I hate modern-day D20, 3.0+. I make no apologies, and I make no claims about trying to like it but not being able to. I’ve had my encounters with it, and I failed my Morale Check or Save vs. Shitty Systems or something.

I have to qualify my D20 “hate” a little or else I’ll seem really closed-minded. I don’t mind the BASIC system itself, the essential mechanics, a D20 as the usual task success/attack roll, with some percentile thrown in for some skills (I think). That part of it is really almost no different than Redbox D&D, which was the first RPG I bought or played and really is a pretty solid if simplistic system. I do prefer, for the most part, systems with more of a bell curve in their dice mechanic, as any number is as likely to come up as another on a D20, most hits are pure, independent luck, not centered or weighted toward any sort of basic competency.

AD&D 2^nd Edition was pretty good and very similar, but with the addition of weapon and non-weapon proficiencies and extra, but usually optional, more detailed rules, most of which I doubt ever got used by most people, definitely not me.  I was harshly disappointed and averse to D&D 3 and 3.5 when I saw them – WAY, way too complicated. Skills, Feats, Class Skills, Epic Levels, the list goes on. My main problem with skills and feats is their sheer number and style of minutia, requiring  “Tumbling” in order to “tumble”, or else you get outrageous penalties, sometimes for more than one part of the action. I hate that kind of infinitesimally specific breakdown or division of things which common sense should be able to cover in most cases.

I just find that absolutely ridiculous and needlessly complex and missing the point of HIGH FANTASY, which I feel is (or at least was) D&D’s default “mode”.  I always hated the checking for traps every ten feet, especially REQUIRING the thief player to specifically state that each time. That sort of thing complicates and draws out the length of the game but adds nothing to it and in fact detracts from the exciting and adventurous parts.  So when 3.5 came out and focused strongly on all these new miniscule but vital rules, AND put the spotlight back on tactical movement and what I’m pretty sure is referred to as “pixelbitching” (“Sorry, you didn’t say specifically you were searching the third row of stones”), I threw up my hands and said “Nope.”

4^th Edition I’m not sure about – I haven’t seen it played, but have looked through it and it looks similarly complicated but with seemingly less character options, and even more focus, if that is even possible, on tactical movement and such, making it seem one step down from a complicated board game.  I had Heroquest and Dark World and Dragon Strike, and they weren’t perfect, and were too simple, but I’d still prefer them to this kind of thing.

---

In a way, I understand the preference for level systems, as they DO make things easier (in theory) and also just give you a very simple, easily identifiable and understandable idea of just how capable and experienced a character or monster or NPC is, and can arguably be thought to correspond to a certain level of proficiency in general skills and life experience and savvy, marking the heroes and veterans from the amateurs.  The problem is the hard-and-fast “no child left behind” type of progression, where you level up and all kinds of things go with it, whether you use any of them or not, or specialize or concentrate on them or not, as well as preventing you from obtaining certain abilities until a certain level, even if you have thousands of XP you would be able to spend to “buy” them without reaching that level. Much like armor and weapons restrictions for spellcasters and such, I feel level systems paint with far too wide a brush, whitewashing details and differences and personalization, while also absolutely limiting a lot of options and branching out in unorthodox ways.

There is a renaissance of sorts going on in RPGs the past few years, as you might know, with retro and oldschool games being quite popular, more or less being “improved” version of original or Redbox D&D, to the point where they look nearly identical, intentionally, even down to the character sheet with the shield on it for AC, and the art and design style and layout of the book and module covers. Castles and Crusades, Labyrinth Lord, Hackmaster (from the Knights of the Dinner Table comic I think) and a few others are all variations of original D&D, and have met with some success by people who yearn for simpler systems, or just use them as one shot nostalgia sessions.  On the upside, with most of these, all the old scenarios for D&D and even AD&D (and 3E too I guess) are all closely compatible with these retro systems, so there already exists a huge amount of pre-written material, including supplements.

Similar Posts:

• Why Warhammer 2nd Edition Sucks
• RuneQuest Memories
• Why Do PC’s Do It?
• Roleplaying, Player Knowledge and Metagaming
• Options Create Appearance of Complexity?

No related posts.

Tags:

This entry was posted by J P on Tuesday, December 8th, 2009 at 11:55 pm and is filed under General RPG, Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.