D & D Diatribe

[Curufea]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

It should be encouraged to bag other systems here. Accusations of trolling only occur if you disparage the system the forum represents - ie coming here and insulting the Hero system..

 

I can't see the point of going to fan sites and trolling. If you don't have anything nice to say - don't go to a board full of fanboys about it.

[Solomon]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

When I was younger, I used to have a strong dislike of D&D and its "signature" mechanichs - hit points, Armor Class, classes and levels, etc.

Now I can see they each have a purpose.

 

The AC system is a very abstract way to represent armor, but it's easy to learn and plays fast.

 

The ablative hit points system leads to those "realism" disconnects we all love to hate: high-level characters casually brushing off falls from a 100' cliff, and the like. However, it does make it very easy for a GM to gauge the effects of a potential combat encounter. It's very easy to gauge how much "hit points attrition" a given encounter will have on your group.

 

The class and level system is very inflexible and makes it hard to customize characters, but it provides unparaleled PC niche protection.

 

As with many other cultural products, I feel that the main reason for D&D's succes is just that it came first to an empty market. It created the market in fact. Do I like HERO above D&D? Sure, you can bet it. But I suspect that without D&D there would have been no HERO either. So please give D&D some credit - it deserves it.

[Solomon]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Re: the "ham sandwich" issue, I think Curufea has a point. Nothing does D&D like D&D. I know it sounds like a circular statement, but it makes sense if you think of D&D as its own fantasy genre.

Admittedly, the feel of any D&D setting is largely set by the rules of the game, and it feels quite unlike any other fantasy setting. Ever tried running a Tolkien-esque setting with D&D? Ever tried an Howard-ian setting? D&D is not "high fantasy", it's not "sword & sorcery", it's... "D&D fantasy".

You can use HERO to capture the feel of most of D&D settings' narrative source material better than D&D does, but no system can convey the feel of a D&D game. Except D&D of course.

[Curufea]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Yep, pretty much. D&D is its own setting and genre. When folk attach names or settings to it, what they're realling doing is flavouring D&D to be slightly reminiscent of that setting - ie a casual observer could guess 4 out of 5 times what setting it is attempting to be.

 

It's really good at restricted class, videogame-esque heroic fantasy.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Solomon really nailed the head on what made D&D so popular in the first place, though he missed one point: character creation.

 

D&D 1st edition character creation was:

 

1. Roll up six attributes

2. Pick a race

3. Pick a class

4. Roll your starting hit points and gold

5. Spend said gold on equipment

 

And you're off. And as much as I despise classes, I do admit that they make life easier for novice players who really don't know what they want to do with their character. And again, as pointed out previously, AC and hit points make combat a lot simpler for people.

 

If I were going to invent a D&D substitute to send back in time, I would make it the simplest point based system I could possibly imagine and then invent a "class/level" system which was essentially a package deal of progression that novice players could purchase with built up experience points. More advanced players could skip it and build characters any way they liked.

 

Not sure what I'd do to replace the AC/hp system, but I'd have to make it very fast and simple so people could get started with it easily.

[tracer]

Plus, AD&D had all the other games beat in terms of bragging rights.

 

Who else but an AD&D player could boast, "I got a +6 holy vorpal defender frost-brand flame-tongue sunblade luck blade longsword of wounding, sharpness, dancing, disruption, final word, slaying everything, thunderbolts, throwing, speed, quickness, all dragon slayer, life stealing, and nine lives stealing, with intelligence 17, speech and telepathy, ten non-alignment languages, eight extraordinary powers, eight special purposes, and all the artifact abilities in the Book of Artifacts supplement!"

[Curufea]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Huh!

 

Check out the size of my Variable Power Pool, baby!

 

 

Yeah, I see what you mean - the most powerful munchkin rules for Hero just aren't up to the level of pimple-producing testosterone compensation required....

 

Hmm...

 

"Desolid vs ..." also lack clout...

[CourtFool]

Flamewar on!

 

These are simply my feelings and not meant to ignite. I hate D&D in all its incarnations because there are not enough Hero gamers. It is my belief, and you could certainly make strong arguments against it, that if people moved away from D&D there would be more Hero gamers. Enough that I could actually play in a Hero game instead of running and trying desperately to convince D&D players to try Hero.

 

I have to disagree with the article in that I do not feel that classes encourage good role playing or avoids munchkinism. As long as players maintain a philosophy of 'winning' in a role playing game, there will be min/maxing. In any system.

 

Classes do not remove 'niche invasion'. There are frequently duplicate classes in a party. Classes special abilities frequently trample all over each other, especially prestige classes. And do not get me started on Feats.

 

"...a good class system also leaves many things unspecified so that you can fill in the details with roleplaying." You mean the arbitrary rulling of the current Game Master. I prefer to have something defined so it is more consistent through GMs, genres and campaigns.

 

Classes do make it easier for novices. I will completely agree with that. Of course this is just as easily accomplished with a package deal.

 

A good GM is a good GM regardless of system. A good role player will role play regardless of system. Remove those two factors and I would still rather have the flexibility of a skill based system.

 

...but what the hell does a llama know?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

but no system can convey the feel of a D&D game. Except D&D of course.

 

Well, a few knockoffs do that fairly well.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

I tend to think of D&D and Fantasy Hero as uncomparable.

 

D&D is, and always shall be, D&D. Warts and all, the iconic classes are burned into literature: Fighter, Mage, Thief, Cleric and certain sub-classes of fighter: Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian. You recognize the races: Elf, Human, Dwarf, Orc and Halflings. I think it was big mistake trying to tack on a skills, powers and feats onto D&D. Their main strength was: roll dice, move mice. It was the never-ending dungeon/cavern/city crawl and the gold came and went faster than at Las Vegas. When they tried to a skill and powers system, I just laughed, it was like trying to add racing strips to a school bus.

 

Fantasy Hero broke the mold. It said, you spent all this time constructing custom-built superheroes, now build your own custom-built fantasy characters. Unfortuately, it was too flexible, each character had to be hand-crafted, hell, everything had to be hand-crafted (unless you wanted to play D&D with Fantasy Hero and then some examples were given). Where D&D had tired old sterotypes, Fantasy Hero was entirely empty waiting for someone to come along and build a brand new world.

[tancred]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

snip

If I were going to invent a D&D substitute to send back in time, I would make it the simplest point based system I could possibly imagine and then invent a "class/level" system which was essentially a package deal of progression that novice players could purchase with built up experience points. More advanced players could skip it and build characters any way they liked.

 

Not sure what I'd do to replace the AC/hp system, but I'd have to make it very fast and simple so people could get started with it easily.

 

This system existed. It was called The Fantasy Trip. Steve Jackson's predecessor to GURPS (before Steve Jackson Games; R.I.P., Metagaming), it was an EXTREMELY simple system both to learn and to play.

There were basically two classes, mages and everybody else.

 

It had great detailed combat, simpler than HERO but MUCH better than D&D. It had an experience point progression system whereby you could buy increased stats, which led in turn to new skills and/or spells.

It had what I still consider the best ever alchemy and magic item creation rules, simple enough to use but balanced enough to not flood the world with potions and magic items.

 

Twenty-five years after discovering it, the campaign world it introduced is still the basis of my Fantasy Hero campaign.

 

Courtfool, I totally agree with what you said. I found TFT wonderful mostly because I hated all the things wrong with D&D. And I still resent D&D because it forces me to be the HERO GM for our group, rather than getting to play HERO.

[Guest taxboy4]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Wow I'm really pleased with the way this threrad i kicked off is progressing (pats my own back)

 

Now to play Devils advocate - things I perceive as wrong with Fantasy Hero

 

* over reliance on Dexterity Stat for combat

* magic system is a bloody nightmare - I struggle every time for simple yet flexible spells system - sorta of a D&D spell chart with ability to be flexible

* experince points awards - too simple

* more a fan of every thing in decile form also

 

What do other people think or could add to the list?

[Guest taxboy4]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Huh!

 

Check out the size of my Variable Power Pool, baby!

 

 

Yeah, I see what you mean - the most powerful munchkin rules for Hero just aren't up to the level of pimple-producing testosterone compensation required....

 

Hmm...

 

"Desolid vs ..." also lack clout...

 

Lol, this is so true!! But its much more satisfying in Hero to go on a super munchkin vs Robbers combat, with targeted damage etc!@!

 

D&D combat is dull and as realistic as WWF

[Curufea]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Warts and all' date=' the iconic classes are burned into literature: Fighter, Mage, Thief, Cleric and certain sub-classes of fighter: Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian. You recognize the races: Elf, Human, Dwarf, Orc and Halflings. [/quote']

 

Iconic, possibly - but I think you are stretching the use of the word literature into realms beyond which it has never boldly gone before

 

I've never encountered anything in fantasy literature that resembles D&D - and only have found things that are similar (but not exactly like) in D&D franchise books. Franchise D&D books aren't literature, and frequently don't even obey the rules fo the game they wish to market.

 

Mind you, I do equate literature with books that, 5 years after reading I can recall the plot and the author, and those that read the genre will recognise just based on one of the characters in it.

[CourtFool]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

* over reliance on Dexterity Stat for combat

* magic system is a bloody nightmare - I struggle every time for simple yet flexible spells system - sorta of a D&D spell chart with ability to be flexible

* experince points awards - too simple

* more a fan of every thing in decile form also

We have had this conversation before. What do you want combat based on? Com?

 

The magic system is not a bloody nightmare, it is non-existant. In my opinion that is its greatest strength and weakness.

 

Experience points awards are too simple? This is the first time I have heard Hero being acused of being too simple. Would you like an arbitrary mathmatical formula? I am sure I could cook one up for you. I will be sure to use decimals instead of fractions.

 

I will conceed that decimals are more appealing than fractions...but then 1/2 and 1/4 convert nicely into decimals.

 

What would I change?

 

Well...to be honest I would like to see more granularity. However, I do not have any suggestions on how to add this without breaking things, so I will just keep quiet about it.

[Solomon]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Solomon really nailed the head on what made D&D so popular in the first place, though he missed one point: character creation.

 

Heh! When I try to explain what's so special about HERO's character creation to someone who has never played it, I tend to use this metaphore:

 

D&D chargen is like ordering a menu at McDonalds - you don't have that many options, but you'll get your meal quick.

 

HERO chargen is like a well-stocked kitchen, but you have to do the cooking by yourself. You can't just randomly mix ingredients or you'll make a mess, but given time and a clear idea of what you're trying to do, you can cook anything.

[Solomon]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Ok, I said I grew more tolerant of D&D's features over time - actually there's one feature that I grew to dislike: it's the artificial distinction between "arcane" wizardry and "divine" spells. Most fantasy literature only has a single source for magic, and historically magic and religion have been closely tied more often than not. The distinction grew even more absurd with the introduction of Sorcerers in D&D3, so now we have a divinely granted magic, a quasi-science arcane magic, and... an innate magic that still counts as arcane magic? Why?

 

Next time I run a D&D campaign I'll probably try out Monte Cook's Arcana Unhearted.

[SaintQuakko]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Ok, I said I grew more tolerant of D&D's features over time - actually there's one feature that I grew to dislike: it's the artificial distinction between "arcane" wizardry and "divine" spells. Most fantasy literature only has a single source for magic, and historically magic and religion have been closely tied more often than not. The distinction grew even more absurd with the introduction of Sorcerers in D&D3, so now we have a divinely granted magic, a quasi-science arcane magic, and... an innate magic that still counts as arcane magic? Why?

 

Next time I run a D&D campaign I'll probably try out Monte Cook's Arcana Unhearted.

Actually, sorcerors, wizards, and bards cast arcane spells, and clerics, druids, paladins and rangers cast divine spells. That's Tradition handed down from the Basic set, IIRC.

[Solomon]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Actually' date=' sorcerors, wizards, and bards cast arcane spells, and clerics, druids, paladins and rangers cast divine spells. That's Tradition handed down from the Basic set, IIRC.[/quote']

 

I know, I know. Given the (artificial, to me) distinction between Divine and Arcane, I can see why Clerics, Druids, Rangers and Paladins share the same "source" of power - divinely granted magic. I can see how Wizards and Bards share the same "magic as a learnable skill" source. But Sorcerers? They are defined as having innate, spontaneous powers. Yet they need the same gestures, incantations and components as Wizards. And they cast the very same spells, including spells named after their "inventor". I can't wrap my mind around that.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

That's what drives me nuts about D&D, it's established so many conventions that are now permanently ingrained in RPG culture. It established a very poorly thought out set of classes and characteristics which have warped and corrupted so many games since then.

[Curufea]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Actually' date=' sorcerors, wizards, and bards cast arcane spells, and clerics, druids, paladins and rangers cast divine spells. That's Tradition handed down from the Basic set, IIRC.[/quote']

 

And it's not the only system that differentiates sources too - Rolemaster's Essence, Chanelling and Mentalism did the same thing.

 

Although they explain it better

[Markdoc]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

but no system can convey the feel of a D&D game. Except D&D of course.

 

Well, except Hackmaster, which is more D&D than D&D itself.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

The class and level system is very inflexible and makes it hard to customize characters' date=' but it provides unparaleled PC niche protection.[/quote']

 

Not any more - I've just started playing d20 D&D and the multiclass system lets you ride all over other people's schticks, since once you multiclass you get *exactly* all the powers they have, just a few level behind (and of course you shortly end up just one level behind, because that's how levels work).

 

Actually, the thought just struck me - perhaps D&D players have always been essentially life support systems for their magic items because it's the magic items that differentate them?

 

cheers, Mark

[CourtFool]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

Actually' date=' the thought just struck me - perhaps D&D players have always been essentially life support systems for their magic items because it's the magic items that differentate them?[/quote']

Yes! Thank you for reminding me of another reason I hate D&D.

[AlHazred]

Re: D & D Diatribe

 

See, this is another reason I prefer Hero. (Not that I hate D&D, really; I play D&D pretty regularly, but to be fair, I'd play any game with that particular group of people.) When you play D&D, you're not "simulating" whatever setting you're playing in; instead, you're doing the "D&D version" of it. If I use D&D to play in Middle Earth, it's essentially just a thin veneer over the basic system because there's no easy way to rebalance things and no way to quantify the effects of rule changes. The maddening thing is that there pretty clearly is an algorithm that they used to make everything in the first place, they just didn't include it in any of the articles or books I've seen.

 

Eh, anyway. Hero lets me make exactly what I want to run, and lets my players know how potent any particular Power, Skill or Talent is going to be.