What will be needed to play?

[Reginald]

anyone think about using the D6 system from west end games? or the chaosium system from runequest/strombringer?

You still have to go to the game company and ask them for the use of their rules, and if you're very lucky, you will only have to pay a small royalty fee for the use of their rules. That royalty will of course be passed down to the consumers in the form of a high price tag.

The licenses that WotC has provided for the d20 system are royalty-free. That means the publisher do not have to pay one red cent to WotC for the use of the trademarks.

**********
all the development, playtesting and research will only result in a glorified 'high-tech' suppliment for D$D?

In a word, yes. In the same context that Steve Jackson Games has one core rulebook and several worldbook supplements that spans from medieval fantasy to futuristic science fiction genre RPG's.

The only difference is Steve Jackson is not going to Open his GURPS rules for other third-party publishers. They have to go to him and he sets the price of the royalty for the use of his rules.

**********
no offense Mark, but the whole open license thing does sound like a Wotc pyramid scheme...

Well, I don't know if I called it a pyramid scheme. More like a business strategy. You can use the trademarks if you follow the restrictions and you don't have to own WotC one red cent but you are helping WotC by promoting their product, specifically D&D, as well as promoting yours to the large D&D/d20 fan base.

This whole d20 thing is still new, at least for WotC. Who knows, maybe in the near future, if it is at all feasible for WotC financially, they may decide to publish a system core rulebook complete with the two much needed rule mechanics, and then change the trademark license appropriately.

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

 

[aramis]

as the draft last sat (And I'm being vague, 'cause I am not certain how far we (playtesters) are allowed to go) the only "references" back to the 3ePH are in the leveling up proceedures.


------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

 

[T. Foster]

If you're not happy with the idea of "a high tech D&D supplement," let me remind that you could instead pick up FFE001: 'Traveller Books 0-8: The Classic Books' brand new on the Far Future website, as well as (I believe) through most traditional game-distributors.

If that's too much (either price- or content-wise), used copies of the Traveller Starter Edition (equivalent to Traveller Books 0-3) still show up pretty regularly on eBay. (Copies of 'Marc Miller's Traveller' aka T4 show up pretty often too, but I advise steering clear...)

 

[Zenon]

Either way you do it, you'll have unhappy people.

Personally, in a T20 Core Book, I'd rather have the maxium amout of T20 rules and material with references to D&D for repeated rule sections. After all, after playing D&D, if you tell me the Point Blank Shot feat is the same, I already know what it means.

Considering the basic rules are available online at:
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html

I don't see what a lot of the fuss about including them in printed material is.

Looking forward to T20, hope you can stick to the October release!

As a last note, please make every effort to proof-read and correct errata. If there's one thing that people complain about with WoTC, it's the errata!

 

[aramis]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zenon:
Either way you do it, you'll have unhappy people.

Personally, in a T20 Core Book, I'd rather have the maxium amout of T20 rules and material with references to D&D for repeated rule sections. After all, after playing D&D, if you tell me the Point Blank Shot feat is the same, I already know what it means.

Considering the basic rules are available online at:
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html

I don't see what a lot of the fuss about including them in printed material is.

Looking forward to T20, hope you can stick to the October release!

As a last note, please make every effort to proof-read and correct errata. If there's one thing that people complain about with WoTC, it's the errata!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Having played SFB since the early 80's, you RPG-only types know NOTHING about erratta!

Seriously, though, Hunter is doing a good job of keeping up with stuff being caught. The drafts have less errata in general than some new releases, not counting stuff revised because it doesn't work or is simply not doing the job well. While I don't agree with some decisions Hunnter's made, he's at least willing to explain them, and discuss alternatives in some cases.

------------------
-aramis
=============================================
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

 

[Reginald]

As a former patient recovering from playing one too many SFB, I know all about erratas and addendums.

But I have observed way too many influx of errata reporting these days from many products from many companies, which is ironic since we're in a computer age. Apparently modern writers rely way too much on the limited spellchecking and grammer-checking feature of their word processor software application. (I will stop short of saying they're much lazier these days.)

As much as I would like to see the finished product by October, I would rather you consider quality over rushing to meet the release date and the appointment with the printer.

**********
Either way you do it, you'll have unhappy people.

Which can be replaced with happy people who already possess the Player's Handbook. Like me, for example.

I'm sorry but in order for QuikLink to reap profit from the many potential D&D/d20 consumers they have to abide by the terms of the d20 System Trademark License.

They can however drop the license and the d20 logo usage and all reference to it being a d20-based product and use the Open Gaming License alone. It may appease to gamers that are still loyal to Traveller but the company itself may not tap into the fan base of D&D/d20 gamers and their wallets worldwide (the Open Gaming license states you cannot advertise that your product is a d20-based game or use the trademarked logo).

Dislaimer: IANAL.

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

[This message has been edited by Reginald (edited 09 August 2001).]

 

[Gallowglass]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Reginald:
Either way you do it, you'll have unhappy people.

Which can be replaced with happy people who already possess the Player's Handbook. Like me, for example.

I'm sorry but in order for QuikLink to reap profit from the many potential D&D/d20 consumers they have to abide by the terms of the d20 System Trademark License.

They can however drop the license and the d20 logo usage and all reference to it being a d20-based product and use the Open Gaming License alone. It may appease to gamers that are still loyal to Traveller but the company itself may not tap into the fan base of D&D/d20 gamers and their wallets worldwide (the Open Gaming license states you cannot advertise that your product is a d20-based game or use the trademarked logo).

Dislaimer: IANAL.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And who finds all this hoo-ha deeply ironic after various protests (by the likes of the Shoveller) when T20 was first mooted that QUOTE: "It sound likd the liscence will require me to buy or borrow D&D3 to learn the core rules. I'm afraid I will have to stick to CT or T5."
Not at all. From what I understand, the license only prohibits blatent plagerism of the stuff from the 3e books. They will be able to communicate the D20 system mechanics in the books.
ENDQUOTE

*Sigh* Did anybody READ Ryan Dancy on why OGL etc is Good Business for WotC? It certainly isn't because it will make other people money...

The whole premise of d20 / OGL is to get more people buying and playing D&D 3e, pure and simple. The long term expectation is that all other game SYSTEMS will whither away and die and that, in the face of market forces, games companies will happily pay the full d20 license, simple to ensure their own survival (the reasoning presumably being that WITHOUT th ed20 logo, no adventure gaming product will be comercially viable).

I think it's flawed, and I really hope that Marc (& Hunter!) are not TOO entagled in committments to d20, in case things go pear shaped, but as long as Marc retians control of the OTU and what is published for T20 is useful gaming material, I'm not bothered.

Not least because, having now read a fair chunk of D&D 3e, I can say with confidence I won't be buying it. It is a massive improvement on previous versions, but it's still not a game system I like and much of the new material has too many echoes of WW (who unlike TSR, have NEVER produced a game system I have liked...).

My only regret is that it seems increasingly apparent that T20 has seriously derailed, if not killed off for the forseeable future, T5.

Oh well...

 

[Gaming Glen]

I also have the D&D3E PHB so it's no bother to me that the T20 book isn't all inclusive. It means more Traveller-related info in the set amount of pages. I welcome T20. Finally when I spend some money on Traveller I'll have a much better chance to get some players when I offer to run a Traveller game. I never got a blip for players when I posted a note at the game store when TNE came out. I didn't bother buying T4 because I had already spent enough on Traveller and had never played it since CT. (I did buy some of the T4 supplements, i.e., Imperial Squadrons and Pocket Empires).

Yes, D&D3e is still D&D. But it's what people are playing & running for a RPG, besides WW (yuck). I'd rather play/GM Runequest, but that's a dead game around here. *sigh* Champions has been reborn lately. I wonder when their 5th version will come out? (about the time Jump drive is invented is the current opinion by Champions fans)

 

[jalberti]

I am going to stick with MT for my rules, but just like I have done with GURPS Traveller products, I will buy T20 suppliments that come out that I find interesting.

From what I have read before, the suppliments for T20 will not require the T20 core rulebook to play. The suppliments will be structured so that other Traveller rules can be used.

Joe

 

[DrSkull]

Yeah, highlight that it's D20 Sci-Fi (or even D&D compatable--your campaign game store add doesn't have to be OGL compliant-- and I'd think you'd have a good shot at new players.

------------------
Dave "Dr. Skull" Nelson

 

[T. Foster]

Err, whatever happened to teaching new systems to players? Over the last 17 years or so I've run games using at least a dozen systems, and in almost every one of those cases I taught the rules to the players as we played the game.

I sold my campaigns based on descriptions of genres and settings and kept them going with good characters and adventures, and the ruleset used was almost always immaterial. As long as the system is simple and transparent enough that players can understand their characters' capabilities and the referee knows what he's doing, there's no reason anyone other than the GM need ever even SEE a rulebook. Sure, a lot of players want to read the rules for themselves eventually, but then one of my best players across several campaigns never owned a single rulebook for ANY rpg -- all he needed was a set of dice, a folder for his character sheets, common sense, and imagination.

Yeah, a prospective GM still has to actually learn multiple rules systems, but considering that 1) most rpg-systems aren't all that different from one another (have these d20-only types ever even tried to learn new systems? It's really not that hard!), and 2) any GM worth his salts is going to be devoting vast amounts of time to creating settings and adventures anyway, in comparison to which the few hours necessary to get a handle on a new system are inconsequential, I hardly feel the burden is overwhelming.

Didn't part of the fun of rpgs used to be trying out new systems and customizing and modifying them and trying to find/create the mythical "perfect ruleset"? When did everybody become so afraid of trying out new things? Are there implanted messages in the text of the D&D3 PHB telling everybody that "learning the rules to an rpg is really hard and that you can only hope to ever understand one game-system in a lifetime of trying" or something? I'm afraid I just don't get it.

Down with D&D3/d20, and up with Traveller, GURPS, RQ/BRP, AD&D1, Cyberpunk/Fuzion, Shadowrun, Star Wars, Star Frontiers, Gamma World, Boot Hill, Top Secret, Dr. Who, Paranoia, Amber Diceless, Pendragon, WFRP, Mythus, DCHeroes, Vampire, TORG, Marvel Superheroes, V&V, Space:1889, and any other game systems (good, bad, and even REALLY bad) I might be overlooking which I've ever played in or GM'd a game of (not even counting those I read the rules to but never actually played)!

 

[Secrect Cow Level]

I agree completely. Half the fun of playing a different game is learning and playing new rules. Most games use the same concepts, it's the dice and the specific application of rules that differ. I detest the current trend in gaming where all games use the same set of rules regardless of genere. When I get tired of D&D I'll go play MERP. When I'm bored of fantasy I'll play TRAVELLER or STAR FRONTIERS. I enjoy all of these games, partially because all four of them use different rules. Playing the same rules system all the time is boring. D&D and TRAVELLER have different combat and character generation systems but the end result is the same; a fun hobby and a great way to pass the time.

 

[Gallowglass]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Secrect Cow Level:
I agree completely. Half the fun of playing a different game is learning and playing new rules. Most games use the same concepts, it's the dice and the specific application of rules that differ. I detest the current trend in gaming where all games use the same set of rules regardless of genere. When I get tired of D&D I'll go play MERP. When I'm bored of fantasy I'll play TRAVELLER or STAR FRONTIERS. I enjoy all of these games, partially because all four of them use different rules. Playing the same rules system all the time is boring. D&D and TRAVELLER have different combat and character generation systems but the end result is the same; a fun hobby and a great way to pass the time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but this does not conform to WotC's vision of the future: Cynically, this is because they want ALL gamers to be paying (if only indirectly) them, hence d20 / OGL. Generously, because FRP has been boom and bust because multiple rule sets fragments the industry, the established player base and makes it more difficult to get new players in. One rule set means it's easier to move between games, and more people play. One Rule set, One Law, One ... ahem, sorry!

Seriously, I have grave doubts about the OGL/d20 thing precisely because it is predicated on the assumption that tabletop FRP is a potentially mass-market hobby held back by the fragmentation into multiple rule-sets. My own view is that that diversity is an essential part of the appeal of FRP's and I worry that too many small publishers are hitching over ambitious dreams to the star of d20/OGL and that they will get burnt badly when the market contracts again in a few years time. And I really don't won't to see either settings I like (Traveller!) or companies who do "good stuff" (e.g. QuickLink) pulled under because they have over committed to a market that doesn't have the long term potential. I bitterly remember the death of Arcane magazine in the UK, which underlined for me just how precarious the margins can be in this business.

Funnily enough, I think that a version of "Network Externialities" DOES work in games: but it applies to _settings_, not rule systems. T20 is good for all Traveller enthusiasts because it gets more people playing in the OTU and could well boost sales of FFE's reprints and GT. In fact longterm I suspect that it will draw more people _away_ from d20, at least for gaming in the Traveller universe.

The real question is what Hasbro / WotC will do if / when d20 and OGL fails to deliver the expected returns...

 

[Spinward Scout]

<<<Half the fun of playing a different game is learning and playing new rules.>>>

Me personally, I never liked learning new gaming systems. I want to learn one and be able to use that for everything. The group I play D&D with really like the new d20 version. It's very easy - it allows us to get into the meat of the game without the system bogging us down. I can Role Play instead of Roll Play. I played a Vampire game where it took almost 2 hours to run one battle. I had similar experiences with Star Wars before it went to d20. It sucked. I don't know how they ever thought that counting out 10 or 15 dice per roll was anything remotely close to fast play. Now I really do think that this will be an improvement for the Traveller game - although Traveller was never really hard to play. I'd like to see conversions for just about every game out there to d20. It works for me.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Just wait for it. The people on the Star Wars mailing list were throwing tantrums about the Star Wars game going to d20. I haven't heard a complaint about the game system since the new Star Wars came out. I don't think there's going to be a problem once you play the game. And Traveller has had sooo many ups & downs already that I don't think it's going to go anywhere if the gaming industry has a fall back. GURPS is a prime example of a system that you can crossover just about any genre to any other. And it's just gotten better over time. So give d20 a chance.

Scout

 

[White Dalek]

I'd vote for MAXIMUM Traveller info - at the expense of d20 rules. I'm not fond of the system - but love the setting. It would be good to have something that wasn't mostly "orks in space".

A conversion chapter/appendix would be more critical to me. CT/MT for sure, but maybe even some of the other versions of Traveller could be covered.

Would it also be possible to have a "official non-official" conversion site, with a PDF download page?

There are websites that convert Traveller to other game systems, it would be great to have a centralized registry... and a common format for printing rules conversions, and adventure scenerios. It might be easier to do this type of thing online, especially if the file size/page count was reasonably small. Also a simple b&w PDF download is WAY easier than converting complex multi-color html to printer-friendly formats.

 

[Reginald]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The whole premise of d20 / OGL is to get more people buying and playing D&D 3e, pure and simple. The long term expectation is that all other game SYSTEMS will whither away and die and that, in the face of market forces, games companies will happily pay the full d20 license, simple to ensure their own survival (the reasoning presumably being that WITHOUT th ed20 logo, no adventure gaming product will be comercially viable).

I think it's flawed, and I really hope that Marc (& Hunter!) are not TOO entagled in committments to d20, in case things go pear shaped, but as long as Marc retians control of the OTU and what is published for T20 is useful gaming material, I'm not bothered.

Not least because, having now read a fair chunk of D&D 3e, I can say with confidence I won't be buying it. It is a massive improvement on previous versions, but it's still not a game system I like and much of the new material has too many echoes of WW (who unlike TSR, have NEVER produced a game system I have liked...).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You see a glass half-empty, I see a glass half-full. You say it forces or compel people to buy D&D3e (of course that depends on the product, technically you only needed the D&D Player's Handbook which is the only product trademark you can print along with the d20 logo on your product, according to the d20STL), I simply see it as an avenue for D&D/d20 gamers to try out T20 before trying out the Traveller RPG (with its own system).

As I have said before (and I noticed you have already made up your mind), if you don't like it, don't buy it. Let someone else who already possess the Player's Handbook get it.

And as for the corellation, YES, D&D is d20, but d20 is not necessarily D&D. It's an evolving rules system, as long as there are publisher creating new Open Gaming Content ... new rules mechanics that can be added on to the d20 System. That way for a particular game, whether it's Dark Age fantasy or science fiction genre, you have a variety of rules options. In time, the d20 System will stand on its own, separate and apart from the D&D game.

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

 

[Gallowglass]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Reginald:
You see a glass half-empty, I see a glass half-full. You say it forces or compel people to buy D&D3e (of course that depends on the product, technically you only needed the D&D Player's Handbook which is the only product trademark you can print along with the d20 logo on your product, according to the d20STL), I simply see it as an avenue for D&D/d20 gamers to try out T20 before trying out the Traveller RPG (with its own system).

As I have said before (and I noticed you have already made up your mind), if you don't like it, don't buy it. Let someone else who already possess the Player's Handbook get it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Errm, possibly I wasn't clear: I WON'T be buying D&D 3e, i MAY yet but T20, and there is a very good chance I'll buy T20 supplements that I can use with CT / in other era's...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

And as for the corellation, YES, D&D is d20, but d20 is not necessarily D&D. It's an evolving rules system, as long as there are publisher creating new Open Gaming Content ... new rules mechanics that can be added on to the d20 System. That way for a particular game, whether it's Dark Age fantasy or science fiction genre, you have a variety of rules options. In time, the d20 System will stand on its own, separate and apart from the D&D game.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is where my scepticism bites: WotC will not, IMO, allow d20 to stand on its own (unless they have sole rights to the d20 PHB) precisely because the model is that by letting others reference their rules, they boost their own sales (of PHB's) AND increase the pool of d20 (D&D) players.

So I hope that the various small press publishers and designers are cautious, but as long as the T20 product line lives up to it's promise so far of good material, faithful to the spirit of the OTU whilst opening up a new (sort of) area, I will happily pay for the supplements that I can use...

 

[Reginald]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Here is where my scepticism bites: WotC will not, IMO, allow d20 to stand on its own (unless they have sole rights to the d20 PHB) precisely because the model is that by letting others reference their rules, they boost their own sales (of PHB's) AND increase the pool of d20 (D&D) players.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But that's where you are wrong. In case you haven't noticed, there are two royalty-free licenses offered by WotC: the Open Gaming License and the d20 System Trademark License.

So far, we've been discussing the terms included in d20STL. What people did not know is that the Open Gaming License is a standalone content license that governs and only governs Open Gaming Content.

If you want to use anyone's OGC, you must abide by the terms of the OGL. That means with this license, I can use the OGC that WotC provided in the System Reference Document. I can use even use OGC that are already provided in most d20-based products, including the upcoming Traveller d20 into my product.

(Now you know why it is imperative that they must be clearly identified.)

If I, a game publisher, wishes to market a standalone product but prefers to have my own character creation rules and character advancement rule (most especially because the character creation rules presented in the Player's Handbook is not suitable for my game), I can simply use the OGL and not use the d20STL.

In, simple terms, I have game design freedom.

So what's the drawback for using OGL only? Simple. I cannot use the trademarked d20 logo, nor can I use anyone else's trademarks and Product Identity. My product will have to stand on its own merit, and my customers will have to draw the conclusion about the system in my game by themselves.

So you're wondering why don't QuikLink use the OGL only. Simple. The d20 trademarks are getting wide recognition within the gaming community, most especially the D&D gamers (like it or not, they consist the majority of the gaming community). A recognizable logo will attract gamers to the game, at least for a "look-see." And if those gamers bought that game, that means increasing sales for the game publisher.

------------------
Anyhoo... just some random thoughts

[This message has been edited by Reginald (edited 12 September 2001).]

 

[Emiricol]

Personally, I think accessing the pool of players and refs represented by the D20 crowd is a good idea. If you want a game with 50 players, go it alone. If you want a game with 50,000 players, go D20 or OGL.

And I believe there is an OGL logo you can use, and most of the D20 'ers recognize it as being of D20 heritage (I'm sure someone will correct me if that's wrong)