D&D 3E/3.5 D&D 3e to be changed to new d20 rules? 4e coming!

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Lately, a desire for a greater degree of "realism" along with several other things have got me thinking about the future 4th Edition of D&D, and how to go about playing it... For example, Monte Cook has stated that he wished armor had provided DR in 3e instead of an AC bonus, and all the new d20 games from WoTC are utilizing the VP/WP and Defense thing instead of HP and AC, so I'm thinking that D&D 4e will end up incorporating most, if not all, of these changes.

With that in mind, I'm working on a theoretical 4th Edition for my home game, being a conversion of 3e to the latest d20 system mechanics from Star Wars, Pulp Heroes, Shadowchasers and the upcoming d20 Modern rules.

I would appreciate any and all feedback on this project. Please visit the thread here to check it out:

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3424

Thanks!

Also, do you think that it is a good idea for future editions of D&D to conform to the new d20 system mechanics as outlined above? Or is it fine as is?

 

[SableWyvern]

3e still maintains enough of the old D&D concepts to be readily identifiable as D&D. With the sort of changes you're discussing, I can see 5e continuing the progression to become something very different from anything anyone recognises as D&D.

Some will argue this is a good thing, others a bad thing.

Personally, I would not be surprised if games like WoT include many concepts that the designers would have liked to see in 3e, but were afraid to put in because they would change the feel of the game too much.

I vote for retaining as much of the past as can be done, and in 3e I think an excellent balance has been found.

If both those for tradition and those for progress could be catered for (eg, with rule expansion packages or somesuch), that would be the best option - but probably impractical.

I dunno. Just some meandering thoughts that I haven't really thought out.

 

[Psion]

Lately, a desire for a greater degree of "realism" along with several other things have got me thinking about the future 4th Edition of D&D, and how to go about playing it... For example, Monte Cook has stated that he wished armor had provided DR in 3e instead of an AC bonus, and all the new d20 games from WoTC are utilizing the VP/WP and Defense thing instead of HP and AC, so I'm thinking that D&D 4e will end up incorporating most, if not all, of these changes.

And I think you are wrong.

D&D is pretty much the premeir fantasy RPG, persisting as such despite many allegedly suprior pretenders. And why do you think that is?

IMO, because aspects like AC and HP as they are capture the heroic fantasy feel. In D&D 3e, a character with a dagger can have a credible chance of harming someone in full plate armor if he is good enough. No such luck if you make armor into DC.

The VP and Armor as DR systems work fine -- for the genres that they mean to emulate. But incorporating them into D&D proper would seriously shift the kilter of the game.

 

[Orclicker]

If you are looking for a greater degree of realism in your RPG consider trying Rolemaster. IT is a great system that has been streamlined but offeres the most realistic game mechanics imaginable.

www.ironcrown.com

 

[hong]

If you are looking for a greater degree of realism in your RPG consider trying Rolemaster. IT is a great system that has been streamlined but offeres the most realistic game mechanics imaginable.

RM is hellaciously complicated, but that doesn't mean it's realistic. If it was as easy to kill yourself with your sword as the RM fumble tables have it, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

 

[SableWyvern]

If you are looking for a greater degree of realism in your RPG consider trying Rolemaster. IT is a great system that has been streamlined but offeres the most realistic game mechanics imaginable.

www.ironcrown.com

Ooh.

You're looking for trouble.

RM is a GREAT game. It is highly realistic - as FRP goes. But there are aspects of RM that don't realistically simulate a fantasy reality (yeah, that's an oxymoron, and part of the whole point).

And because I know some anti-RM poster will comment on the game's complexity*, let me say: RM is NOT as difficult to run as it appears on the surface. Most people who have a problem with RM see lots of tables and believe its too complex to run smoothly. It can be if you run old school D&D style dungeon crawls. But that's what d&d is for, not RM.

*Edit: hong posted while I was typing.

 

[Victim]

The Wheel of Time game uses HP, not WP/VP.

Also, the armor DR rules seem pretty weak. Armor only protects against WP damage. WP are basically a character's last ten or so HP, except crits will pull off these points too. Wow, you can wear armor, get penalties, and only have protection on the last 10 - 20 points of damage. That's SO worth it. If something gets a character down to his last 10 HP, then it can probably blow through the armor and finish him. If it couldn't, then the players haven't been doing a good job at killing stuff. Those rules essentially make armor useless in battles between groups of powerful adversaries.

 

[SableWyvern]

RM is hellaciously complicated, but that doesn't mean it's realistic. If it was as easy to kill yourself with your sword as the RM fumble tables have it, the world would be a much more peaceful place.

In 15 years packed with RM, I've never seen anyone or thing kill themselves with their own weapon. Refer my previous post.

 

[hong]

Also, the armor DR rules seem pretty weak. Armor only protects against WP damage. WP are basically a character's last ten or so HP, except crits will pull off these points too. Wow, you can wear armor, get penalties, and only have protection on the last 10 - 20 points of damage. That's SO worth it. If something gets a character down to his last 10 HP, then it can probably blow through the armor and finish him. If it couldn't, then the players haven't been doing a good job at killing stuff. Those rules essentially make armor useless in battles between groups of powerful adversaries.

That kinda makes sense, in a way. Ever notice how in many fantasy stories, the quality of the armour is inversely related to the power level of the character wearing it? From battlesuited stormtroopers to nazgul and uruk-hai in plate mail, it seems that armour is really the traditional domain of mooks. _Real_ heroes get by with a chain shirt, or even just regular clothing.

Hong "or a chainmail bikini, even" Ooi

 

[Desdichado]

D&D is pretty much the premeir fantasy RPG, persisting as such despite many allegedly suprior pretenders. And why do you think that is?

IMO, because aspects like AC and HP as they are capture the heroic fantasy feel. In D&D 3e, a character with a dagger can have a credible chance of harming someone in full plate armor if he is good enough. No such luck if you make armor into DC.

D&D's popularity has (IMO) nothing whatsoever to do with its system and everything to do with being first to market so many years ago. Most roleplayers, who don't consider themselves real roleplaying connoisseurs, think of D&D and D&D only when they think of roleplaying. The standing network of D&D players relative to players of other games has pretty much ensured that this will maintain itself for at least the next several years. AC and HP aren't the reason D&D is at the top of the pack.