New Survey on Getting into RPGs by Necropraxis

[tenbones]

You know, while I personally don't like D&D, I have nothing really against its players or creators or anything (and play it some myself), but I swear there are some people who if they were the ones running everything, its the only game we would have ever gotten, because apparently it was perfect and there was never any reason to make anything else, because it works guys why would you need anything else! If you have a problem with it, clearly you are at fault, and not the perfect D&D system. There many RPGs who have hobbyists with that sentiment. However D&D has it both ways. Those who you describe and those who get ridiculed constantly for using a broken game especially if it is an older edition. I have been BOTH of these assholes. Ahh the Nerdzerker Wars! It's really just a case of being honest. I don't *run* D&D anymore either. I no longer feel comfortable with the system. I sure as hell don't feel welcome with the companies I used to write for (outside of Goodman Games - Joe is *awesome*). The players that currently make up the fandom on forums and at the FLGS's around here (which are jam-packed and huge) are particularly hostile to people that don't buy into their "ideas" that have nothing to do with the game (this is locally - I'm not speaking for everyone). It's not the game I used to play, nor the people with whom I wish to play it - exceptions are ALWAYS on the table. That said - it doesn't affect me one bit at my table. I'm still having magnificent fun running games I could simply never do with the D&D chassis. And that's kind of the larger takeaway - D&D is for playing D&D, to me. I don't feel any desire to run it to exemplify anything other than itself, mainly because I don't think it does things as well as it used to. But I've certainly gotten flak for saying as much. But I'm not going to tell people having fun with their game to stop. I might suggest another system - but to me, that's like recommending another band to listen to. But I guess that's no different than telling someone that only listens to Iron Maiden and power-metal (which alone invites argument and debate) to check out some Black Keys or something. The fact is D&D is the flagship of the hobby. Like it or not. And while many of us started in that august kingdom and moved on to other, smaller fiefdoms... until it implodes under its own mediocrity/rival faction fights/poor architectural engineering between editions - it's D&D that pulls more people into this hobby than anything else. And that's worth a lot on its own.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I think that the big thing for me, from my perspective, is that I'm a big proponent of System Matters. Just not in the way that Forge meant it .

What I mean is that I tend to think that, in general, every system gives a certain feel, and its better to find a system that matches the feel of what you want than to try to twist another system to do it.

It's why I tend to like weird specialist systems more than generic systems. Like even Savage Worlds, which is "generic"ish still has a certain feel to it (it really has a pulpy adventure movie feel to it to me)

It's honestly the thing I dislike most about the OSR. This insistence of taking a square peg and shoving it through every single hole no matter what shape it is.

You like something, cool, good for you. But don't act like because you like it that makes it universally true.

 

[robertsconley]

I think that the big thing for me, from my perspective, is that I'm a big proponent of System Matters. Just not in the way that Forge meant it .

What I mean is that I tend to think that, in general, every system gives a certain feel, and its better to find a system that matches the feel of what you want than to try to twist another system to do it.

What is feel? It is the procedure one uses to handle an actions like a swing of the sword or a jump across a chasm? Is that you use a 3d6 versus 1d100? It that hit location is important to consider? Is is pooling everybody dice versus an opposing number of dice?

Feel is a preference. But it not just an a preference it of vital importance to one's enjoyment of the campaign. The right set of rules for a group can make a campaign far more fun and enjoyable to play. But not necessary to make it happen. For another group a completely different system may do the trick.

It's honestly the thing I dislike most about the OSR. This insistence of taking a square peg and shoving it through every single hole no matter what shape it is.

Or maybe it isn't as hard you think it is.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Compare D&D to CP2020 for instance.

Strict class system vs Freeform character creation (with like, 1 exclusive skill basically from "class")
zero to hero vs competent to more competent
low level D&D is high lethality, mid to high level is more attrition based, CP2020 is just high lethality thorughout.
etc
etc
etc

If you think these games don't create a different feel at the table, then I have no idea how to approach this conversation at all.

EDIT: Also, yes I'm talking mostly about combat, because when comparing D&D to anything, combat is the thing that D&D has the most rules for. If we talk about OD&D vs CP2020, the fact that CP2020 has a skill system where as OD&D is mostly GM fiat (this is not good or bad it just is), then that is also another point of "this creates a different feel".

 

[AsenRG]

But the premise of Empire of the Petal Throne was still dungeon crawling. I’ve read the original set and that’s what it seems to me: the PCs explore the underground ruins of the ancient advanced civilization the current world is built on top of.

Its relative failure is hard to pin down all these years later, could have been distro issues, etc. but most likely the world was too far from the Tolkien-lite assumptions that most were interested in playing at the time. The later success of FR backs that idea up I think.

Yeah, that too.
As for the relative failure, the part about overpriced is something I've had confirmed by people who were involved in the production, and by people who explained why they never paid Tekumel attention. So I'll stick to it as a major reason.

Like I said above core D&D comes with a kitchen sink collections of character types, items, and monsters. Enough that over the decades it covered a wide variety of setting.

The problem I see people assume that if you X system that you have to use all the option that in that system's core. What I found through my own writing endeavor that often it just a bunch of small tweaks that needed to make a given system feel right for a setting. Especially if the RPG is designed to be used with a genre instead of a specific setting.

I have to stress though this is not a 100% thing or even a 80% thing. There are plenty of setting that would take a lot of work to run with System X. In that case I agree use a system that already has the work done.

For instance the biggest issue for fantasy campaign is often the magic system which is hard to get around. The biggest issue for science fiction campaigns is the equipment and technology lists. For Horror it is the list of monsters that the PCs have the contend with. In most RPGs they are pretty long list thus take a lot of work to do for somebody to spend their hobby time on.


You said that you can use Savage Worlds to run the kind of campaign you like. Yet the Savage Product line is like GURPS or Hero System, a core book with a wealth of support product to tweak it for various genres and settings.

Why does D&D get criticism for being too specific when there are numerous example of publishers for various editions including the OSR who treated D&D the same way Pinnacle treat Savage Worlds. Tweak one or more aspect of the system to fit a subgenre or setting better. Just like Cublicle7 did with 5e with AiME.

To lesser extent Cepheus has been treated the same by publishers using it. Many of come out with versions of Cepheus tweaked for their settings or subgenre. Of course it helps that Mongoose designed MgT 1e, Cepheus' foundation. to support more science fiction settings than the Third Imperium.

If you look at what Cepheus, Savage World, does most of the work is in tweaking the stuff, the careers, the equipment, the creatures, and the extra things characters can do in the setting like magic and psionics.

D&D in it various editions except for 4e* is no better or worse than Savage Worlds or GURPS to adapt to a particular setting or genre. Pathfinder has Starfinder, Swords & Wizardry has White Star, and so on.

Fourth edition unfortunately takes an order of magnitude of more time to revamp due its exception based design. To impart a different feel you have to do the same amount of work they did on the original system. Because once all the exceptions are stripped away the core system is minimal by design.

Like I said above core D&D comes with a kitchen sink collections of character types, items, and monsters. Enough that over the decades it covered a wide variety of setting.

The problem I see people assume that if you X system that you have to use all the option that in that system's core.

I assure you, that has never been my problem.

I have to stress though this is not a 100% thing or even a 80% thing. There are plenty of setting that would take a lot of work to run with System X. In that case I agree use a system that already has the work done.

For instance the biggest issue for fantasy campaign is often the magic system which is hard to get around. The biggest issue for science fiction campaigns is the equipment and technology lists. For Horror it is the list of monsters that the PCs have the contend with. In most RPGs they are pretty long list thus take a lot of work to do for somebody to spend their hobby time on.

Well, glad we agree here .

You said that you can use Savage Worlds to run the kind of campaign you like. Yet the Savage Product line is like GURPS or Hero System, a core book with a wealth of support product to tweak it for various genres and settings.

Why does D&D get criticism for being too specific when there are numerous example of publishers for various editions including the OSR who treated D&D the same way Pinnacle treat Savage Worlds. Tweak one or more aspect of the system to fit a subgenre or setting better. Just like Cublicle7 did with 5e with AiME.

Because, unlike in D&D, the core parts of the system work right (anything from checks to wounds to advancement to magic). I can and have worked from those core rules only...I'm not using Savage World+Rules Supplements (like Fantasy) to run those campaigns. I'm using Savage Worlds Deluxe, period.
If I need any tweaks, I usually make them myself. But the only supplements I own are setting ones (Mars and Thrilling Tales), and then I bought them mostly for the GMing chapters (the genre advice).
Well, I probably own a few more due to Bundle of Holding, but I haven't even read the mechanics in those...

Now compare with D&D where I have to alter basic stuff like the magic system (and, for many genres, the wound system ). Does it compare favourably? I'm saying "no".

To lesser extent Cepheus has been treated the same by publishers using it. Many of come out with versions of Cepheus tweaked for their settings or subgenre. Of course it helps that Mongoose designed MgT 1e, Cepheus' foundation. to support more science fiction settings than the Third Imperium.

Yes. But again, I'm only using the Cepheus Core rules and some advancement rules I cribbed from...somewhere. I'm not sure whether it was a blog, a fan supplement, or something else. Same thing as Savage Worlds...
And since I also mentioned ORE, I can run pretty much anything with StarORE. I've ran wuxia with it without significant alterations. (Admittedly, I've ran wuxia with so many systems that it's mind-boggling).

If you look at what Cepheus, Savage World, does most of the work is in tweaking the stuff, the careers, the equipment, the creatures, and the extra things characters can do in the setting like magic and psionics.

But the point is, I mostly don't use any "tweaks" except for those I've introduced myself. Because that was easy to do.

D&D in it various editions except for 4e* is no better or worse than Savage Worlds or GURPS to adapt to a particular setting or genre. Pathfinder has Starfinder, Swords & Wizardry has White Star, and so on.

Definitely untrue in my experience. Sorry.

Fourth edition unfortunately takes an order of magnitude of more time to revamp due its exception based design. To impart a different feel you have to do the same amount of work they did on the original system. Because once all the exceptions are stripped away the core system is minimal by design.

I'm fine with leaving 4e out of it if you're fine as well.

Not sure what you mean here. Are you speaking more general or something I published or blogged about?

Isn't this the D&D-alike system that you're talking about?

DriveThruRPG

www.drivethrurpg.com

If so, I tried using it...about a year ago, maybe more? In the end, I gave up on both the system and the setting. (Granted, that was mostly because the group I tried to run it for splintered. But the system didn't feel right and I was at the point to ask for a system change).
As I said, I'm sure that you can use it. I'm sure other people can, too. It just doesn't work for me - and I dare say that if you needed to "educate yourself" on the assumptions of the creators, this ain't a good system for introducing new people (including new GMs). Which is where this discussion started.

Or the amount of stuff (character types, monsters, items, magic) is broad enough to encompass a wide variety of campaigns. Omission doesn't take a lot of works.

No, it doesn't. But it doesn't suffice, either.

But the example of AiME suggest that you could run a Middle Earth campaign with core 5e if you omitted the magic system and the spellcasters. Have a selected list of magic items one used. That combination would be good enough for many. This is easily achievable within the time one has for a hobby.

Again, if you can use 5e with such "omissions" to run Middle Earth, I'm glad it works for you. I've tried similar "fixes" with other editions and settings...nope, it didn't work.

How far can one get by just not using everything a edition of D&D has but just use what fits the setting?

IME, "not far enough".

 

[Ladybird]

You know, while I personally don't like D&D, I have nothing really against its players or creators or anything (and play it some myself), but I swear there are some people who if they were the ones running everything, its the only game we would have ever gotten, because apparently it was perfect and there was never any reason to make anything else, because it works guys why would you need anything else! If you have a problem with it, clearly you are at fault, and not the perfect D&D system.

It's not perfect, it's fine. It's good enough. Many other games do specific things better, but few are quite as all-round okay, and sometimes that's enough.

But it CAN be done.

BECMI obviously did it. I'm not sure who made it to Immortal Rules... but I've always thought that D&D (and any flavor of it) could do a rock-solid 10-lvl game. It could hold all the modern conceits for D&D - no "dead levels", constant progression. And condensed into that block, you set all the fluff conceits needed to explain what those levels of play actually mean in terms of the content. At 10th level you're doing the big stuff: fighting dragons, leading armies, founding kingdoms etc.

By adhering to a 10-lvl scale, it's much easier to design for because you can keep number bloat down.

You could condense XP totals to make those level gains more meaningful. And you'd be incentivised to create as many adventures people can handle, while creating ever larger regions of play, from the starting point of the game to flesh out the world and breadcrumb GM's into ad-hoc creating their own sandbox along the way.

This could be done with tables, with adventure hook creation methods that teaches new GM's how to create relevant content on the fly. Worldbuilding rules - which for the creatively challenged could also be generated via tables.

This is the sort of thing that Shadow of the Demon Lord at least tries to do, with a ten-session campaign framework. It seems a little too rapid for me, because it doesn't leave time for the pottering about and getting into the details of the world that are the best parts of RPG's, but all it takes to do it in this E10 D&D is a bit of GM advice like "level the party up whenever you feel they're ready" and not putting in XP tables, and boom, you're done.

On the other hand, I've seen players complain that they were somehow missing out on content because a campaign started at level 3 instead of level 1, or that certain video games have less content because the level cap is 20 and not 60. 20 has now became one of D&D's sacred cows, even if games rarely actually reach that level.

 

[EmperorNorton]

It's not perfect, it's fine. It's good enough. Many other games do specific things better, but few are quite as all-round okay, and sometimes that's enough.

If I was going to pick one system to use forever for every single game, D&D variants would be anywhere NEAR the top of the list.

D&D is good at being D&D. The fact that a lot of people like what D&D is, isn't the same as it being a good all around game.

Games I would pick way before D&D:
Savage Worlds
FATE (and I don't even like FATE much)
Genesys
D6
HERO (if you don't mind a lot heavier on the character creation)

And that is just off the top of my head.

D&D based systems just has some things about it that imo make it kind of only fit into a specific type of game. (Zero to hero, attrition based). The only game I'd probably consider to actually get outside of that feel is Mutants and Masterminds.

 

[Luca]

Yes. The facts that the game was, reportedly, overpriced for its time, and pictured a setting at a time where most GMs came up with their own dungeons first and the setting second, certainly have no bearing on the matter!
Neither does the fact that Tekumel had acquired, by mistake of its own fans, the reputation of "that place that requires you to have a PhD in Tekumeliani Studies in order to run it right".

Ten US dollars in 1975. Or maybe 20? Sorry, going from memory here. Make of that what you will.
Also, at that time, Tekumel was far too young to have acquired any reputation.

 

[Ladybird]

If I was going to pick one system to use forever for ever single game, D&D variants would be anywhere NEAR the top of the list.

That's... kinda out of context, though? I'm still dealing with the original topic of the thread - D&D as an introduction game, not D&D as the one system to use forever for every single game.

I agree that D&D's best at being D&D, but sometimes that's enough. Sometimes that's all you need to get people hooked. If it makes a player realise they want one of the other things from their games, great, that's why literally every other game exists.

 

[Jetstream]

Ten US dollars in 1975. Or maybe 20? Sorry, going from memory here. Make of that what you will.
Also, at that time, Tekumel was far too young to have acquired any reputation.

Empire of the Petal Throne

Introduction For me, and I suspect for many people, it was this game that launched a lifelong fascination with the world of Tékumel. I still remember the chill that ran up my spine when as a high s…

tekumelcollecting.com

$25, apparently. But there was a coupon you could get.

 

[EmperorNorton]

That's... kinda out of context, though? I'm still dealing with the original topic of the thread - D&D as an introduction game, not D&D as the one system to use forever for every single game.

I agree that D&D's best at being D&D, but sometimes that's enough. Sometimes that's all you need to get people hooked. If it makes a player realise they want one of the other things from their games, great, that's why literally every other game exists.

Which I don't disagree with. I think D&D has worked very well as a beginner's game, I even stated why I thought so upthread.

But what you quoted from me was an entirely different tangent, in which I was responding to how some people seem to be incapable of taking any criticism of D&D at all, and thinking it was a perfect fit for every single type of game.

 

[Ladybird]

Which I don't disagree with. I think D&D has worked very well as a beginner's game, I even stated why I thought so upthread.

But what you quoted from me was an entirely different tangent, in which I was responding to how some people seem to be incapable of taking any criticism of D&D at all, and thinking it was a perfect fit for every single type of game.

Alright, fair enough, my bad. I think we're basically on the same page then.

 

[Magister]

There is no plausible point of departure that gets tabletop roleplaying prior to the development of sophisticated wargame campaigns in the late 60s and early 70s.

Here's an interesting link for an earlier possibility.

I suspect the open-endedness of tabletop RPGs would be hard to evolve out of computer games (if, say, home computers had been 10 years or more ahead of when they appeared) or even board wargames that did not have the umpire of free Kriegspiel.

 

[AsenRG]

Ten US dollars in 1975. Or maybe 20? Sorry, going from memory here. Make of that what you will.
Also, at that time, Tekumel was far too young to have acquired any reputation.

Nothing is wrong...except your memory.

Empire of the Petal Throne

Introduction For me, and I suspect for many people, it was this game that launched a lifelong fascination with the world of Tékumel. I still remember the chill that ran up my spine when as a high s…

tekumelcollecting.com

$25, apparently. But there was a coupon you could get.

And now...

Value of 1975 US Dollars today - Inflation Calculator

How much are 1975 dollars (USD) worth today? This tool calculates the time value of money based on inflation and CPI historical data from the United States.

www.inflationtool.com

So, $100 US at 1975 are $484 today.
Yes, I'm really surprised that a $121 game (for a single book!) wouldn't gain much traction, or that it attracted elitists...

 

[Jetstream]

Yeah, $25 in 1975 would’ve been pretty high I guess. I remember when I was a kid in the late 80s, and video games were stupid expensive too.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Yeah, $25 in 1975 would’ve been pretty high I guess. I remember when I was a kid in the late 80s, and video games were stupid expensive too.

I always get confused at people thinking video games are expensive now cause they are $60 bucks new, when Chrono Trigger was like $80 and that was in '95

 

[Voros]

Empire of the Petal Throne

Introduction For me, and I suspect for many people, it was this game that launched a lifelong fascination with the world of Tékumel. I still remember the chill that ran up my spine when as a high s…

tekumelcollecting.com

$25, apparently. But there was a coupon you could get.

Adjusting for inflation that is almost $120 in todays dollars. So yeah, that's a steep price tag.

 

[3rik]

I always get confused at people thinking video games are expensive now cause they are $60 bucks new, when Chrono Trigger was like $80 and that was in '95

I suspect something similar is the case with RPG books, especially considering production values and inflation. I've never found RPG books in general particularly expensive.

 

[Baulderstone]

I suspect something similar is the case with RPG books, especially considering production values and inflation. I've never found RPG books in general particularly expensive.

The entertainment value per dollar is very good. It only gets expensive when you start buying RPG books at a rate much higher than you can ever realistically play them. Playing RPGs is a cheap hobby. Collecting them can get pricey.

 

[Dumarest]

Flashing Blades cost something like $12. Divided by (let's guess) 240 hours of game time, not counting other enjoyment derived from it, it's cost me 5¢ an hour to date and every time I play it the cost goes down. Sounds like a heckuva bargain to me...as long as you actually play your games.

 

[3rik]

The entertainment value per dollar is very good. It only gets expensive when you start buying RPG books at a rate much higher than you can ever realistically play them. Playing RPGs is a cheap hobby. Collecting them can get pricey.

Even regarding them as "nothing more than books", I don't consider them particularly expensive. Of course there's a limit to anyone's budget, but that doesn't mean RPG books are unreasonably pricy.

 

[Magister]

With a price of $25, Empire of the Petal Throne wasn't more expensive than D&D with its supplements, nor D&D 5e now after adjusting for inflation. On the other hand, my impression is that the game system was not that different from D&D, and the only attraction would be the setting. I'm not surprised that it wasn't successful at a time when published RPGs had mostly generic settings, and GMs expected to create their own worlds; the price wouldn't help to overcome that.

 

[Voros]

With a price of $25, Empire of the Petal Throne wasn't more expensive than D&D with its supplements, nor D&D 5e now after adjusting for inflation. On the other hand, my impression is that the game system was not that different from D&D, and the only attraction would be the setting. I'm not surprised that it wasn't successful at a time when published RPGs had mostly generic settings, and GMs expected to create their own worlds; the price wouldn't help to overcome that.

Ironically the ruleset in Empire of the Petal Throne is much better explained than in OD&D.

 

[Magister]

Ironically the ruleset in Empire of the Petal Throne is much better explained than in OD&D.

How many rulesets are worse explained?

 

[Dumarest]

Ironically the ruleset in Empire of the Petal Throne is much better explained than in OD&D.

How many rulesets are worse explained?

Beaten to the punch!

​

 

[tenbones]

I literally was in this situation this Christmas - my nephew and nieces all wanted to start gaming, (they're 11-13) and Uncle Tenbones was gonna deliver. My first impulse was, naturally, D&D Starter set...

They were clamoring like hungry chicks asking me what they could do in D&D - and it dawned on me what do they want to do? They all said - "We wanna play in Harry Potter!!!!" ... suddenly D&D didn't sound like a good idea. Then I started thinking about it... Do I trust that the starter set for D&D was gonna translate to actually them picking up the full set of 5e books and just start rolling and playing Harry Potter, or would D&D fantasy as currently presented actually draw them in? Or were there other options?

SWADE's boxset then suddenly leaped to my mind. I went with SWADE. Found the Harry Potter fan-rules, printed it out. Ran them through it, the crowd went wild.

I later was talking with my nephew (their brand spanking new GM) and I sent him my full set of 5e books. He was looking them over and said "I don't get it." He did after I walked him through it... but the whole class thing wasn't as interesting to him. Now it could totally be due to the assimilation factor of SWADE... and perhaps that's why so many people like D&D, as it's usually their first rodeo.

But I'm pleased with my choice in that they're using a system they can morph into whatever they need vs. one stuck in its own "genre".

 

[tenbones]

And I DO think it's important for them to learn and play D&D, I did drop coin for the PHB/DMG/MM - so they could spread out and participate with others that will likely be playing D&D.