CODA to D20-Conversion rules?

[AndorMan]

Since the systems are similar enough in theory, has anyone tried a conversion of CODA to D20? With the new Traveller D20 rules available, this may not be difficult at all.

Ideas? Opinions?

AndorMan
Portrait of the Artist as an Andorian

[Sea Tyger]

Originally posted by AndorMan
Since the systems are similar enough in theory, has anyone tried a conversion of CODA to D20? With the new Traveller D20 rules available, this may not be difficult at all.

Ideas? Opinions?

AndorMan
Portrait of the Artist as an Andorian

T20's available? Where?

[KillerWhale]

Given my dislike of D20... I'd happily convert D20 to Coda, but doing the reverse is not really interesting in my view

[AndorMan]

Originally posted by KillerWhale
Given my dislike of D20... I'd happily convert D20 to Coda, but doing the reverse is not really interesting in my view

Thing is...

I'm really not a fan of CODA. It's one interesting feature (I didn't say appealing - I said interesting) is that it's D20-like. Unfortunately, it doesn't benefit from actually being D20, and therefore compatible with all the materials produced for Star Wars, Traveller, Farscape, etc.

Think about a current D20 SF GM and what's easily available to him/her. Jedi, Aslan, Living Starships and everything else are at their fingertips.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had that kind of access.

AndorMan
More then meets Antenna

[KillerWhale]

Wouldn't it be nice if we had that kind of access.

With this set of rules? No. I don't care. I don't want it. If I want this kind of material, I will rather make it up, or convert it to Coda, than turn to D20. That D20 is open-licensed doesn't make it a good system, no matter what quantity of material can be found (er, like Windows? )
Moreover, Coda is simple and opened enough to make whatever you want with it.

D20 has two fatal flaws IMO.

1. Level-based experience.
This is a backwards idea IMO. Earning XPs and gaining automatically some aspects corresponding to your class is something I dislike. But my biggest problem with D20 is...

2. Linear progression
[Chance is too much a factor. You need to get tremendous levels to be assured to hit reasonable difficulties, because you are as likely to roll a 2 than a 17. This is - IMO - the dumbest idea I ever saw in a RPG. (That's also why I never really liked Chaosium)
While Coda, on the contrary, uses a Gaussian (binomial in fact) probability law (2D6), which is far more natural and reduces the chance factor to an acceptable level: it's something like 4 times more probable to roll a 7 than a 2 or a 12. In Coda, I know what a character is likely to perform or not. In D20, if I'm lucky, with average skills, I can do whatever I want. But if I'm unlucky, I can get ridiculous failures, sometimes following extraordinary successes. That destroys completely the game coherence. D20 is OK for DD. But not for anything else! IMO.

Okay, that was my D20 rant way off-topic

[Joe Dizzy]

totally off-topic:

Originally posted by AndorMan

Wouldn't it be nice if we had that kind of access.

I was just listening to my Winamp MP3 list, while surfing around and reading up on some of the threads here. As I was reading this post and reaching this very sentence... "Wouldn't It Be Nice" started blurting out of my speakers.

Funny, that.

slightly on-topic:

I don't like D20 either. We've been playing D&D for the last couple of months and the only reason we're still using D20 is because the GM has a soft spot for the game. The rest of the group would probably jump ship the minute anything else became available. So far I've been suggesting house-rules to fix the D20 fiasco. Now we're using 2d10 instead of 1d20, and I'm talking to him about fixing skill points, magic and advancement.

...*just realized something*.. say, anybody have conversion rules for D20-to-Coda?

Joe

[Balok]

I don't think the level based nature of d20 is the right sort of system for a game that isn't primarily combat. I have no doubt that a conversion is possible, what I doubt is that the result would be a superior gaming experience.

d20 was an attempt to move D&D towards a point build system like Coda or Hero. But they walled up the plumbing. Creating prestige classes (essentially, packages) requires more guesswork and playtesting than in systems where the costs of advancement are out there for all to see.

That, in my view, limits d20 to milieus in which combat is the chief exercise. That doesn't make it a bad system, just a specialized one. Too specialized, I believe, for use in games where combat is likely to be only one facet of play.

[Sea Tyger]

I think AndorMan was asking for input on how to convert Coda to d20. I certainly don't think that he was inviting people to bash the d20 system.

d20 is not better than Coda. d20 is not worse than Coda. It is a different system, with it's own merits and flaws (just like Coda).

I love d20, and I use it quite successfully for a variety of settings (where combat isn't the main attraction....hell, combat isn't the main attraction in my D&D games, and the system doesn't fall apart because of it). And I also love Coda, because it captures the feel of Star Trek quite well.

So, if you don't have anything constructive for AndorMan, I suggest you just avoid this thread all together.

[AndorMan]

While I was more interested in a way to convert CODA to D20, I can appreciate what people are saying. Truth be told, I'll use LUG or FASA if my D20 idea doesn't work out. D20 is not my all time favorite system, but I've been using it for my current D&D campaigns as well as a few one-shots in other genres. The main elements that made me curious about a D20 Trek game were that:

A) Traveller D20 is SF, D20 and very cool!
B) I really don't like CODA. As I said, it's D20 without being D20. Therefore it has, IMHO, all the problems and none of the benefits.
C) Alot of very well done material is available for D20 now. This would give a D20 Trek GM a good deal of source material for running a campaign.
D) I'm having trouble getting people to play Star Trek...but everyone and their brother will play D&D. When I mentioned to my group that I would run something new, and that the rules were basically the same as D&D, everyone said "Sure. We'll try it."

Obviously, some of the reasons mentioned above are the very reasons the D20 system was created and the reason it does well.

I understand everyones feelings and I'm interested in all opinions, pro or con.

AndorMan
To each his Andor

[KillerWhale]

To each his Andor

Amen to that. If you like D20 then go for it!!!

[Joe Dizzy]

First steps:

Professional Abilites become class features. I think most professions have around 6 abilities so maybe handing one out every 3 levels would make sense.

Compare atrribute modifiers with the D20 equivalent and adjust attributes (roughly adding 6 to them, I think) accordingly.

Savvy and Willpower are merged. The favoured reaction of each profession becomes the highest saving throw of the three. (If you look at the PHB table on 3-1, you'll find that every class has one higher saving throw. That would be the preferred reaction.)

Ignore courage points and Health points. Instead apply a hit die to each profession and start rolling (woo-hoo!).
Ignore the defence rate and just use the standard AC rule:
10 + Dex + Size + Armor(?)

That should get you started.

Optionally, instead of losing all your courage points you could add them to the AC instead, as misc. modifier.

Anything I missed?

Joe

P.S. - AndorMan, what do you mean by D20's benefits being ignored, while its problems were adapted to CODA? Any examples?

[Lancer]

For the AC I think the "Defense Bonus" rules from SW d20 would work well in a Trek setting. Without something like it even experienced characters will be too easily hit or go for armor, which just doesn't fit the setting IMHO.

Courage Points can be ignored IMO, if you give humans an extra starting feat as per the usual D&D rules. It's not the same, but it's a bonus for humans built into both systems, so why make any big changes here? Same goes for the extra skill points.

[Argyle]

Originally posted by KillerWhale

2. Linear progression
[Chance is too much a factor. You need to get tremendous levels to be assured to hit reasonable difficulties, because you are as likely to roll a 2 than a 17. This is - IMO - the dumbest idea I ever saw in a RPG. (That's also why I never really liked Chaosium)
While Coda, on the contrary, uses a Gaussian (binomial in fact) probability law (2D6), which is far more natural and reduces the chance factor to an acceptable level: it's something like 4 times more probable to roll a 7 than a 2 or a 12. In Coda, I know what a character is likely to perform or not. In D20, if I'm lucky, with average skills, I can do whatever I want. But if I'm unlucky, I can get ridiculous failures, sometimes following extraordinary successes. That destroys completely the game coherence. D20 is OK for DD. But not for anything else! IMO.

This is exactly why I'm going to experiment with running d20 games as 2d10 games when I get my copy of d20 Traveller . The only needed change other than that is to tweak combat botches and criticals. Making 2-3 be the botch range and increasing weapons' listed threat ranges by one is what I'm going to start with. That'll make botches and criticals a little rarer than vanilla d20, which is fine with me. It'll also make weapons with increased threat ranges stand out more.

Any thoughts, or should I take my non-trek related d20 tweaking somewhere where people care?

[Sea Tyger]

Originally posted by Argyle
This is exactly why I'm going to experiment with running d20 games as 2d10 games when I get my copy of d20 Traveller .

Speaking of....I'm going to go pick up my copy from my FLGS in about 20 minutes. Woot!

[Joe Dizzy]

Originally posted by Lancer
For the AC I think the "Defense Bonus" rules from SW d20 would work well in a Trek setting.

I don't know SW, what do the defense bonus rules say?

Joe