Eleas wrote:Yes, since the GM advice chapter is symptomatic of how the system is intended to be used. I wouldn't have cared if the GM advice chapter was alone in this regard, but it is not. This is how the rules are presented, designed, and intended to be used.
I really don't see any evidence that d20 is designed to not be houseruled any more than any other game. Later in the post you post some core changes you'd have difficulty making, but that really isn't the same thing as the minor changes to aid playability that one might make to any system.
You seem to boil down my criticism toward d&d into "its ruleset is bad", and assert that since GURPS has loopholes, it must also be bad. However, this simplistic way of looking at it is just that: simplistic. While I do not like GURPS, I did not criticise games that have loopholes. I criticised the exact opposite: games that try to rabidly advance "balance" as some sort of holy grail, and that by their very design encourage gamers to optimize their characters into the best combat machines they can.
I don't think that trying to balance rules against each other is the same as"asking for" munchkinizing, any more than carrying a gun is asking to be robbed. Furthermore, most games with any kind of task resolution element and multiple ways to be good at task resolution (so I guess that'd be all of them) strive for game balance; a game in which one option is far superior to all others would rightly be looked down upon. Balance is especially important to D20 because, like Exalted, it strives to make character advancement an entertaining strategic mini-game. It's easy to make a capable character; if you want to optimize your character, it's like a puzzle. This is true for most point-based systems as well, but character advancement is less explicitly a minigame.
I first criticized D&D for its ruleset's rigidity, its poor rules and the notion that rigid rules somehow prevent powergaming.
Well, I'm not arguing that, so no matter.
I also make a clear distinction between what the system promotes and what the system allows. A system that allows people to act like morons is only a problem when people are, in fact, morons. A system that discourages you from doing things you should be able to do is just stupid.
It seems like you're contradicting yourself here. Is a system that allows moronism but discourages it good or bad?
As far as power level is concerned, as long as the GM and players are all on the same page, what's the problem? Anything else is people acting like morons.
And in fact, the obvious response of the usual d20 player seems to be rather along the lines of "it's in the rules; here, look, page 122."
Hooray for generalizations!
snip class definiiton
Now, sit down.
You assume a dictionary definition will be useful in discussing the use of the term in gaming... why?
This would actually be a relevant point if we were talking about D&D as opposed to d20.
If you want to get technical, d20 is just the SRD. Either way you cut it, it's not star wars.
Wait a minute, I'm confused here. Are we judging the system? If we are, shouldn't we, like, actually judge what it says? You know, kinda like what its rules dictate and do? Of course not. We should judge the game to be excellent because the GM should be able to patch the game continuoustly.
It's another prepackaging of "d20 rules becuase you cn changeit!"
Strawman. Using common sense in obvious situations not explicitly described in the rules is not rewriting the system to make it playable.
I give a fuck when the quote is symptomatic of the whole philosophy behind the engine of the game.
Yes, d20 markets to newbie gamers, and also to gamists, who you seem to regard as lepers. The discussion on how to use the system is geared towards them because they're the ones most likely to abuse it. That doesn't mean that d20 is only for these people.
Feats and combat maneuvers are (for the most part) impossible to perform if you don't possess them; i.e., a beginner can't use them at all, can't even attempt them. They furthermore come in completely arbitrary "use x times a day" helpings. Finally, and most damning, they do not actually simulate what I was asking for. If you want to feint every time you cut, that's impossible, for example. If you want to lock blades with a person, you can't. Et cetera.
Well, feats yes. Combat manouvers no. To use your two examples, yes, any character can feint before every attack, using the bluff skill. I'm not sure exactly what the intent behind "locking blades" is, but any character can a) try and hit someone else's weapon, b) try and knock a weapon out of someone else's hand, or c) simply fight defensively to bring things to a standstill.
But on the other hand, that was not what I was addressing to begin with, either. What I said was that in d20, things happen to you, while in other games you do things. There are a lot of actions in d20 that are active, but there are an equal number of actions around that you're not really asked about, despite the fact that your character performs them.
I think I'm still misunderstanding this point. Can you give some more examples (that go beyond the semantics of dodge roll vs. reflex save), preferably contrasted with an "active game." It would also be nice if the contrasted game was not Eon, with which I'm unfamiliar.
You fail to consider that experience points do not imply levels or advancement of any skill but the one you're training. In light of that, your whole point becomes moot, as the only systems that don't let you train without yielding absurd results are systems identical to d20.
Actually, I'm using "experience points" to refer to any point quantity which you get during/after play and spend to improve the character. In the vast majority, you spend a few points to improve one thing, rather than the extremely abstract levelling of d20.
Anyway, Eon, Västmark, FUDGE, Khelataar, Skymningshem, Neotech and Tensided, IIRC all work fine without experience points at all. Break out of your myopia. You do not need it.
I realize you seem to assume that I play nothing but d20, but that's not actually the case. Of the names above, I'm only familiar with FUDGE. A couple of them sound like they're unavailable in the States, so you'll have to excuse my ignorance. I know several 10-sided die based systems, but I'm not sure what Tensided is. Care to enlighten me?
I see. So you have to contrieve a series of adventure to simulate what is in effect no different from weight training? Unworkable also.
Why do you assume that the abstract term "encounter" refers to an adventure? It simply means something difficult. A week of strenuous weight training can certainly qualify, just as picking a difficult lock can, or bringing in the harvest. How do you think commoners gain levels?
...thereby ignoring the system altogether, and also making it more difficult for your character to become better in his chosen field further on (something that is just ludicrous, as you must know). Yet again, unworkable.
I don't see how it's shocking to allow character improvement during two years of downtime. Just because there isn't a little table for years -> xp doesn't make it forbidden. The game acknowledges that characters can grow without a player at the helm when it lets you start characters at higher than level one.
As for the apparent ludicrousness of mounting xp costs...
After a while of lifting one particular weight, it will cease to help you. In order to keep building up strength, you need to go on to something heavier. Similarly, practicing fencing against the same person over and over again ceases to make you better once you significantly exceed them in skill. Is it so surprising that once kobolds are no longer a challenge, you no longer improve your skills by fighting against them? Each level is gained by (iirc) 13 encounters of the appropriate CR; varying CRs mean varying numbers. To improve your skills, you have to actually challenge them. Why exactly is this so bizzare?
I did not miss his point. Rather, it was you who missed the entire point of the discussion. I said that there were few methods of interacting. The character is allowed a rigid set of actions with little to no variations (feats and such are specific to certain people, and so should not be included, as the actions I speak of could be performed by anyone). His reply seemed to be roughly on the level of "well, you just use the rules as a framework and interpret it however you want. Oh, and the rules are good since you should be able to see past them".
Let's look at something like the stunt system in Feng Shui (I haven't played much of this game, so forgive me if I'm getting something wrong). The game actually encourages you to do crazy things. You get penalties for being boring, and bonuses for being exciting in combat. Yet "I flip over the heads of the goons, land behind them and shoot them in the back" is a move and an attack. Does this satisfy you, or do you object to the lack of specific rules for the flip, etc?
It seems a common conception that, by dint of repetition, d20 proponents can somehow make d20 into a Plug and Play system by calling it so. It isn't. The system is interlocked. Everything is (and the d20 people love to point this out) balanced. If I remove something, this will break the system.
The core rules certainly claim to be balanced. However, given that anyone can produce supplemental materials, anyone can make quasi-compatible new games based on the skeleton (Mutants and Masterminds, anyone?), and anyone can produce OGL games like Conan, I'd be amazed if anyone claimed that all d20 material was carefully balanced, or even intended to fit into a campaign world that made RIFTS look cohesive. D20 is a plug and play system because anyone can put out new content or (ding!) variant rulesets, and many effective ones have been made. Core d20, as per the SRD, is balanced against itself, and WoTC generally tries to balance its supplemental materials. Still, they're not all of d20.
If I want to add another class? Whoo boy. I have to write up fucking tables.
Not an argument.
If I wanted to make the attack bonus the skill it should have been from the beginning, it will throw things completely out of balance.
Mutants and Masterminds changed HP out for a damage system more in line with its superhero source material.. OGL Conan made AC into parrying and dodging. BESM d20 goes at least as far (though I found that game hella confusing, to tell the truth). Check out the Grim and Gritty rules on EN World's free download section, and see a much changed and decidedly non-heroic d20 that works quite nicely. I'm sorry you find implementing your desired changes difficult, but this is an argument from incredulity: just because you have trouble doing it doesn't mean it can't be done.
) Challenges to the characters are scaled up accordingly. I would have used one of the two standard methods (either 4d6 or the elite array), except that I don't bother making characters that I won't use. These boys, now that they exist (and have to some extent had their backgrounds fleshed out; my mind just works this stuff out on it's own while I'm making the character) they're going to see action at some point and, as I said, I run high powered campaigns.
