Re: [DL] Which System to Use for a New Game

[Jesse Burneko <jburneko@yahoo.com>]

I have only skimmed the d20 version myself but here
are my honest opinions.

The d20 rules are quick and clean if you're interested
in solid challenges and don't care too much about
realism, flavor, or simulating genre conventions.  I
myself found that the d20 System sucked all the flavor
out of the Deadlands rules.  I LIKE the poker chips
and the cards and poker hands and so on.  But, I can
understand the appeal of quick and clean and that's
what d20 is.

The Deadlands rules can become combersome very quickly
but if you know how to Marshall the short cuts well
they don't become that big a deal.  The bigest advice
I have is DO NOT drop the stun rules.  I think it's a
big temptation just to ignore the stun rules to avoid
an extra roll.  However, it's MUCH easier to make one
recovery check then it is to make a complex attack. 
I've found that in a shoot out between humans by the
end of round 2 or 3 everyone is either dead,
unconcious or stunned.  Play it fast and loose.  Use A
LOT of common sense.  It takes practice and skill but
the system eventually runs quite smootly.

That's just my opinion.

Jesse
--- Daniel Stack <danielstack@mediaone.net> wrote:
> Dan bravely delurks...  I realize this is a fairly
> sensitive topic so
> I hope not to start a bitter system argument.
> 
> I'm currently mulling over which system to use for
> my Deadlands
> campaign which begins in the fall.
> 
> All of the players like and are at least somewhat
> familiar with the
> d20 system - we've played both d20 D&D and Star Wars
> with it.
> The players have mixes of preferences - some really
> like science
> fiction, some like Victorian era, some like the
> fantasy and magic of
> D&D.  All like action and adventure.  We're
> currently in a Star
> Trek game.  Discussing what to do when that winds
> down,
> all players have found something that they find
> interesting
> in a Deadlands game.
> 
> As Marshal, I have access to both incarnations of
> Deadlands.  I
> certainly feel that using the d20 system will be
> easier, at least in
> the first phases of the game, given the prior games
> the players have
> been in.  However, I wonder if the flavor of the
> game would be better served by using the original
> rules engine.
> As a caveat, I've never actually used the Deadlands
> system,
> though I have used similar systems.  However, I have
> heard
> some indicate that it can get quite complicated
> rather quickly.
> My biggest worry is that I, as
> gamemaster/Marshal/etc., tend
> to be the only owner of the rules - we tend to run
> rules-lite
> and I'm curious if others have run Deadlands
> campaigns in
> a similar manner. (i.e. the Marshal is teacher).
> 
> It looks like it'd be a lot of fun, dealing out
> cards, playing chips, etc.
> Also, I rather like the deadliness of the combat
> system and the less
> ablative approach to damage.  So far the players
> seem neutral
> to enthusiastic in trying out the Deadlands rules.
> 
> If I do go with the d20 version, I'll certainly not
> run it like a D&D
> game - for example I plan on being somewhat
> restrictive with
> hucksters and other arcane characters - characters
> who behave like
> D&D wizards will quickly find themselves being
> accused of being in
> league with Lucifer...  However, I do worry that
> higher level
> characters will be very, very tough to threaten.
> 
> Honest, non-flammable opinions sought.
> 
> -Dan
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net
> with
> 	unsubscribe deadlands
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/