you!

No, it requires a less well planned campaign because (obviously) You write the adventure to the level you want.
I don't agree. In leveless systems, you don't even have to care about that and scaling the opposition requires less work in light rules systems.
Of course scaling an adventure requires some familiarity with the system, but it can be said for any game.
 
Of course. I didn't say otherwise. It's just that some games are far more 'power oriented' than others. Pretending D&D doesn't belong to that category would be so... well, so like you!

You keep saying this over and over and over again, and you can never say why it should be. You don't like d20: and that is all there is to it.

I don't agree. In leveless systems, you don't even have to care about that and scaling the opposition requires less work in light rules systems.

You DO have to care about that. Scaling the opposition against the PCs is a basic concern for any game, and the fact that it is so easy in level based systems is one of the main arguments for that style.
 
Back
Top