Star Trek d20

[Silverstreak]

People in this thread who may take offense to what I'm about to say, please don't take it personally, I have no intent to insult anyone, but there a re a number of things in this thread are just too much.

Let's first start with the D20 system.

D20 is RPGing for dummies, they should have put a yellow and black cover on all the books and written that across them.

Forgotten Realms for Dummies

Dungeon Master's Guide for Dummies

etc....

Honestly if you can't grasp something in those books you do need help. There is nothing difficult in them.

Advanced D&D was twice the game. It required an actual brain to play.

Now don't get me wrong, I enjoy D20 D&D, but in all honesty, it makes skill checks far too difficult or easy based on simply how you roll. I've seent he difficulty for a check be 22 and someone with a skill of 4 get a 24 and the guy with a skill of 15 get a 16. No concept of skill is shown there.

Then there's the ridiculously low experience charts. Sheesh, after one night everyone's almost 4th or 5th level. The advancement in the game is insane. Before you know it, you've played 6 times and you have a party of 15th level whatever's running around. Severley overbalanced.

(And yes, I know how to calculate the experience correctly, so don't say it)

D20, while a fun game, just isn't right for Star Trek in my opinion. Levels, stupid skill levels, Hit Points, Armour Class, none of those make sense.


Now let me start with the White Wolf system:


The original World Of Darkness system is better than the new one for a number of reasons. The first being the dice pools. A dice pool gives that good range of successes or failures. Second, the new system makes the base difficulty 8. I'm sorry, but for a game based on a D10, that's just lame. It's far too high. The old one, with it's base of 6 was far better, it made more sense.

When you start giving people Target Numbers so high they begin to question why use a die that low to begin with.

Take Shadowrun for instance. I don't know how many of you ever played it, but after base difficulty and penalties are added, 9 times out of 10 your target number is between 7 and 9 on a d6. That's just stupid and in all three editions of the bloody game they haven't once redesigned the dice system.


So you see, while I don't think CODA or ICON are the best systems for Star Trek, they are the best we've had so far, and to be honest, Charcter creation is far better in ICON, but the rules for play are easier with CODA.

Just my opinion lads.

[REG]

I disagree wholeheartedly.

As for Advanced Dungeons & Dragon, there is nothing really advanced about it. Just have unnecessary complexities to it, like the THAC0 formula or the old combat matrices.

D&D is an entry-level game, which is good because it allows potential gamers get into the hobby. The easier you make for an average joe off the street to play the game, the better.

But we're not talking about D&D. We're talking about d20, the core engine that powers D&D game. Remove the medieval fantasy flavors of that game, and you have just the rules system, just as you would remove Vampire flavors from the Storyteller System.

Sorry, Silverstreak, but if you think we're wasting our time, then it's our time we're wasting by choice, not yours.

[Tobian]

Hmm.. if D&D is an entry level game, what do people play when they want something more? Since most of the books in my gaming store sporting D20 or OGL etc are D&D of one sort or another

Reg. To be fair Silverstreak was pointing at the mechanic of the system sans references to the game it's self.. I.e. his criticism of the unballancing nature of the D20 roll etc. That is a problem for the D20 genre as a whole...

I'm still waiting for my Reg version of D20

[REG]

Hmm.. if D&D is an entry level game, what do people play when they want something more? Since most of the books in my gaming store sporting D20 or OGL etc are D&D of one sort or another

Reg. To be fair Silverstreak was pointing at the mechanic of the system sans references to the game it's self.. I.e. his criticism of the unballancing nature of the D20 roll etc. That is a problem for the D20 genre as a whole...

As a whole? I doubt it. Most of the mechanics you are referring to are mostly D&D. Have you considered some of the mechanics in Unearthed Arcana? d20 Modern? Third-party d20 like Babylon 5? Spycraft?

Like the Fuzion System, you have "plugins." If you don't like Hit Points, why not use Vitality/Wound Point system?

If you keep pointing toward D&D as your main reference for criticizing d20 System, then I urge you to research more.

[Owen E Oulton]

If you keep pointing toward D&D as your main reference for criticizing d20 System, then I urge you to research more.

D&D is the defining baseline for D20 - if a product has the D20 logo on it, it requires the use of the D&D Players' Handbook. In essence, all D20 products are simply sourcebooks for D&D.

[REG]

D&D is the defining baseline for D20 - if a product has the D20 logo on it, it requires the use of the D&D Players' Handbook. In essence, all D20 products are simply sourcebooks for D&D.

Meh. D&D is just as good a book as GURPS 4th Edition. After all, Spycraft and Babylon 5 don't feel like a "D&D sourcebook."

[Tobian]

In which case, as you say, the premier product for D20 IS D&D and therefore will form people's opinions of the system as a whole. As you are well aware I play many types of D20: Stargate, D20 modern, Mutants and Masterminds, Starwars, Cthulu, Steampunk, OGL ancients etc..They all still cary many of D20's flaws as a whole, because they are STILL D20! I'm not that under researched, it's just my opinion hasn't changed despite it.

[Silverstreak]

I disagree wholeheartedly.

As for Advanced Dungeons & Dragon, there is nothing really advanced about it. Just have unnecessary complexities to it, like the THAC0 formula or the old combat matrices.

D&D is an entry-level game, which is good because it allows potential gamers get into the hobby. The easier you make for an average joe off the street to play the game, the better.

But we're not talking about D&D. We're talking about d20, the core engine that powers D&D game. Remove the medieval fantasy flavors of that game, and you have just the rules system, just as you would remove Vampire flavors from the Storyteller System.

Sorry, Silverstreak, but if you think we're wasting our time, then it's our time we're wasting by choice, not yours.

Ok, First of all, let's be realistic.

I've played several D20 games, the premise is basically the same for them all.

They all use the same skill system, they all use a level based system, they all use the D20 to make their rolls.

The point is you cannot properly reference someone's skills in a game with such an unbalanced skill system.

No where, ever should someone with a lower skill rating do something better than someone with a high one simply due to a die roll.

IT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN, plain and simple. That is a design flaw in the D20 system.



Let's look at ICON for a moment.

If I had a skill rating of energy weapon (phaser) 4(5) and I roll off against someone with a 1(2) in that skill. Because we are both rolling d6's (let's exclude the chance of the drama die coming up 6), I am going to succeed 90% of the time over his 10%.

If that was D20, the chances for him to do as well or better than I raise significantly.

I enjoy D20, it's fine as a game to be taken in a non-serious manner played by people who don't like to do math or can't playa complex game system.

But for those of us who enjoy a more substancial quality to our games that get closer to the sense of realism, then it just can't cut it.

I could see it now, STAR TREK D20

DM: Ok a bunch of Klingons barge into the part and pull out their disruptors. One of them aims at you what do you do?

Player 1: I pull out my phaser to shoot back

Player 2: Me too

Player 3: I wanna use my Vulcan nerve pinch on one of the Klingons

DM: Ok, everyone roll initiative.

P1: I got a 12

P2: I got a 20

P3: Oh, I only got a 4

DM: Well the Klingons got lucky with a 24, they go first, the first Klingon takes aim and shoots at you P1, what was your AC again?

P1: 18

DM: Ok, he got you, His disruptor was set on heavy disrupt and does .... 54 points of damage. How many Hit Points do you have left.

P1: Oh, I'm still ok, I have 50 left.

(Why, because he's a stinking level 12 PICARD!!!!!)

D20 Star Trek.

Whatever.

I just proved why it should never exist.

[Tobian]

Snigger

NB Reg: With regards to Storyteller system you can easilly remove the 'supernatural' from it, and indeed that is what the new product does in book 1.

To be fair to D20, some of the other systems, such as Stargate, and even Starwars can simply kill somone with a hit.. however you have to be very lucky in allot of cases.. instead of just dead, like most matter to energy weapon scenarios

[REG]

Ok, First of all, let's be realistic.

[snipped for brevity]

So, basically this thread is all for nothing? That you think I am wasting my time?

Then so be it. You have your own conclusion. Be okay with that. I however choose this endeavor even if I die trying.

IOW, there is nothing you can say or do to steer me away. Simple as that.

So let's agree to disagree, whether or not you think you have my best interest.

[Sea Tyger]

Ok, First of all, let's be realistic.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

These are RPGs, they aren't supposed to be realistic. Remember, the PCs are the stars; they're supposed to have the lucky breaks that allow them to live longer (hence the fact that HPs {or VPs, if you're using the alternative system} represent many things, including luck and combat experience...it's, by design, abstract). So, in Star Trek, the "12th level Picard" (as you called him) is supposed to get taken down by the Klingon mook? Funny, I don't ever recall that happening, unless it was dramatically appropriate.

[Silverstreak]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

These are RPGs, they aren't supposed to be realistic. Remember, the PCs are the stars; they're supposed to have the lucky breaks that allow them to live longer (hence the fact that HPs {or VPs, if you're using the alternative system} represent many things, including luck and combat experience...it's, by design, abstract). So, in Star Trek, the "12th level Picard" (as you called him) is supposed to get taken down by the Klingon mook? Funny, I don't ever recall that happening, unless it was dramatically appropriate.

And if the PC fails an important saving throw in D&D and he dies because he was disintegrated, you don't kill them?

That's what I get from your statement.


And when I said let's be realistic there smarty pants I was referring to the rules. You know there's a difference between being smart and a smart ass.

[Sea Tyger]

Yeah, but some people's "cunning" wit just brings the smart ass out in me.

Listen, any good GM will tell you that rules are simply a toolset -- a means to an end. Your ability to use the rules to their greatest effect is what determines a good campaign, not the rules themselves. And that is true regardless of which system you play.

Now, to address your point directly: as a GM, I would never put a player into a no-win situation like a one-roll death trap. So, I would never have a situation like yours in my game, where a single failed die roll determines if a PC lives or dies. That sort of thing is bad for the story, and, in my opinion, bad GMing; heroes should always have a way to escape.

However, I'm not a fool, and I don't suffer fools gladly. If a player is stupid (not unlucky, actively stupid), I'll let the roll determine the character's fate. I've had one character die three times over the course of four years because her player acted stupidly and selfishly. Needless to say, she no longer games with us.

[Silverstreak]

Yeah, but some people's "cunning" wit just brings the smart ass out in me.

Listen, any good GM will tell you that rules are simply a toolset -- a means to an end. Your ability to use the rules to their greatest effect is what determines a good campaign, not the rules themselves. And that is true regardless of which system you play.

Now, to address your point directly: as a GM, I would never put a player into a no-win situation like a one-roll death trap. So, I would never have a situation like yours in my game, where a single failed die roll determines if a PC lives or dies. That sort of thing is bad for the story, and, in my opinion, bad GMing; heroes should always have a way to escape.

However, I'm not a fool, and I don't suffer fools gladly. If a player is stupid (not unlucky, actively stupid), I'll let the roll determine the character's fate. I've had one character die three times over the course of four years because her player acted stupidly and selfishly. Needless to say, she no longer games with us.

You mean to tell me you've never had a powerful villain cast a Death Spell or a disintegrate or another spell that could kill a PC such as a fireball?

I don't go around killing my players either, but the fact is spells are a big part of D&D and if a player fails a saving throw against one, death is a very likely thing.

What about a Dragon's Breath weapon? Many monsters have abilities to kill PC's outright. Yes I know they are the heroes, but D&D is a dice rolling game, everything depends on rolls, how a hit takes place, skill checks, saves, etc....

You cannot simply ignore all the rules because the Heroes should always triumph. My players know when we play any game I don't hold back, any spell they can cast or any item they can use a villian can use right back.

Besides, if the PC's know you won't do things that could threaten their lives heroism goes out the window. The players begin to think, hey we can do anything, he won't use disintegrate or death spell or Powerword Kill or , etc...

Now put all this stuff in the context of Star Trek.

What do you do, never put the PC's ship up against another because they might lose? Hell a bad skill roll could result in the ship's shields not working properly. Romulans, Dominion, Borg, none of them care if some or all of the PC's die you know. If you are holding back you aren't doing something right.


Let me try it this way.

Say for the sake of arguement you are doing a campaign during the Dominion War.

Now the PC's ship is travelling along and gets attacked by a Jem"hadar Fighter. The Fighter Captain winds the initiative and attacks the PC ship. Now the PC at the Helm screws up his evasive maneuver roll and the PC's ship get's hit before the shields are raised.

The ship will take some damage.

Now because all the PC's lives are in the hands of the person maneuvering the ship, is that fair?

You see what I'm getting at. Now imagine this is a D20 system and the PC rolled a 1 on that maneuver roll. Wow a huge failure, doesn't matter what his skill is then.

What about a PC being shot in combat. Enemies don't set their weapons to stun you know.

But let me guuess, you think that's not something a good GM would do either right?

Player Characters die sometimes, it's a fact of life in gaming.


If you can't handle that, here's a small piece of advice, Never play DARK SUN then. Because if the DM doesn't actively try to kill you he isn't doing his job right.

[Sea Tyger]

Okay, I see you're not getting it.

I didn't say I didn't challenge my PCs (I take no small amount of pleasure scaring the hell out of them), I just don't put them into meaningless no-win scenarios that lead only to their death. Every scenario of that kind must build upon the greater story.

Yes, character death is part of the game. But, GMs shouldn't put the characters at unnecessary risk (like sending them up against a dragon that they have no business facing). You build each scenario so that the PCs have a chance, even if you have no intention of them succeeding.

Sure, the Jem'Hadar don't care what happens to the PCs, but, they may have a need for information for their Vorta master's plan. The Romulans, well, their machinations are as Machiavellian as you can get. That will give the PCs a chance to, at least, escape -- at best, they discover the plot and are able to thwart it.

Failure is perfectly acceptable; but you don't try to indiscriminately kill the characters. Where's the enjoyment of the story in that? If you properly manage the game, an errant dice roll isn't going to ruin things for the players, or the GM.