Re: [DL] martial arts question

[balance@tubas.net]

On Wednesday, June 19, 2002, at 11:56  PM, Mary Payton wrote:
> <<  Ok...one more thing..this time I mean it...lol What's the general 
> consensus with people on this listserve on Deadlands D20, how does it 
> rank against the original system?>>
>
> I suppose I have to say "whatever floats your boat."  I have played 
> both classic and d20 (although I've only run in classic).  Although I 
> thank Pinnacle for broadening its fan base and its horizons with both 
> systems

This is true... If I owned the books, I'd consider DLd20 a very valid 
choice for 'one-off' games where the value of a system most gamers know 
is there.

> (and thank them again for not retiring one when the other came 
> out...Wizards of the Coast, I'm looking at you!), personally I prefer 
> classic,

What did they do this to? I don't think WotC is exactly a great company 
anymore for other reasons, but D&D3 is much more concise and a logical 
successor to 2nd, which had grown very cumbersome.

It's also nice o see that they seem to hae trimmed their focus... While 
it's left some settings unsupported and others have been reimagined, the 
plan to focus on a setting at a time is probably a good one.

As much as I hate to say it, D&D3e is the only game I could run where I 
would expect all of my players to own the player's handbook.

(although everyone in my group now ones some sort of Deadlands book, be 
it out of date, current, or Hell on Earth.)

> mostly because of the freedom and creativity it allows for the marshal 
> and the players.  Any point-based character system (including 
> Hero/Champions) allows the player to "play around" with the different 
> types of characters, rather than consigning them to the somewhat 
> limited world of levels and classes.  For example, one can have a 
> character with strengths in demolition, gun fighting, medicine, and the 
> black arts, without the headache of experience points and level 
> gaining.  Also, above all else, I look for originality in game systems, 
> both in design and function. 

True... I've reached a point in my curmudgeony old age (and I'm only 
24!) where I consider any system without edges/flaws somewhat inferior...

Of course, Deadlands does have classes, they just arent as set as those 
of most d20 games. Arcane Backgrounds are exclusive (with exceptions) 
and require enough special skills to make the character useful that 
other skills will, by default, have to become secondary.

> What other game ! system allows you to roll all them pretty d12s?  I 
> tell ya...my "purple d12 of death" was a might neglected while playing 
> the d20.  All in all, I guess I just can't be convinced to give up my 
> poker cards or fate chips--if only the d20 system could have found a 
> way to integrate at least the Fate Chips.  Alas!

Dream Pod 9 is revising their Silhouette system for their new game 
(althoguh I think it's been pushed back a bit) and has considered 
replacing the current use of d6 rolls with d12s to provide more 
granularity... Could be amusing.

The lack of fate chips in DLd20 is surprising... Since Weird Wars II 
uses 'bennies' for much the same thing, as does Star Wars d20, it's 
surprising. Oh well, there are a lot of advantages, as it allows 
Deadands to infect a group and makes them much more suceptible to a full 
campaign later.

One big issue is, to me, that certain systems encourage certain styles 
of play. CoC's sheer simplicity can, when run by a good GM, inspire the 
players to play their characters very well. Classic DL can be cumbersome 
at times, but still manages to focus on the things that are needed 
without bogging down on things that aren't.

The d20 core is very good. It's concise, clear, and has mercifully few 
opportunities for the rules lawyers to really bite down on. The 
weirdness of 2nd has been cleared up and the concept of 'a new system 
for every feature' has been banished. But it has the downside of 
inspiring standard D&D 'dungeon crawl' play. Players start obsessing 
over equipment, encumbrance, and similar.

For the record, as a marshall I'm often tempted to throw 'dungeon' 
segments into my home brew adventures. The reasons were simple: I know 
them (I grew up asking my parents for big (2' x 3' or so) things of 
graph paper and would make massive dungeons, most of which I never even 
stocked!) and my players know them. This is, i realize, something of a 
mistake. besides the fact that I've reached the point where I don't like 
subjecting my players to a dungeon who's existence I can't explain, 
dungeon crawls, in Classic DL, get bogged down and tend to wear out the 
players if done for any length.

Of course, an occasional 'old mine' inhabited by a few nasties can raise 
the scare potential...

Also, as another point in d20's favor, I play in a d20 game, and it can 
be very good... I think our group is split between serious talkers and 
heavy fighters, but we coexist well and one or two members can pinch-hit 
between the two groups. It still requires a good GM, but d20 doesn't 
mean that every adventure will turn into a hack & slay fest.

'Course, I'm saving Night Train for one weekend when we need a filler 
game.
--
Brett

LORD, WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT FOR THE CARE OF THE REAPER 
MAN? (Reaper Man, Terry Pratchett)