Smoke and Mirrors?

[aramis]

Originally posted by Takei:
In Dane's defence, we're now onto v5.5(?) of CoC (not counting the d20 version!) and in that time it's rules have not changed appreciably.
Whilst the CT reprints are exactly the same as the originals, the route to them (CT-MT-TNE-T4-GT-Reprints) has seen the basic rules system change dramatically.

And CT is still being sold, and played, without the "Later Editions". CoC can't say that the early editions are in print. Let alone gaining new purchases by new players.

MWM is selling the same original ruleset as was available when i started gaming. CoC isn't; while the rules are only slightly tweaked (Chaosium BRP based games are all mechanically nigh identical, even when done unliscenced by 3rd parties ala a certain SciFi game with the Swarr, an aslan rip-off), each edition has substantially changed the setting material and how the plaayers are expected to interacct with it.

Now, also remember that CT did not flush from the supply chain until TNE... in the 90's.

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

hmm. I think I'd care. I've been riding Marc Miller's train since the early eighties when all my friends were buying 1st ed. D&D and wanted to be the first kid on the block with something different. I love the way his 'histories' crib from everthing from actual earth history to gilbert&sulivan.

I have to admit though. It's the Marc Miller universe and a couple of key game concepts (ie prior history) that really work for me. (hence my cheif objection to the gurps version)

Despite my long dislike of D&D i've found t20 to be very flexible and playable. I'd probably buy both. It's not as if I play enough to justify very much of my gaming purchases, but when it comes to writing books that let people's 'minds roam free' I think Marc Millers is one of the best.

(even if classic traveller WAS clunky, and even if the adventures back then were um.... mechanistic and overly tight in plotting)

GARF.

 

[Gallowglass]

Originally posted by aramis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Takei:
In Dane's defence, we're now onto v5.5(?) of CoC (not counting the d20 version!) and in that time it's rules have not changed appreciably.
Whilst the CT reprints are exactly the same as the originals, the route to them (CT-MT-TNE-T4-GT-Reprints) has seen the basic rules system change dramatically.

And CT is still being sold, and played, without the "Later Editions". CoC can't say that the early editions are in print. Let alone gaining new purchases by new players.

MWM is selling the same original ruleset as was available when i started gaming. CoC isn't; while the rules are only slightly tweaked (Chaosium BRP based games are all mechanically nigh identical, even when done unliscenced by 3rd parties ala a certain SciFi game with the Swarr, an aslan rip-off), each edition has substantially changed the setting material and how the plaayers are expected to interacct with it.</font>[/QUOTE]Err, and how were Cthulhu 3.0 /-/ 5.5 (which stabilised sometime in the early 90's actually) substantially changed in setting? Since the game has always been set primarily in 1920's America (with increasing nods to 1890's England and the present day as alternate settings) I find this a bizarre claim. And how has the expectation of player interaction changed? I have Cthulhu 3rd Edition (from the Games Workshop boxed set circa 1984) and large sections of the Keepers advice and how to play the game sections are identical in my recently purchased Hardback copy of 5.6. You investigate very cautioulsy, you discover some bizarre event you don't quite believe in is about to occur, you attempt to stop it and most of you get horribly butchered or go stark raving mad, but one or two lone survivors are left with the realisation that all you have done is hold back the night a little longer...

IMO by any useful yardstick CoC, as both a system and a setting, has not substantially changed in twenty years, it has simply been tidied up and greater clarity and depth added. One of the great tragedies of Traveller's history is that that is precisely what Mega Traveller was billed as being and it got mired in errata. Love the CT reprints though I do they are, as a game to be played a weird retrograde step to the mid-late 80's when CT, the original clean simple elegant FRP system, was begining to make C&S look straightforward and Aftermath! a worthwhile challenge... or possibly not!

Now, also remember that CT did not flush from the supply chain until TNE... in the 90's.

Which (see above) is about the same time or a little after when the CoC Rules stabilised (as in the version number last got changed / Chaosium last attached a Copyright date, can't remember as books are at home but I think it was 1993). Plus, Chaosium are reprinting the original Basic Role Playing book this year, so the original core rules will be available again. Now if they would only dust off Future World as well...

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

Hmmm. wow.
I lot of hatred for old D&D still abounds.

I have to say I can longer join you in hatred of the rules qou rules. anymore.

I did hate rolling up characters back when it was 3d6 in order, like it or lump it.

I do generally object to 'class and level' systems, prefering 'points and budget' systems myself. However 3e D&D and all it's d20 siblings are in fact a hybrid system, which while complex, is nearly the equal of any points and budget system I've seen. The skill system (which does operate on a points and budget structure), the feats, The liberal rules for multiclassing and prestige classes all go a lOOOONnnng way to removing original D&D's inflexibility. I've played it as Star Wars (and the West End Games Star Wars I, thought, was an unimpeachable favourite) and found it just as fun to play. I've played it as D&D and lost most of my objections to dungeon crawling. Since for me the Travller universe is more important (generally speaking, Exception: GURPS sux.) than the rules platform. I'm actually kinda pumped about t20. Yes I'm kind of concerned that WotC are poised to become the Microsoft of the gaming world but... my other gamming hobby is monopolised by Games Workshop and I seem able to live with it.

of course all the above is just me.

GARF.

 

[Nearside]

I've noticed a lot of people who have bad feelings towards d20. Is it the OGL concept? Is it just the company that produces it that invokes this hostility?

It's because of d20 that we're getting T20, so for that much I'm grateful.

 

[Ron]

Originally posted by Stephen Herron:
I've noticed a lot of people who have bad feelings towards d20. Is it the OGL concept? Is it just the company that produces it that invokes this hostility?

It's because of d20 that we're getting T20, so for that much I'm grateful.

Nope. Most people who dislike d20 already disliked D&D, so it's a sort of an extension of an old feeling. It doesn't also help the fact that d20 is grabbing market share from other games, although this mainly by the increase of D&D players that are now playing something else also.

I think that most non-d20 players will disagree with your last paragraph. I personally don't care for the d20 version but I think it's a great opportunity to expand Traveller awareness among roleplayers.

 

[TWILIGHT]

I have to admit, I'm not a fan of D20. This is mainly due to it's clunky rules (Chaosium's BRP-RuneQuest & Cthulhu are much better). I also play D&D3 (again D20). The upside is it's created a lot of renewed interest in rpg's. In the UK role-play had died a death and wizards (despite the feeling against them) have added to this hobby through their advertising and game production budget. You can't deny that even though D&D is a bit clunky, the production value is amazing.

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

The dislike of d20 for me is two things:
1) I have long and bitterly held objections to D&D since the days before it came in a version called 'Advanced' - I prefer guns and spaceship to swords and sorcery. and the rules were REALLY clunky back then.

2) I am kinda worried about WotC becoming the microsoft of the gaming world with d20 as their 'windows'

on the plus side: d20 is MUCH better than original D&D and compares (to my mind) quite favourably for playability with most contemporary games.

I've always believed that a good referee can make a bad rules system work and that bad referee will not be saved be even an awesome game.

with the above in mind, AND what I've seen so far (The t20 lite and other .pdf teasers) I'm actually kind of pumped up about T20. I'll buy it I'll read it. and for durn sure I'll run it. Even if I have to shanghai my players.

Garf.

 

[MichaelL65]

Originally posted by Garf:
2) I am kinda worried about WotC becoming the microsoft of the gaming world with d20 as their 'windows'

Funny, the OGL has frequently been compared to the Linux mentality of "Open Source."

OK, so there are some major diferences. But reality is most of the restrictions only come when you want to use the D20 logo. As I understand it, you can use the same core rules without making any mention of D20 and do pretty much what you want. Everyone just wants that D20 logo, just like everyone wants that MS Windows logo on their software.

 

[Ron]

I think that d20 is a fine system to a lot people, but not to me. One of the main features in Traveller that attracted me was the fact that the characters weren't much better than skilled but still normal people. I am not much in heroic gaming. It bores me.

As a matter of fact, I am irregularly attending to a D&D campaign for the sake of meeting old friends. The characters are of 8th to 10th level and, despite the fact they doesn't have many magic items, they are too powerful. So powerful that I think that the game is a kind of ridiculous and, despite my efforts, I am not identifying with my character. I only manage to keep playing because I discarded it as roleplaying game in favor to a wargame. As we are playing with counters over a squared map, I am calling it Fantasy Squad Leader. I evaluate the tactical scenario and ignore the roleplaying (as I can't relate myself to the character anyway). Strangely, I am enjoying the game now.

Traveller and BRP are my favorite systems, which doesn't surprise me because they are better adjusted to non heroic campaigns. To play powerful heroes such as 8th to 10th level D&D characters, I prefer HERO.

 

[DrSkull]

With the Lifeblood/Stamina system and the fact that NPCs will all be the same levels with the same skills and feats as the PC's, T20 doesn't quite have the same "heroic inflation" as D&D. A 20th level guy is just as likely to get killed doing something stupid in a fight as a first level guy is, and once you throw vehicles into the mix, gross character power really isn't an issue.

 

[Ron]

Originally posted by DrSkull:
With the Lifeblood/Stamina system and the fact that NPCs will all be the same levels with the same skills and feats as the PC's, T20 doesn't quite have the same "heroic inflation" as D&D. A 20th level guy is just as likely to get killed doing something stupid in a fight as a first level guy is, and once you throw vehicles into the mix, gross character power really isn't an issue.

Although I have not playtested it, I have the impression that the T20's lifeblood/stamina system is much of an improvement from regular d20 rules. However, after 18 years, it is hard to switch from a system that you already like to an adaptation of a system that you kind of dislike. As I said, I think that the most important contribution feasible by T20 will be get new players for Traveller. I am very satisfied with my adapted Megatraveller rules and I would rather see T5, which, I hope, will be more or less compatible with my game, than T20.

 

[jalexandratos]

Originally posted by Stephen Herron:
I've noticed a lot of people who have bad feelings towards d20. Is it the OGL concept? Is it just the company that produces it that invokes this hostility?

It's because of d20 that we're getting T20, so for that much I'm grateful.

From the people that I know, the biggest complaints are about the changes in D&D 3e. To many players, that is synonymous with d20.

Some people just don't like the changes. Doesn't matter if the system is more internally consistent, balanced and not strictly combat-oriented. Some people have spent 15+ years figuring out how to exploit loopholes and glaring omissions in the rules so that they can always create a campaign-busting druid or ranger.

They cry foul now that the rules create a much more level playing field for all players.

Heaven forbid that at some point we remember it's just a game.

 

[Elliot]

I have to say that I think T20 is pretty authentic to the original traveller despite the D20 interface.

Having played Traveller as a religious experience since 1980 I use a mix of MT/CT rules. I also play AD&D 2nd ed (Having bought most if D&D 1st and 2nd ed, i'm not buying it again) occaisionally. Between the two I think T20 lite (that's all I've seen of D20) looks pretty impressive!

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

Just in case my posts haven't made it clear:
I -Like- every d20 product I've played. This is despite my longstanding dislike of D&D.

d20 seems to work well.

T20 lite Looks great. I'm really impressed with what I've read. So far it captures the feel of Traveller -quite well-

I'd actually have to play it to see how it plays. The only concerns I have... hmm

1) this is flaw dating back to CT - a touch of... over mechanicalizaion of the game. There is a tendency with traveller to read it like a computer strategy game without the computer. one can get buried in die rolls and charts to the point of drowning out RP. I saw a hint of this in the narrow escape feat. It basically lets you avoid certain random encounters. It's great I suppose if you and your Ref are depending on tables and die rolls but how might that feat effect RP? should the Ref warn a player with that feat that his spider sense is tingling?...

2) CT - never had experience. MT - still didn't you instead Rp'ed the learning of skills directly (usually by taking time out and spending money) I kinda liked that.

T4 - had a very Slow experience system resulting in maybe... a skill level every couple of adventures.

My experience with other d20 games (Starwars. D&D 3) has shown that characters gain levels and significant increases in ability fairly quickly. (mind these were all low level campaigns.)
Still this will change the traveller dynamic.

It just occured to me too. characters in d20 tend to be all the same level. or within a level or two of each other because mixed level parties... well... put unfair burdens on certain players.

Traveller has always had parties composed of characters with mixed degrees of age and experience. The trade off was traditionally Skills for stats... Will T20 have some sort of aging penalty? (that too was an essential element of Traveller)

Garf

 

[Tanuki]

Originally posted by Stephen Herron:
I've noticed a lot of people who have bad feelings towards d20. Is it the OGL concept? Is it just the company that produces it that invokes this hostility?

I think it's the whole concept of you MUST buy a D&D manual and then figure out what might be relevant to what you're actually trying to do, but ghod forbid that anyone should actually tell you how to put it together.

I've played Magic and stuff, and I used to think WotC was pretty cool. I've played D&D first edition, too -- not that it seems to have anything to do with the T20 incarnation -- and CT and even GURPS. But buying their stupid expensive book and trying to figure out how to use it for T20 has pissed me off so much that I will do my level best to never buy a WotC product again.

If they must collect their royalty, I'd rather they produce a small, basic, manual that clearly detailed how to do the basics and how to put them together with other systems. I'd buy that and not feel nearly so ripped off. I'd even more rather that they sold a decent license, for a _reasonable_ fee, that allowed people to publish the entire rules set in one volume. But this secret arcana crap is a pain in the butt and I detest them for foisting it on us.

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

Are you saying the full rules... when printed in their own T20 Hardcover will still require generic d20 support?

That wasn't the case with Star Wars. One book had everything you needed. I think you only need the PH if you're going to use the 'Free' T20 lite. Which is fair. If people are going to download the rules off the net... Who is going to buy any books?

Someone correct me here if I'm wrong. If I have to buy a D&D PH or DMG in order to use my $60 (Canadian) T20.. I may rethink that purchase.

Garf.

 

[Simon Jester]

Originally posted by Garf:
Are you saying the full rules... when printed in their own T20 Hardcover will still require generic d20 support?

Yep. You'll still need the PHB (or Star Wars, or the CoC book, or the WoT book, or any other main rule book WoTC puts out under d20) for character generation and level progression.

That wasn't the case with Star Wars. One book had everything you needed. I think you only need the PH if you're going to use the 'Free' T20 lite. Which is fair. If people are going to download the rules off the net... Who is going to buy any books?

The reason Star Wars had all of the rules was that it was published by WoTC, the holders of the d20 license. Any d20 main rulebook published by WoTC will have the entire ruleset.

Someone correct me here if I'm wrong. If I have to buy a D&D PH or DMG in order to use my $60 (Canadian) T20.. I may rethink that purchase.

Garf.

As I said above, if you've purchased the d20 Star Wars main rulebook (and your above statement seems to indicate you have), then you don't need to buy the D&D Player's Handbook; you've got what you need already. Anyone just coming into this, buying the T20 rules without having bought anything d20 before, will need to buy one of the following d20 rulebooks to get the required information:

D&D Player's Handbook;
Star Wars Rules (either first or second printing);
Wheel of Time;
Call of Cthulhu (although I've heard that the character generation rules here were modified from the other d20 books WoTC has published);

And likely any other WoTC d20 main rulebook published in the future. If they've been publishing the complete rules in the main genre books so far, they're not likely to stop now.

I just wish they'd get around to releasing the d20 Dune RPG like they said they would over a year ago.

Simon Jester

 

[PapaGolfWhiskey]

I've -read- the Star Wars rule book.

Whelp! that makes that descision...

When's T5 comming out? I ain't playing T20 until someone convinces me to buy a d20 core book.

what downer man. WotC SUXX!!!! (add lots of emphasis to that last word)

I can't tell you how much this news disapoints me.

I retract ANYTHING positive I said about d20. This "you must buy two games to get one concept" is... so bad I cannot express myself adequately without using explitives.

what a... frickin' .. buncha nickel and diming Chiselers!

GARF.

I was super pumped about T20.. now I'm just disgusted.

 

[far-trader]

Hey Garf don't go away! You can still grab all kinds of crunchy goodness here and contribute besides.

And look at the CoiT submissions (once I hear from Hunter et al. just how us Canucks can write for shiny US coin too) and you can earn store credit to 'buy' T20 with, or at least discount your purchase.

You are coming into this late and so it's a bit of a shock I guess. To play devils advocate a mo' by doing it this way Hunter accomplishes a couple things.

First, T20 is 'complete', for Can.$60 you get the equivalent of the D&D 3ed Player's handbook, Dungeon Master's guide, and more (about what, a Can.$60 + value). True you need some 'basic' d20 rules but it has been pointed out and summarized eleswhere here just what that entails, I'll try to hunt it up later and bump it up again (I think it came down to you don't really need to buy a book in most cases, iirc).

Second, and the main point, T20 is geared to attracting (new) player's who are already d20 player's and have the books they need. I know if I have any chance of a FTF Traveller group it will be this route only, as the only player's I know right now (with the exception of one) are d20 D&D 3ed players.

Now that I've done the dirty deed of defending the convoluted license needs for T20 it's given me an idea I have to put on my lawyering cap and check the whole d20 license thing again, but it might just work <eg>, if it does you can look for a post you (and others) should find helpful soon... <cross fingers>