The D20 system is NOT your father's D&D

[The Shoveller]

As is probably obvious, I am a D20 system fan. However, I was not an old style D&D fan. It's the first RPG I cut my teeth on, but I was playing it when D&D was THE role playing game on the market. I outgrew it when DragonQuest[SPI], RuneQuest and Traveller came along.

The D20 system allows one to generate any type of PC one can concieve of. Skills didn't exist in D&D1e. D20 relies on them. Feats are an huge addition. The combat system is almost unrecognizable compared to D&D1e. D20 D&D is a COMPLETELY different game than D&D1e.

I see a lot of people saying they think Traveller will become D&D in Space because of the use of the D20 system. Nothing could be further from the truth. D20 D&D is so different in it's present form than any of it's previous versions that I think it's fair to say that D&D3e isn't even "D&D" anymore.

Traveller will work in D20, and it will remain faithful to it roots. The D20 system really is solid and will allow Traveller to shine.

 

[hunter]

And T20 isn't Grandfather's Traveller?

Heh, sorry, that line just begged to be said...

Hunter

[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[AndreaV]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
And T20 isn't Grandfather's Traveller?

Heh, sorry, that line just begged to be said...

Hunter
[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 15 May 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Strephon, I am your father!

(Equally sorry)

 

[AndreaV]

I cut my RPG teeth on Traveller (the LBB where the first RPG product I bought, followed by RQ) and only came late to AD&D(1e). To be honest, I long ago abandoned any pretence of using any "specific" mechanics. I mine mechanics as ruthlessly as I mine background for my games.

However, T20 does excite me. I've perused the d20 mechanics and they'll work (you can't say any better than that about any system), a bit more cinematic/heroic than Traveller or GURPS, but then again that suits my style of play. But the mechanics are not what excites me.

What excites me is a whole new period/region openning up for detailed development and the potential for a whole new generation of gamers to be introduced to Traveller.

GURPS is a good system, but it's A) best suited for gritty reality, B) intimidating for a beginner (IMHO its a "graduate" system) and C) an poor fit to Traveller in a few areas (notibly tech levels).

T5 is also a good system, more heroic than GURPS, more newbie friendly and an excellant fit to Traveller (well you'd expect that

). But its also currently vapourware.

CT is a system showing its age. In reality its a 1st generation RPG (contempary with AD&D1e) with all the baggage that brings. A lot of its mechanics are cobbled together and they don't fit well at the seams.

None of these systems is going to have the pulling power of a well done d20 version of Traveller.

 

[Gallowglass]

I think I disagree: the system helps define the setting (TNE's problem wasn't that it was Aftermath in Space, it was that it was the then GDW house system in Traveller...). Very few settings survive being transposed to a new rules set IMO e.g. Elric just doesn't fit the Young Kingdoms, and Runequest would be a lousy fit for Ghostbusters. IMHO, d20 is a poor fit for Traveller because the underlying assumptions don't fit and whilst it is possible to mitigate them with specific rules, this defeats the point of using a "generic" system. My biggest gripe with GURPS is that at it's heart, it desperately wants to be a very gritty simulation style system and that makes it a poor fit for heroic games.

But in the end, I'm not really that interested in either T5 or d20 (or T4, TNE, MT, GT or CT for that matter). I'm interested in Traveller, and the Traveller universe. Provided the system specifics don't get in the way, I'll use whatever material for my games that I can. My concern is that the canon will be distorted to suit the system, which would be very disappointing.

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gallowglass:
I think I disagree: the system helps define the setting (TNE's problem wasn't that it was Aftermath in Space, it was that it was the then GDW house system in Traveller...).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny, my biggest gripe was that it had no 3rd Imperium.

But, as I have quoth before elsewhere, a friend of mine once said "A game system doesn't model Reality, but it does model A reality."

the real questions are "Will the t20 rules allow me to model my Sten-esque variant on the 3I? Will it inhibit modelling the 3I in a manner consistant with canon? Will PC's still be able to Trade, Fight, and Die of Old Age in believeable manners?"

------------------
-aramis
========================================
Smith & Wesson:
The Original Point and Click interface!

 

[Uncle Bob]

I have to admit, somethings I have heard about D20 encouraged me. Even before I heard about T20.

Except Experience Points.

XPs have always bothered me, because they are either awarded objectively (and usually not enough) or subjectively and capriciously. They usually end up as just a way to keep score. Traveller was the first "storyteller" game where success was sujective and interpreted by each characters motivations. Munchkins and Monte Haul are rare in Traveller: this may change that.

Advancing from XPs. I know Shoveller believes we learn from experience, but I don't. What I have seen people learn from is failure and at best they learn that they need better skills. If they are smart they find a coach or teacher to show them what they're doing wrong and help them learn to do it right. Doing it on their own is possible, but much slower. I have never seen anyone learn from a completely successful project or victorious bout. And that is what you get XPs for.

[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[The Shoveller]

Goalsetting is considered by experts to be to best method for increasing personal performance. Experience points are SUPPOSED to be a measurement of how well a PC accomplishes their goals. Therefore, experience points SHOULD the best measurement of character advancement. When a game is properly GMed, XPs are the best method. If a game is poorly GMed, they can be one of the worst measurements. Looking at Massively Muilt-player online RPGs is the best example of the worst use of experience points. Roleplaying degenerates into creature camping. An enlightened GM will grant XPs for accomplishing goals. No XPs for random meaningless killing sprees.

Also Bob, would you drop the learning argument! You keep claiming you know what the best method of learning is, and that method keeps changing. First, it was from manuals and classrooms. Now, it's something to do with failure. The only thing you learn from failure is a technique that doesn't work. A success shows you a technique that WORKS. Successful techniques are far more important and far rarer to have first hand knowledge of than unsuccessful techniques. Successful first hand knowledge is therefore far more important than volumns of knowledge of what doesn't work.

First, you were claiming all these famous people and experts supported your position. Now we find you have posted thousands of words which make arguments which utterly contradict common sense and thousands of years of educational theory totally on the basis of "what you have seen." Sorry, Bob. I'm not going to throw aside the sum of all human knowledge about the educational process because you've decided you and Richard Burton are right and everyone else is wrong.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
I have to admit, somethings I have heard about D20 encouraged me. Even before I heard about T20.

Except Experience Points.

XPs have always bothered me, because they are either awarded objectively (and usually not enough) or subjectively and capriciously. They usually end up as just a way to keep score. Traveller was the first "storyteller" game where success was sujective and interpreted by each characters motivations. Munchkins and Monte Haul are rare in Traveller: this may change that.

Advancing from XPs. I know Shoveller believes we learn from experience, but I don't. What I have seen people learn from is failure and at best they learn that they need better skills. If they are smart they find a coach or teacher to show them what they're doing wrong and help them learn to do it right. Doing it on their own is possible, but much slower. I have never seen anyone learn from a completely successful project or victorious bout. And that is what you get XPs for.

[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 15 May 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



[This message has been edited by The Shoveller (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[Uncle Bob]

Well, you have finally learned how to quote.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Shoveller:
Goalsetting is considered by experts to be to best method for increasing personal performance. Experience points are SUPPOSED to be a measurement of how well a PC accomplishes their goals. Therefore, experience points SHOULD the best measurement of character advancement. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So XPs measure what improvements a character has already made, not a mechanism for improvement. Unfortunately, this is contrary to the way they are perceived and commonly used. And goalsetting is a first step, not the whole program.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
When a game is properly GMed, XPs are the best method. If a game is poorly GMed, they can be one of the worst measurements. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Unfortunately, D20 is more likely to be used by inexperienced and/or egocentric GM.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
The only thing you learn from failure is a technique that doesn't work. A success shows you a technique that WORKS. Successful techniques are far more important and far rarer to have first hand knowledge of than unsuccessful techniques. Successful first hand knowledge is therefore far more important than volumns of knowledge of what doesn't work.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What failure tells you is that you need to learn a better technique. Success tells you nothing new, after the first time (maybe nothing at all if you're not sure exactly what you did). To get a new technique to test, you can
a) Experiment and try to develop a new technique (you had better be be smart, lucky, patient, and able to survive failure), or
b) Ask someone who has successfully completed the task and find out how he/she did it. This is called learning.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
First, you were claiming all these famous people and experts supported your position. Now we find you have posted thousands of words which make arguments which utterly contradict common sense and thousands of years of educational theory totally on the basis of "what you have seen." Sorry, Bob. I'm not going to throw aside the sum of all human knowledge about the educational process because you've decided you and Richard Burton are right and everyone else is wrong.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I cited the experience of others to help show how I came to my conclusions.
Over the last twenty years I have studied and tutored History, Physics and Mathematics, and studied pedagogy as a graduate student. I have learned computer troubleshooting through a combination of study, mentoring, and on the job experience. I have taught Algebra at an accredited university, sword & shield fighting, Classical fencing in my own salle, and computer trouble shooting in a corporate environment. No student has spokenly badly about the experience and many have volunteered testimonials or sent friends to learn from me, even years later. I do not recognize "knowlege of the educational process" or indeed "common sense" as you use them. Neither do I comprehend phrenology. I refuse to appologize for any of these shortfalls.

[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[hunter]

Experience, in real life, is learned through success AND failure, not one or the other.

Thus experience in gaming terms (T20) can and does represent both.

In T20, experience is not tied to the number of monsters you kill, or the number of times you successfully use a skill. It is the GM who decides what the experience awards will be.

The one MAJOR drawback to CT, was the lack of improvement in characters, failure or success...

Hunter


[This message has been edited by hunter (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[Uncle Bob]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
In T20, experience is not tied to the number of monsters you kill, or the number of times you successfully use a skill. It is the GM who decides what the experience awards will be.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can only hope the GM will be encoraged to reward study and practice with a qualified program or instructor.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
The one MAJOR drawback to CT, was the lack of improvement in characters, failure or success...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not after the Instruction skill came out in Book 4. But it would be nice to codefy it.

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hunter:
The one MAJOR drawback to CT, was the lack of improvement in characters, failure or success...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, CT DOES provide methods for improvement in characters, it is just that these methods involve large investments of time and resources, taking characters temporarily out-of-play, and are not tied to the successful completion of 'adventures.' The Instruction skill in Book 4 extends this notion.

Personally, I don't consider this to be a weakness. Considering that in CT characters typically pick up 0.25-0.5 points/year in character-generation (which is to say while working full-time at their jobs and receiving on-the-job training) I don't find it at all surprising to think that they wouldn't automatically get continued skill improvements through gallavanting around the universe 'adventuring.' It's only our (D&D-infected) notions that successful adventures should be 'rewarded' and that players should be able to have fixed numerical proof of their character's growth and accomplishments that make this (presumably intentional) design choice seem like a weakness.

Note also that in MegaTraveller a system of character improvement through adventuring-experience was introduced (presumably by popular demand), but that it is a deliberately slow and awkward affair and if a player's primary interest is only in beefing up his character's skill-points the most cost-effective method is still formal training (or another term of Previous Experience before the campaign begins

).

(Note, I'm not debating XP; that's a matter of taste I made up my mind about years ago. I'm just pointing out that Traveller's different method of handling character improvement is a deliberate choice, consistent with the rest of its system, not an oversight or failure)

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
I can only hope the GM will be encoraged to reward study and practice with a qualified program or instructor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which brings up a (serious, non-sarcastic) question: does D&D3/d20 provide a system for accumulating 'experience points' through practice, training, and instruction? Or is it still only possible (at least by the letter of the rules, barring individual GM-fiat) to gain experience (and, by extension, improve your skills) through 'adventuring' and/or accomplishing story-related goals?
Surely even the pro-XP faction must see that spending hours a day for weeks on end practicing and being instructed at scaling walls is more likely to make someone a good wall-scaler than scaling one or two walls and rescuing the princess on the other side. In the old days D&D made no allowance for this sort of logic, and I'd be disappointed (but hardly surprised) if it still didn't.

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by me:
In the old days D&D made no allowance for this sort of logic, and I'd be disappointed (but hardly surprised) if it still didn't.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, let me ammend myself. In the 1st ed. AD&D DMG where Gygax attempted to justify all of the already-evident flaws in the *D&D system (after all, Traveller and RuneQuest were already on the market by then

) he makes the case that roleplaying through and keeping track of sessions of training, practice, and research wouldn't be 'fun' and therefore are abstracted into GP=XP, figuring that money is necessary to pay for tutors, research materials and such (though in that case, why not use Dave Arneson's rule that XP are only gained for GP SPENT, not hoarded, but that's another topic for another forum). Anyhow, in it's own extremely narrow and somewhat counter-intuitive way, this actually does counter my argument and make some sense (just like pretty much everything else about 1st ed. AD&D -- as long as you stay within its narrow (and not always self-evident) set of assumptions, it's a pretty good game).

Where the problem really arises is in the sort of neither-fish-nor-fowl systems (such as AD&D2 or TNE) where experience/improvement (be it in XP, 'hero points,' or whatever) is gained solely through successful use of skills, completion of 'adventures,' and/or at arbitrary whim of the GM (through 'good roleplaying' awards and such). Those are the ones I really can't stand.

 

[The Shoveller]

Well, Bob, I'm not going to continue to use the quote system because it only encourages you in the creation of your trademark massive response posts.

Bob, are you even reading the garbage you are typing anymore? Look at this...

B: "What failure tells you is that you need to learn a better technique. Success tells you nothing new."

If the goal is to succeed and you succeed, you are told by the result that YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING CORRECTLY! Isn't knowing how to do something successfully the whole object?

B: "Unfortunately, D20 is more likely to be used by inexperienced and/or egocentric GM."

So I guess we shouldn't make good tools, only foolproof ones? No such thing as foolproof, anyway. Fools are too ingenious.

B: "Over the last twenty years I have studied and tutored History, Physics and Mathematics, and studied pedagogy as a graduate student. I have learned computer troubleshooting through a combination of study, mentoring, and on the job experience. I have taught Algebra at an accredited university, sword & shield fighting, Classical fencing in my own salle, and computer trouble shooting in a corporate environment. No student has spokenly badly about the experience and many have volunteered testimonials or sent friends to learn from me, even years later. I do not recognize "knowlege of the educational process" or indeed "common sense" as you use them. Neither do I comprehend phrenology."

So, in other words, not only are you smarter than all the rest of us about the educational process, you're smarter than the rest of us about a whole bunch of stuff.

Bob, I'm not going to respond to anymore of your posts. Either you are so brilliant that it is beyond my ability to comprehend even the simplest of your utterances, or you are a wannabee fraud who constantly thought he knew more than his intructors, bouncing from passing interest to passing interest, learning little along the way. Either way, interaction between us is futile.

 

[Brandon C]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T. Foster:
Where the problem really arises is in the sort of neither-fish-nor-fowl systems (such as AD&D2 or TNE) where experience/improvement (be it in XP, 'hero points,' or whatever) is gained solely through successful use of skills, completion of 'adventures,' and/or at arbitrary whim of the GM (through 'good roleplaying' awards and such). Those are the ones I really can't stand. [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to completely disagree -- these are the only situations in which experience points *should* be handed out.

My biggest complaint about Classic Traveller was that there was no point in trying to improve your skills because the effort wasn't worth the return. MegaTraveller was *slightly* better in this regard and, IMHO, GURPS Traveller handles it best of all Traveller versions.

 

[DrSkull]

I've got to say I really liked the T4 experience system in preference to the MT one. (1 "experience point" allowed you a chance to roll to gain a skill point in a skill you had used. If you rolled higher than the current skill level, the skill went up, if you didn't, the exp. was wasted)

I would set up each adventure with the possiblity of getting anywhere from 0-3 exp
points.
0=failure, lots of innocnet NPC's or hirelings killed, adn mission a fialure.
1= draw, players live, mission not completely successful no horrible consequences.
2=succesful mission with lots of hireling, NPC or proiperty loss.
3= successful mission woithout side effects.

It wasn't exactly arbitrary since there was a set standard that was applied.

It would be easy enought o adapt that to d20, I guess.

------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson

 

[Uncle Bob]

I guess the Shoveller found my boot-tops were too tall. If anyone else cares . . .

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Shoveller:
If the goal is to succeed and you succeed, you are told by the result that YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING CORRECTLY! Isn't knowing how to do something successfully the whole object?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Success tells you the technique is correct. It has nothing to do with developing the technique, or telling you which parts of your technique are actually useful.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
So, in other words, not only are you smarter than all the rest of us about the educational process, you're smarter than the rest of us about a whole bunch of stuff.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, but I have broad enough range of experience and training to post credibly (if not authoritatively) on a range of topics, and I will not take your word at face value when it contradicts my experience. Training and learning is one of those topics.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Bob, I'm not going to respond to anymore of your posts.
<snip>
Either way, interaction between us is futile.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank God. If anyone is concerned about my credentials or about me being a wannabe, ask "Murph" or "Sir Harold Shagnasty," on this board. Both have known me for about twenty years.


[This message has been edited by Uncle Bob (edited 15 May 2001).]

 

[The Shoveller]

Bob: "I have broad enough range of experience and training to post credibly (if not authoritatively) on a range of topics."

Yeah, well you have more than 19 pages of physics abstracts conradicting your "credible" theories about gravity. I don't think you look like too good a judge of what is "credible" right now.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T. Foster:
Which brings up a (serious, non-sarcastic) question: does D&D3/d20 provide a system for accumulating 'experience points' through practice, training, and instruction? Or is it still only possible (at least by the letter of the rules, barring individual GM-fiat) to gain experience (and, by extension, improve your skills) through 'adventuring' and/or accomplishing story-related goals?
Surely even the pro-XP faction must see that spending hours a day for weeks on end practicing and being instructed at scaling walls is more likely to make someone a good wall-scaler than scaling one or two walls and rescuing the princess on the other side. In the old days D&D made no allowance for this sort of logic, and I'd be disappointed (but hardly surprised) if it still didn't.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Strictly speaking, d20 or D&D3e doesn't provide for the kind of xp gains you speak of.

D&D3e has provisions for the classic D&D methods of gaining xp: killin' monsters, gaining treasures, and story awards.

Unfortunately, the OGL and the d20 license seems to preclude a game designer from altering the xp system - at least that's how I read it.

I guess I've always assumed that D&D PCs practice like you speak of in order to maintain their skills, and improve them when gaining a level. One could interpret the Story Award xp variant to account for such training and practice, but even to me that'd be stretching things.

Personally, I see your point, but think it wouldn't be very fun to play that way - not to denigrate you or your style of play, it's just a matter of taste.

Just to let you know, I've gamed since 1979. I've played dozens of different RPGs - including the original 1970s era Traveller, all of which had varying ways of handling xp and improvement of skills. I acknowledge d20 may not handle xp the best, but for me, it's simple and easy to grasp, concept-wise.

------------------
"Illegitimis non carborundum." - General Joseph Stilwell