OK, not strictly an indie game, but Mongoose's Conan RPG shows a strong Forge influence. A d20 game, it advocates a vastly more Narrativist style than standard d20-Gamism. While it doesn't suggest out-of-chronology stories, pretty much everything else you'd see in a full Nar game is there. I've been having a blast running it so far - there's a Story Hour of the first session at:
http://www.randomlingshouse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3110&sid=fdac2baaf45c160c394782e353221b7d
Anyone else tried it or played it? How did you think it stood up as a Nar game? Or is it just highly Drifted Gamism? >:)

Just as a note, if you listen to Ron's interview with Thor the Barbarian Here

He mentions that he is freinds with the Conan D20 designer and that Sorcerer and Sword has had some influence on the design.

regards,

Trevis

Trevis Martin wrote: Just as a note, if you listen to Ron's interview with Thor the Barbarian Here

He mentions that he is freinds with the Conan D20 designer and that Sorcerer and Sword has had some influence on the design.

regards,

Trevis

& just to be clear that this isn't fully off-topic, I definitely found that reading Sorcerer & Sword before running Conan enabled me to really 'get' the game and its aims, to really run it as all it could be rather than just a pale shadow of D&D with less 'stuff' (magic gizmos, monsters, prestige classes et al). For a supplement to a game I don't own (other than the free intro download) S&S has to have been the most influential RPG tract I've ever read. It gave me the confidence to do the kind of things Conan advocates - starting the PCs off defeated and stripped of their gear amongst the corpses of their friends; advancing the timeline 2 years between sessions, encouraging players to develop the narrative (by use of Fate Points mechanic), in accordance with their Destinies. Even developing non-trivialised love interests for PCs. Where D&D is very much about the PCs' acquisition of power & stuff (wealth & magic), the aim of players in Conan seems much more to have the PCs be able to look back on their lives and say:

"That was a good life."

Not all my players have 'got it' yet - though the one I lent S&S to has - but we're getting there. :)

Hi there,

This is great to read, and even makes up a teeny bit for my inexplicably referring to Paul Tucker as "Paul Simon" in the interview with Thor.

The shift from Gamism to Narrativism, as I often say, is both a tiny one and a major one. It's tiny because the two modes are represented by very similar procedures of play, and it's major because the system's main role in that shift is always the reward system. What Paul & Co. did with the Conan game represents, to me, the first fully applied version of this principle to D20 (I'd hoped to see it in Spycraft but, well, didn't).

Further, it seems to me that many different versions of the principle might be applied very easily without much trouble. In the Gamism essay, I mention that "naked D20" really isn't a role-playing game at all, because both character creation and the reward system are so vague. It's not even a matter of "customizing," it's a matter of literally writing those sections. Since I see all of play, most especially resolution of any kind, literally to be a bridge between character/setting creation and the reward system, that means that you have to write a game, period, in order to write a D20 game.

The Mongoose guys understood this better than anyone, I think, and part of that might be their extensive experiences in playing the games and supplements they wrote for D&D-fantasy style D20 products. They really did, too - played the hell out of them, and doped out just how they worked in terms a lot of us would recognize here at the Forge. So no surprise, when they wanted a game that could do something else, they flowed right into writing the relevant sections of it appropriately.

S'mon, if you could, tell us more about actual play. What decisions did you and the other people make, at the table? How were the Fate points applied? And ... I shudder, but forge on ... tell us about the characters!

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: Hi there,

S'mon, if you could, tell us more about actual play. What decisions did you and the other people make, at the table? How were the Fate points applied? And ... I shudder, but forge on ... tell us about the characters!

As well as the two PCs, there were two other new NPC guards, Unegen a fiery Hyrkanian warrior-woman, and Cillian, a Brythunian youth. Jirrigan had got to know the two a little in Shadizar, and established that Unegen was of similar experience to herself, while Cillian was a nervous, inexperienced type. At the changing of the watch, Jirrigan decided to kick Cillian awake (she'd been kicked awake for her own watch) - Cillian took it reasonably good naturedly.

The other PC, the Shemite, decided to follow Jirrigan's lead and kick Unegen awake. He was still a stranger to Unegen, so on being awakened she (fairly good-naturedly) grabbed his ankle and tipped him over (succeeding on opposed rolls). The player went crimson and yelled:

"Bitch!"

Unfortunately Unegen had the Barbarian Code of Honour. Jirrigan & her player knew what would happen next. A swift and bloody duel followed. I was a bit reluctant to kill a PC within 10 minutes of his appearance, so I had her sunder his bow, which annoyed him further - he drew his scimitar and waded in. After some bad die rolls the Shemite went down 'dead' - per the rules, a Fate Point was then spent so he'd be Left For Dead (the only FP that evening).

I looked to the Jirrigan player and, thinking Gamistly said:

"The Shemite appears to still be alive." - ie "Time to roll the Heal check".

Jirrigan's player, thinking Narrativistly, and somewhat annoyed by the Shemite's player, said:

"Unegen, he's still alive! You better finish him off!"

The Shemite had his throat slit & body rolled in the nearest ravine, which event helped bond Jirrigan more closely with Unegen, Cillian, and Jeros (now awake).

The Shemite's player went upstairs and spent the next two hours bothering my wife. In Gamist terms the kick-awake scene was a disaster. In Narrativist terms though, it actually made a very cool little vignette that really brought alive the Hyborian spirit.

I guess that makes it a draw.

Next: The 2nd session.

Where the first game was based on an amateur scenario from the Internet, this one had a different origin. A player - sunbsequently unable to play - had requested to play a Pirate, inspired by Pirates of the Caribbean, and clearly had a strong character concept. So I looked for a suitable adventure, and in my archives found "Thief's Challenge 2: Beacon Point" - copyright 1996, TSR inc; ie this was a product from The Bad Old Days.

It also looked perfect to introduce my players to a little Conan-style Narrativism...

The characters:

1. Jirrigan - two years after the previous adventure, Jirrigan, now an experienced warrior (well, 2nd level) and her (platonic?) companion Cillian, the youthful NPC guard from the first game, were now, I declared, marine guards on the merchant ship Dolphin, on the western ocean.

The new PCs (player of the Shemite from 1st game not attending):

2. Belisarius, a Hyborean mercenary Belisarius is played by a nervous ultra-Gamist player of the 'resource allocationist' type - in other games he loves counting his crossbow bolts, planning the perfect spell combinations, thinking of every possible angle to a problem (except maybe the obvious & correct one). He spent considerable time using his starting cash to buy multiples of each of his weapons and every cheap item on the equipment lists. He was in for a big culture shock.

3. Kerukai, a female Hyrkanian nomad. Kerukai's player is a keen roleplayer but so-so min-maxer, who has seemed a bit intimidated previously in our hard-Gamist D&D campaign. She took to the Conan game like a duck to water.

Belisarius & Kerukai were, I established, acting as bodyguards to Isobel of Messantia, an NPC noble created by me for this scenario, who was taking a ransom for her husband's release to Port Tortage in the Barachas.

4. Connor, a classic Cimmerian barbarian, also a marine guard. Connor's player is of the kind sometimes unfairly called 'munchkin' by 'role-wimps'. Connor has STR 20 - the highest possible - and CHA 8 - the lowest possible. He presumably looks like a meat freezer on legs. He bought a Bardiche, the biggest-damage weapon in the game. Connor's player would be a surprise.

BEGINNING:

The way the scenario was written, it began with the PC(s) on board the merchant ship - it was intended for a single Thief PC. The first two pages were a boxed-text heavy railroad where the PC would meet and fall for a Charming, Perfect & Wonderful uber-NPC (9th level Thief), then there would be a boxed-text heavy railroad in which the ship would be attacked by pirates, the PC(s) would fight but be knocked unconscious, waking up after the fight was over.

I decided to skip to the chase.

"I'm about to screw you over really badly. Have a Fate Point."

That was a trick I learned from reading the Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG. Most of the players looked puzzled, but complied.

"The battle was long and hard. Your comrades fought well, and died bravely. But they still died. You awake on the bloodsoaked deck of the Dolphin amidst the bodies of the slain. Nearby, several others are also stirring..."

That scene had always been in this mid-90s TSR scenario, a product of those highly-drifted quasi-Sim-style days, from before WotC's Return to the Dungeon - ie, return to hardcore Gamism. Hardcore D&D Gamism was what my group had been used to ever since we met. Several of them looked stunned.

Belisarius' player paled as I crossed item after item from his character sheet, taken by the pirates. I felt a bit bad, but OTOH he'd just had the Conan RPG when he was generating the PC, complete with all its admonishments against an obsession with gear, its encouragements to the GM to do exactly what I was doing. He trembled, but remained calm.

Connor's player was allowed to keep his Bardiche - the scenario describes the PC as being able to find a weapon on deck. He was happy.

Kerukai's player opted to spend a Fate Point to be sure of finding her bow, it being very important to her. Jirrigan's player was calm.

The adventure as written followed the "You wake up" textblock with a text block wherein the ship hits a submerged reef and breaks up, depositing PC in the sea, then still-in-block the PC grabs some piece of debris, floats off, falls unconscious and awakens next day on the beach of the isle of Beacon Point, where the adventure proper would start.

I had decided to follow this in essence but rather than simply do read-aloud, I'd present each section in terms of a choice - with skill rolls.

Belisarius' player had equipped his PC with the heaviest armour he could afford, that would make swimming almost impossible. Rather than just have it stolen by the pirates, I stated that a pirate had clearly tried to steal it, cutting through several straps, the given up. I described the PCs sliding down the lurching deck towards the ocean. The player could keep wearing it, and probably drown, or give it up and go into the future unarmoured.

Off it went.

The adventure continued with the PCs struggling to help each other survive (swim rolls), then on the island, a mostly investigative scenario involving townsfolk, a wizard, non-hostile fishmen and the hidden pirate base. The two female PCs & players took the lead, helped by their PCs' high CHA. The PCs killed the pirate chief, found & rescued Cillian & Isobel in the pirate base. No Fate Points needed to be spent, although after the session ended some possibilities were raised:

Jirrigan's player mentioned spending a FP to have Cillian fall in love with her. I explained he already was. Kerukai's player felt likewise about a handsome youth she'd met on the island, clearly smitten with her.

Connor's player had got into the swing of things, his mighty axe hacking pirates apart with joyful abandon. He suggested taking over the pirates and their ship and becoming a pirate chief. This with a second-level PC. Unthinkable in D&D.

Belisarius' player was quiet, but he said he'd enjoyed the game. :)

Here's what I told the players about Fate Points after the game:

"Just a reminder re Fate Points, as well as being used directly to stay alive you can use them to help develop the narrative in accordance with your player & PC goals - eg Peter's PC might spend an FP to have his employer Lady Isobel fall in love with him, Lucy's PC Kerukai could spend a FP to hear a rumour that her father was still alive or word of the sorcerer hunting her, Kerstin's PC Jirrigan might spend an FP to have a surprise meeting with an old ally like Jeros the Kothian. Such FP uses have to be requested rather than just stated of course, but if they're reasonable the GM (me) will try to work them in ASAP."

I think in summary it'd be fair to say that we're still novices in a Narrativist style and the Conan game includes enough Gamist elements to make the change fairly painless.

The first scenario, Slavers' Caravan, appeared quite linear, but it went off in several unexpected durations - the early death of an extraneous PC, the primary PC forging a friendship with an NPC who became her longtime companion ('little friend' in Xena-speak) :) and gaining of a spontaneously-created NPC as a likely future contact. At this point I wasn't suggesting Fate Point uses other than staying alive.

The second scenario Beacon Point worked well - almost surprisingly well - in introducing a mix including some firmly Gamist D&Ders into a new style of play, and encouraging them to think of their PCs as protagonists rather than as a tactical fireteam (my regular D&D style). Fate Point use was minimal without really being used for story development, but is likely to happen in the future.

In both cases there have been strong signs of players developing 'authorial' stance rather than pawn or actor stance, I thought.
A lot of behaviour seemed guided by what would make the funnest story - eg Jirrigan's exploring a magic-technological lighthouse and hopping into bed with Antonus the elderly wizard lighthouse-keeper (purely to sleep!) didn't gain them any information or XP, but it was hilarious and really pointed out her unique worldview.

One thing I did notice though was that the Conan game still uses the tactical D&D battlegrid rules, which highly encourages a certain tactical mode of thought in combat that tends to creep into other elements. It might have been better if Mongoose had discarded the grid for a more literary style.

I certainly read both Sorcerer and S&S cover to cover before starting to write Conan -- I'd been meaning to pick up Sorcerer in any case, after its Diana Jones success, and so many people had spoken for so long about the usefulness of S&S as a Conan resource that it would have seemed mad not to read it.

I did toy with the idea of including something on non-linear gaming, but figured that was possibly a little too outre for the typical d20 market. Hopefully though a few people will pick up S&S and use it to supplement the Conan RPG in exactly that way.

The idea of parting PCs from their kit isn't entirely a Sorcerer pickup, though; it was clear from the Conan stories that such a convention was entirely appropriate, and I'd seen it before in Dying Earth, Amber, and BESM.

I was really pleased with the work I did writing the Fate Points section though, and would hope to see something similar used by other d20 games. Again there's probably a bit of an Amber influence there.

Interestingly, back when Ron was first rewriting Sorcerer & Sword for non-PDF format, he told me about the whole "non-linear gaming" thing. I said, "You know what you could do that with? D&D & other d20 games." I had this idea that you could make a 1st level character, make the same character at 5th level, the same character at 10th level, & maybe at 20th level. And then play them out of order. Maybe your PC at 5th level has a magic sword, but doesn't have the sword at 10th level. What happened to it? That can be answered through play.

Hi Ian - great game BTW! :)

From me & my group's perspective I think the choice not to advocate non-linear gaming was the right one; it was the one element in S&S I really struggled with, trying to see how it could work with any group of more than one player. In short, I think it would require either, as one player suggested, a Moorcockian 'nomad of the time streams' campaign where different PCs did not inhabit the same linear time-stream, or else have one true-protagonist PC and the other players merely there to play sidekicks & foils.

Likewise, I think the Conan game's Fate Points struck exactly the right balance - not too few, not too many, neither too dominant (the usual failing) nor too weak. As I mentioned above, I bought Eden's Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG, a game which appears Narrativist on first glance (all about choices), but IMO ends up being a hard-Sim of the tv show's plot processes, to (IMO) the severe detriment of any suspension of disbelief.
It's fantastically well written by CJ Carella, it looks beautiful, but the Drama Points totally dominate the game as written. In combat every 'mook' monster has a few, and victory is determined purely by who runs out of DPs first. Yet the game requires DPs to allow heroic PCs like Buffy and 'normal' PCs like Xander to exist in the same party, so they can't easily be discarded. Some of their uses, like spontaneous healing & self-resurrecting PCs, may emulate the show well but are too cheesy for me to stomach, either.
After seeing how the Conan game deals with the same issue so much better I'm planning to change the Buffy DPs so they function in the same manner as Conan FPs, which I think should change the game from unplayable (to me) to workable.

Yeah, I think non-linear gaming would work very well for one-on-one play. I did write up a section on one-on-one, or one-on-two, play in Conan. It didn't make the finished game, for space reasons, but I believe it's been published in Signs & Portents. The idea is that for one-on-one play, the player takes on the role of someone Conan-like -- could be Conan himself, even. While no more powerful than other Conan characters, s/he would have a considerably wider range of skills -- Conan is never constrained in the stories by not knowing how to decipher an ancient manuscript or sail a pirate ship. One-on-two play takes a similar approach, but the second player's character changes depending on the adventure -- in effect, s/he plays the major NPC of that story, perhaps an ally of the 'protagonist', perhaps an enemy. Adding non-linear play to that would be a cinch, I think.

Your Actual Play posts look fun, BTW -- I'm hoping to actually get a chance to play or run the game myself over the next few months. Poor old Shemite player -- but then, as Mencken put it, "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats." I suspect the same applies to normal Cimmerian women, but more so.

There is a brief piece on one-on-one or one-two play in the GM section at the back of the book, so that didn't get totally excised, although the variant skills rule has been relegated to a confusing note about class skills in the Skills section at the front. :)

It was unfortunate about the Shemite, but also oh-so-horribly-Conanesque that I can't say I'd have had it any other way... >:)

I'm Jirrigan's player in S'mon's Conan game, also a player in a DnD game GMed by S'mon, and GM in a Midnight game in which he plays. I'm a confessed Gamist mostly, so there. :)

I'd read S&S and was intrigued by certain aspects of Narrativism, so I was intrigued to see how the Conan RPG would play. So far I haven't been disappointed.

To get back to some of Ron's questions:

What choices did I make? Rather, what choices did I make in the game so far that I wouldn't have made in a purely Gamist game* - or might have made with a Gamist mindset, but for different reasons?
And where were those FPs employed?

(*I don't see Conan RPG as a purely Narrativist game btw, I'd say it's still Gamist enough to make me comfortable, albeit with strong Narrativist elements.)


First scenario choices:
(Note that these they aren't necessarily choices in the Narrativist sense - I'm trying to explain my mindset as a player, not so much to apply game theory.)

First choice: pre-game - going with the unarmoured starting package for the Barbarian.
Speaking as a Gamist, I didn't give myself long as a melee type with no armour on; then again, in a d20 game the one time you can even hope to enjoy life much without items is at very low levels.
Thinking Narrativist, I just couldn't resist. As Jirrigan said to the NPC Jeros early in her career: "Armour? Best not to get hit, as far as I'm concerned." Fat talk, as I well knew.

Second choice: drinking more of that accursed Korajan whiskey after I'd already failed one Fortitude save.
Gamist: uh oh.
(In retrospect, I might have remembered I had Fate Points available in case things went very pear-shaped...)
Narrativist: Heh. I'm made by Crom. I can do this --- surely ...

Third choice: not backing up the Shemite PC when he insulted an NPC.
No difference between Gamist and Narrativist approaches for me here. One character insults another - my PC has the Barbaric code of honour that requires her to kill people who insult her, so it's only natural for her to assume that everybody else would.
When the Shemite player spat "Bitch!", S'mon the GM looked at me somewhat pained. "What do you do?"
*shrug* "I step back and give Unegen [the NPC insulted] room to kill him [the PC]."
Dunno, the Shemite's player had given his PC the Barbaric code of honour as well, so he should have known what he was getting into with his insult.


Fourth choice: letting the inexperienced NPC Cillian tag along as I went into Arenjun to enjoy the Beggars' Feast.
Gamist: uh oh. (As I said to S'mon: "That guy has VICTIM written right across his forehead." How right I was....)
Narrativist: I thought Jirrigan sorta liked him, also he made a cool counterpoint for her - rather like her own Grey Mouser.


All in all, a fun session. The scenario was linear (being about caravan guarding and - with luck - escaping the nasty twist at the end), so didn't allow for major plot choices, but gave me room to stretch and get ready for ...



The second scenario (not yet completed):

One choice and one Fate Point comment.

As S'mon mentioned, no FPs were spent. As a Gamist, however, I was well aware by this time that I had some available, so unlike everybody else I didn't cut off my armour when the ship sank.
(Also of course I wasn't wearing chainmail or anything stupid to have aboard ship, not to mention too expensive for a poor Barbarian to afford - just a leather jerkin. So unlike the Soldier PC I did have a chance of making my Swim check in my armour.)


The choice I probably enjoyed most - and a "real" choice in this case - was not even to bother about the strongbox beneath the bed of the pirate captain we killed and moving on without having so much as looked at it.
Speaking as a Gamist, very liberating. If I'm unlikely to still have all of my equipment at the start of the next scenario, why bother counting beans or silver pieces?
Narrativist: Jirrigan still missed her companion NPC Cillian who she'd just learned was held prisoner in another part of the pirate hideout - so I decided that nothing would keep her from storming over there and trying to free him immediately. Maybe come back afterwards if someone dragged me, but no time to waste now.

The cool thing was that as I went, away from the treasure and towards my captive friend, I swept everyone else along in my wake. There was no suggestion of hanging around and discussing further proceedings or tactics (a thing our heavily Gamist group has been guilty of a lot). Apparently my dramatic drive (which I didn't even explain at the table) was compelling enough for everyone else to follow. If I see myself taking Author stance at any time during those two sessions, that was it.

Very interesting thread. I apologize if this is a bit of topic drift... but I wanted to get the feedback of the Conan gamers. Reading SB/Jirrigan's Gamist/Narrativist on/off switch was great!

And one that "solved" a niggling problem that I have with my own game, Savage Worlds.

SW has Bennies. But they are basically a re-roll "fate" mechanic. We've used them to do a bit more than that... but the structure suggested in this thread of the Conan rpg (which I had hoped to get a copy of) seems a bit more interesting.

If I'm reading this right, basically Conan suggests; If the GM screws the PCs with Fate (starting them off with no equipment) you give out a Fate pt.

Now, in SW, players get more Bennies for "good roleplaying". My problem as a GM is my players role play quite well... seperating out what is Bennie worthy is hard. So I just simply forget about it. But Bennies are very much needed in combat to keep the players alive.

So, my rewording for SW is this:

If a player, through good roleplaying in character, takes on additional Risk... that is Bennie worthy (or Fate pt or Luck or what have you). Or another way to put it, when a player screws his PC over for dramtic story sake, there is a reward for doing so.

My one thought is that in SW, you get 3 Bennies at the start of every adv. I think I would make it a bit more complicated in that "Fate pts' would be awarded for taking on Risk. These Fate pts could be used like a Bennie, mechanically, but they could also be used to create subplots, situational "editing" as Neil likes to call it, do Magic in the Fantasy game, that is beyond the scope of the character's write up... stuff like that. Fate pts carry over from session to session... so they could be horded or used as the player sees fit. Bennies do not carry over, as per SW rules.

I loved how SB/Jerrigan used a Fate pt to make the young squire fall in love with Jerrigan. I would love to encourage more of that author stance, thru this mechanic, with my own group. I've noticed a tendancy in my 2 groups that are in this world, to play it close to the vest, to only take on the "job", because generally, the job is a big deal... and it makes sense to husband ones resources. There is also a sense that Bennies are SO needed for combat, I think my players are hesitant about spending Bennies for subplot creations. And I do NOT run a lot of combat usually.

So, breaking away from the main quest and investigating that haunted copse of trees IS a Risk. The Hard Bitten mercenary taking on a wide eyed apprentice is a Risk (y'know, the one with "victim" written on the forehead).

Dunno. I like it. I WANT to give more story control over to my players. I control the world, seems to be a bit of disparity! <g> It remains to be seen if my players do.

Hi Storn - glad you've found our play accounts useful! :)
StalkingBlue described Jirrigan's choices better than I could, because she was the one actually making them.

Storn wrote: If I'm reading this right, basically Conan suggests; If the GM screws the PCs with Fate (starting them off with no equipment) you give out a Fate pt.

Thread drift, sorry...

There is also a sense that Bennies are SO needed for combat, I think my players are hesitant about spending Bennies for subplot creations. And I do NOT run a lot of combat usually.

The idea of FP-for-screwover I think I got from the GMing advice in CJ Carella's 'Buffy The Vampire Slayer' Game;

If you Fate mechanic was to give out more bennies each game

I feel a need to have a break from the high-Nar games I'm running with our group now (Dark Ages: Mage in FUDGE/FATE, Victorian Horror in Sorcerer) and I would very much like to have a few sessions of Howard's Conan-style atmosphere and frenzy. Besides of thinking about Sorcerer & Sword (does it deliver? can you share your experience?) I'm very tempted with the Conan RPG (although over past 2 years I became increasingly frustrated and disgusted by d20). Is it able to recapture the setting and pace and fulfill the goals presented by Sorcerer & Sword?

Thanks a lot.

Bifi wrote: I feel a need to have a break from the high-Nar games I'm running with our group now (Dark Ages: Mage in FUDGE/FATE, Victorian Horror in Sorcerer) and I would very much like to have a few sessions of Howard's Conan-style atmosphere and frenzy. Besides of thinking about Sorcerer & Sword (does it deliver? can you share your experience?) I'm very tempted with the Conan RPG (although over past 2 years I became increasingly frustrated and disgusted by d20). Is it able to recapture the setting and pace and fulfill the goals presented by Sorcerer & Sword?

Thanks a lot.

As a player I thought Mongoose (and S'mon as GM!) were doing a brilliant job in enabling a Howardish feel.

Of course as I've stated above, I'm mainly a Gamist and I don't have big issues with the d20 system. What exactly frustrates you in d20? More information would help me deciding whether there's more I can tell you that makes sense.

S'mon wrote: I've approached Conan as an introduction to Narrativist gaming based on the d20 ruleset; what I've seen on the Conan Mongoose forums are a lot of players with a rigid Gamist (or occasionally Sim) mentality who try to use the game for typical resource-allocationist, 'stake out a territory', beat X opponents to level, type games. I think using Sorcerer & Sword in conjunction with Conan helped me a lot to make the game 'be all it can be'. :)

StalkingBlue wrote: Of course as I've stated above, I'm mainly a Gamist and I don't have big issues with the d20 system. What exactly frustrates you in d20? More information would help me deciding whether there's more I can tell you that makes sense.

Bifi wrote: Just from the top of my head. Plainly - if I want to play Gamist and with better rules I rather play Mordheim or Confrontation.

>>* the absence of any meaningful mechanics or stress on character development or social context - relations, status, etc. <<

Conan RPG uses a Reputation stat, Allegiances & Codes of Honour which are mechanically defined. Personally I'm not sure why rules should be necessary for roleplay stuff, I tend to like to do it freeform, but Conan does support the alternate style better than standard d20.

>>* how the game tends to bog down in combat without providing an option for streamlining (apart of just proposing it at the beginning of the GM's Guide)<<

Conan combat adds _increased_ complexity with the aim of better emulating the stories. It lacks an option for streamlining - and in fact I found it more necessary than for regular D&D so I added my own, basically rolling a d6 per NPC attacking another NPC and killing them on a 4+, 5+, etc depending on relative ability.

>>* alignments<<

None in Conan

>>* too many game currencies<<

? You mean cp, sp, gp, pp? Conan game only uses sp, with occasional gold.

>>* the GM vs. players attitude in contract to GM and the players<<

Conan Fate Points require a cooperative attitude & help mitigate this.

>>* the silly nonrealism of combat (especially in relation to how it is unnecessarily complex and abstract), mainly the infamous 5-ft. step and attacks of opportunity, hit points, rigidly defined elements such as ranges, speed, load etc. (making decision does not mean to imagine the situation in your head including the atmosphere, cool moves, flashes or emotions but thinking in 5-ft. increments, feat combination and tactics)<<

Conan RPG retains all this, which as I said earlier may have been a mistake, it seems a bit incongruous in a literature-based game.

>>* the kill things and gain stuff and XP attitude (and how characters are defined in relation to this)<<

Conan RPG discards this; XP are awarded freeform, not for killing things, there are no tables of magic items or wealth-by-level. Of course most Conan scenarios will still involve killing things! A trusty sword & some stout armour is all the stuff most characters will ever need (or get).

>>* the open-ended nature of the system with linear curve of resolution<<

Well, yes, d20s are still rolled...

>>* XPs and character advancement (the level system and the growing gap between high-level characters and low-level (read: common) characters/people (Hide +26 as in contrast to +4 - what does it mean, actually? Where is the "top"?)<<

"Top" is level 20 I guess. Conan retains this, basically. I award skill points outside the XP system to reflect life experience, but I'm a d20 heretic and they'd burn me on ENWorld if they could...

>>* why "Do I fast-talk him?" is of enormously different scale and complexity than "Do I kill him?"<<

Conan retains this. I think the fault lies with too-complex minis-based combat rather than too simple skills system, personally.

>>* how magic is treated<<

Completely different magic system in Conan, nothing at all like regular D&D. Much more freeform & generally mysterious, at least the way I use it.

>>* how Nar stuff tends to be slaughered by the system again and again (although this fault probably lies with the players also)<<

Conan RPG Fate Points encourages Nar approach. OTOH use of FPs tends to involve negotiation GM/player, players & GMs likely to be reluctant to accept whatever player says is the result of the FP expenditure, at least to start with.

>>* how the classes, races, feats and else are treated - just a collection of interchangeable crunchy elements<<

Hard to say how much this is changed. Classes, feats & (human) races all have mechanical (ie crunchy) differences, but you said earlier that you like 'crunch' for social interaction stuff - do you not like it for physical stuff? The Conan races are all very evocative & flavourful I thought, much moreso than the bland D&D demihumans.

>>* the dichotomy of making story-oriented decisions for your character and character effectiveness (combat or else)<<

I have no idea what this means.

>>* the way the player is forced to accept the behaviour of his character in certain situations without being able to decide for the character<<

This isn't true of 3e D&D or Conan, in fact I don't think it's ever been true of D&D in any incarnation, it's a very un-Gamist thing to do. I guess it's true of certain heavy-Sim games like Pendragon where you might have to 'save vs avarice;' or whatever to avoid your PC acting against your wishes. In D&D it would only occur under the influence of mind-altering magic, and likewise for Conan.

>>If I understand correctly a lot of the things are adjusted or changed in the Conan RPG and I slowly come to think that after about a year of RPG experimenting and theory I probably would be able to shift the focus but maybe it's just an illusion. <<

A lot is changed. But if you have a gut hostility to d20 per se I wouldn't think it was the game for you.

S'mon wrote: Conan RPG discards this; XP are awarded freeform, not for killing things...

S'mon,

Thanks very much for your lengthy answer. I didn't want my post to sound hostile (to d20 or its players), I apologize if it did.

As for some of the points:

It seems to me completely acceptable (at least in a system that's so heavy on describing anything crunchily) to have some mechanics for social interactions - although that does not mean I'm missing it in other games. I think "stats" like Honor etc. would do. If I understand correctly it's present in Conan.

Although in some instances the added complexity in combat could be good (such as in a dramatic adventure-ending fight), but I don't see the necessity for a three-hour long (real time) fight when two wolves attack the party. Pity they (WotC, Mongoose) didn't provide some guidance on how to mitigate this. Maybe a 250-pg. sourcebook on how to streamline miniature combat for $30.00 will be out one day... :)

With game currencies I mean all the things (stats, mechanics) that are in some way measured, but each differently - starting with hit points, attributes, skills, spell levels etc. It is quite hard to introduce new players to the game (at least players that didn't play any RPG before) although 3e did things to unify the system (that's why it's called d20, isn't it).

Of course S&S genre REQUIRES slaughter, so I'm with you on this one... but as I said in my previous post, thinking in 5-ft. increments and combat strategy (in terms of how best use, if not exploit, the rules) is in some way antithetic to the epic "feel" and atmosphere of combat, at least that's how I feel. Not to mention the fact that whatever level the character is, often his survival stands and falls on one roll (be it attack roll or saving throw).

As for the linear nature of d20, one of my ideas was to replace d20 with 2d10, increasing the range of critical failure to 2-3 and critical success to 19-20 and all weapons would have their critical ranges lowered by one. Maybe these changes would also force some changes in the skill system, like increasing the cost for higher skill ranks. I agree that the skill system is not too simple (neither too complex).

I like more settings with more human races instead of demihumans. Character immersion or believable story decisions for members of different races are very hard, not to say in a system such as DnD.

The "dichotomy of making story-oriented decisions for your character and character effectiveness (combat or else)" means that making story-oriented or in-character (Sim) decisions is not effective. Examples: the character inherited a beautiful masterwork sword from his father but as soon as he finds a generic +1 sword somewhere in a dungeon he tosses it away (repeat as he raises in levels). OR: If he fights one-handedly it's just plain silly not to take a shield, isn't it? But who in literature used a shield? The same goes with armour or some decisions in combat.
(If I extrapolate correctly, magic items in Conan RPG are rare which is good for my campaigns.)

The "way the player is forced to accept the behaviour of his character in certain situations without being able to decide for the character" means e.g. rolling a Will save to see if the character flees no matter how epic the player deems him to be, thus forcing a decision on the player and taking the epic feel of how the player dreamed up his character (surely in DnD no one dreams up a lame or daft character).

To the other points, I'm really glad to hear that Conan RPG brings so many changes.

I don't have a hostility to d20 per se, my disliking lies probably in frustration with the players (not just my player group) and their (our) interaction, too. It's just bad experience. Other factor could be my previous lack of insight into RPG theory I later gained thanks to Forge and indie-RPGs.

I grew up on 2nd Ed. AD&D and became very enthusiastic for 3e at first, but somehow I haven't experienced anyone to successfully work with the "meta-metagame" framework around d20 (me included). Maybe one exception to this experience: we played Arcana Unearthed and that was really good but we played just 2 sessions I think, so it's hard to tell. As time goes by and my bad experience fades away I'm starting to think whether it could be done successfully.

Michal

StalkingBlue wrote:

Bifi wrote: Just from the top of my head. Plainly - if I want to play Gamist and with better rules I rather play Mordheim or Confrontation.

Well, that about sums up your position, doesn't it? Don't deceive yourself then. Conan is - and means to be! - d20, albeit with some rules tweaks and more freedom for slivers of Nar stuff.

6inTruder wrote:

S'mon wrote: Conan RPG discards this; XP are awarded freeform, not for killing things...

How exactly does the Conan RPG say to award experience? Are there any specific guidelines?

Jason

Hi Bifi

>>It seems to me completely acceptable (at least in a system that's so heavy on describing anything crunchily) to have some mechanics for social interactions - although that does not mean I'm missing it in other games. I think "stats" like Honor etc. would do. If I understand correctly it's present in Conan.<<

Yup - personally I have more of a problem with a player who rolls a 40 on his Diplomacy check and expects the Hostile dragon to become Friendly, than I do with the player who casts a spell & Charms or Polymorphs the wyrm. I've been berated for this on ENW. I think character interaction should generally be resolved by in-character roleplay, with dice only rolled where the result is uncertain.

>>Although in some instances the added complexity in combat could be good (such as in a dramatic adventure-ending fight), but I don't see the necessity for a three-hour long (real time) fight when two wolves attack the party.<<

I have to say that all the Conan combats I've fought so far have resolved quickly, but I've used a lot of unarmoured, non min-maxed foes, fighting low-level PCs. The Conan RPG has lots of special 'combat maneuvers' derived from the stories, most are very deadly and will tend to speed up combat despite the complexity, as will the likelihood of death through massive damage (any wound doing 20+ hp dmg).

>>With game currencies I mean all the things (stats, mechanics) that are in some way measured, but each differently - starting with hit points, attributes, skills, spell levels etc. It is quite hard to introduce new players to the game (at least players that didn't play any RPG before) although 3e did things to unify the system (that's why it's called d20, isn't it).<,

OK, I agree this is a problem. Conan cuts down on it a bit, I think. The magic Power Point system is simpler than D&D slots system, and anyway will rarely be used by PCs unless you allow PC Scholars (sorcerers).

>>Of course S&S genre REQUIRES slaughter, so I'm with you on this one... but as I said in my previous post, thinking in 5-ft. increments and combat strategy (in terms of how best use, if not exploit, the rules) is in some way antithetic to the epic "feel" and atmosphere of combat, at least that's how I feel. Not to mention the fact that whatever level the character is, often his survival stands and falls on one roll (be it attack roll or saving throw).<<

Fate Points in Conan do away with that. PCs rarely die as long as they still have FPs and the GM is reasonably generous in how they can be used. We had a death in my Conan game yesterday when the PC chose to use up all their FPs in an heroic stand against the pirate hordes.

>>The "dichotomy of making story-oriented decisions for your character and character effectiveness (combat or else)" means that making story-oriented or in-character (Sim) decisions is not effective. Examples: the character inherited a beautiful masterwork sword from his father but as soon as he finds a generic +1 sword somewhere in a dungeon he tosses it away (repeat as he raises in levels).<<

Not a big problem in Conan anyway, modelling the stories Conan happily wielded whatever came to hand. There are no +1 swords in core Conan. BTW this was a huge problem in 1e/2e AD&D but in 3e magic items can be boosted as PCs go up in level, and I've rarely seen a favoured weapon discarded in 3e.

>> OR: If he fights one-handedly it's just plain silly not to take a shield, isn't it? But who in literature used a shield?<<

Sojan Shield-Bearer. >:)
(Conanesque character created by Michael Moorcock at age 16).

> The same goes with armour or some decisions in combat.
(If I extrapolate correctly, magic items in Conan RPG are rare which is good for my campaigns.)<<

That's right - almost non-existent, per the core Conan book. In the 3e d20 rules, sword & shield, 2-handed weapon or 2-weapon combat are all reasonable options; 1-handed w no shield isn't though, except for Prestige Classes like Duelist or somesuch. But the GM can always introduce a 'fencing' feat to make it a viable style if desired - that's what I did.

>>The "way the player is forced to accept the behaviour of his character in certain situations without being able to decide for the character" means e.g. rolling a Will save to see if the character flees no matter how epic the player deems him to be, thus forcing a decision on the player and taking the epic feel of how the player dreamed up his character (surely in DnD no one dreams up a lame or daft character).<<

I agree that that's a problem with _magical_ fear effects - which is the only case where this occurs. Conan RPG has a lot of Swooning when 1st & 2nd level PCs fail their Terror checks vs the supernatural. In a level-based system players have to understand that their 1st level PCs ARE NOT 'epic' - YET. If the players & GM want an Epic game they need to start at higher level. Personally in playing D&D I seek ways to give my PC fear-resistance - Iron Will feat, prestige class abilities, etc. Being a Gamist game though I have to accept that if I fail the save, I can be Feared (or killed). It's not as bad as a Sim game though where the rules try to tell me _how_ to RP my character and punish me for deviation. Not a d20 fault.

>>As time goes by and my bad experience fades away I'm starting to think whether it could be done successfully.<<

Might be worth a try! :)

-Simon

Hi all,

The Conan RPG recommends rewarding XP at a steady rate, with no relationship to any acheivement, so the character's leverl up every couple sessions. This is obviously an attempt to remove the gamist incentive to kill things and take their stuff. It does, of course, retain, the other half of the award system: becoming better at killing things and taking their stuff!

Fate points are awarded for achieving story goals. I think that they could easily replace XP - just keep track of how many you've spent - once you've sent Fate points equal to your next level, you level up.

Another idea: let players make a list of story goals they'd like to achieve in play. Then the GM can use these as guidelines for creating adventures. This would work rather like SAs in TROS.

Hi S'mon,

The more I know about the Conan RPG the more my desire for playing/running it grows. Come to find the right players... :)

Bifi

Alan,

Your idea with Fate Points means they are actually a reward for completing story goals. Which is quite Nar. And good, IMHO.

Bifi

Bifi wrote: Alan,

Your idea with Fate Points means they are actually a reward for completing story goals. Which is quite Nar. And good, IMHO.

Bifi

Yes, I drifted from what the rules say (Fate points for goals) to my own ideas without attributing techniques clearly.

I also think that the game's mechanics for Corruption, especially as a problem for sorcerer's tend to support narrativist play. It gives the player a standard to play against, similar to (but less powerful than) Humanity in Sorcerer.

Hi all,

I just happened to think: Is the Conan RG actually Gamist? Isn't it Sim, focused on Setting or Situation Exploration (with Nar elements)? What role does Gamist d20 actually play in it?

Bifi

I haven't played the Conan RPG, so I can't say for sure - but the how to play and gm advice all sound narrativist to me. Also, Fate points, being the strongest reward system, will tend to support narrativist play I think.

I suspect that the underlying d20 system may occasionally work against narratist priorities, especially if players come from another d20 game expecting what they've experienced in the past.

I think with some care, and some group agreement on creative agenda, Conan can be played for narrativist priorities.

Bifi - Conan RPG is Gamist with Narr tendencies, definitely not Sim I'd say.

If you have a Narr-crazy group you can prob shift it further into Narr than it is designed to be, but as S'mon has explained much better and more accurately than me, the d20 rules are there in principle, if with some tweaks. (As a d20 player and GM, I can play my Conan PC almost without referring to the rulebook, it's that similar.)

This means it supports combat challenges excellently, social interaction challanges to some extent, and leaves some room for cinematic descriptions of actions and with the Fate Points, limited player influence on the outcome of certain scenes and (if the GM allows and you haven't burnt your Fate Points on gamist stuff) on bits of Plot input.

Overall, d20, derived from DnD, in its turn derived from wargaming, is a Gamist system. As far as I understand, the d20 designers got rid of most of the Sim baggage AD&D appered to have accumulated (I never played AD&D 2nd ed, so this is second-hand info from me). So when the Conan designers opted for d20 rules, they essentially elected to make a Gamist game.

There isn't a lot of stuff I've seen in the Conan RPG book that would support a Sim style. On the contrary, e.g. the book advises GMs to strike surplus equipment off char sheets arbitrarily as it suits them, at the beginning of a scenario. Resources management being one part of Sim, I'd say that's anti-Sim GM advice (one I'm very grateful for btw, being a Gamist with slight Narr leanings and a distaste for items bookkeeping excesses).

Alan wrote: I haven't played the Conan RPG, so I can't say for sure - but the how to play and gm advice all sound narrativist to me. Also, Fate points, being the strongest reward system, will tend to support narrativist play I think.

I suspect that the underlying d20 system may occasionally work against narratist priorities, especially if players come from another d20 game expecting what they've experienced in the past.

I think with some care, and some group agreement on creative agenda, Conan can be played for narrativist priorities.

Bifi wrote: Hi all,

I just happened to think: Is the Conan RG actually Gamist? Isn't it Sim, focused on Setting or Situation Exploration (with Nar elements)?

S'mon wrote: I'd say no, it simply isn't focused on Setting/Situation exploration. The countries of Hyborea are presented more as 'moods' - sinister tomb-shadowed Stygia, sleepy spider-haunted Zamora, mighty conquering Turan - than as 'real places'. This is just how REH did it.

Of course you can argue it's "Simulating REH's stories" - that always makes my head hurt. :)

John Kim wrote:

S'mon wrote: I'd say no, it simply isn't focused on Setting/Situation exploration. The countries of Hyborea are presented more as 'moods' - sinister tomb-shadowed Stygia, sleepy spider-haunted Zamora, mighty conquering Turan - than as 'real places'. This is just how REH did it.

Of course you can argue it's "Simulating REH's stories" - that always makes my head hurt. :)

Keep in mind that in the current GNS model, Simulationism is defined completely in narrative terms: i.e. Exploration of Character, Setting, Situation, System, and Color. So GNS Simulationism can include a high focus on Color, like the moody character of countries. Simulating stories of a certain type can be considered "pastiche" which Ron says is characteristic of GNS Simulationism.

There is nothing about cause-and-effect simulation in the current definition of GNS Simulationism.

However, what you say is characteristic of rgfa Threefold Simulationism, which is defined in terms of sticking to a strict world model.

Hello,

I am so boggled by that dialogue that I don't even know what to say.

Except ...

1. Character, Situation, Setting, System, and Color are not narrative elements, although they can be. They are imaginative elements. I treat the term "narrative" much more narrowly than a lot of people seem to; it is more specific than "chain of fictional events" and literally requires Premise.

2. Simulationism as I define it is rabidly concerned with internal (imaginary) cause. It is predicated on focusing on that cause to the Nth degree. I wrote a whole essay about nothing else; its most important section is called "Internal cause is king." John, I can't imagine what you must be thinking to suggest otherwise.

So I'm throwing up my hands. Screw it and think what you like. But S'mon? Don't get hornswoggled by this noise.

Best,
Ron

StalkingBlue wrote: ... leaves some room for cinematic descriptions of actions and with the Fate Points, limited player influence on the outcome of certain scenes and (if the GM allows and you haven't burnt your Fate Points on gamist stuff) on bits of Plot input.

Alan wrote: I think you're actually drifting the text as written toward a gamist interpretation...

StalkingBlue wrote: Bifi - Conan RPG is Gamist with Narr tendencies, definitely not Sim I'd say.

...

Overall, d20, derived from DnD, in its turn derived from wargaming, is a Gamist system.

...

So when the Conan designers opted for d20 rules, they essentially elected to make a Gamist game.

Ron in his Simulationist essay wrote:
I am coming to think of D20 as a kind of High Concept (Simulationist - Bifi) chassis, a very new and interesting development in RPG design.

Bifi wrote:

Ron in his Simulationist essay wrote:
I am coming to think of D20 as a kind of High Concept (Simulationist - Bifi) chassis, a very new and interesting development in RPG design.

I'm sorry I haven't read the Conan RPG text to be able to actively enter this discussion. What the second quote means, however, is that d20 isn't purely a Gamist system (what especially cannot be told about all other d20 games, in my view especially those heavy on Setting).

Bifi wrote:

Ron in his Simulationist essay wrote:
I am coming to think of D20 as a kind of High Concept (Simulationist - Bifi) chassis, a very new and interesting development in RPG design.

I'm sorry I haven't read the Conan RPG text to be able to actively enter this discussion. ...
[omissions]
But from the previous posts it seems Conan is a Gamist -> Nar game.

Ron Edwards wrote: ... "naked D20" really isn't a role-playing game at all, because both character creation and the reward system are so vague. ... it's a matter of literally writing those sections. ... that means that you have to write a game, period, in order to write a D20 game.

Ron Edwards wrote:
... the system's main role in [the shift from Gamism to Narrativism] is always the reward system. What Paul & Co. did with the Conan game represents, to me, the first fully applied version of this principle to D20 ...

Alan's nailed it. I strongly recommend that no one ever refer to d20 as a this-or-that "game" in terms of GNS - not because it's omni-GNS or whatever, but because d20 per se is not actually a system. It has to be built further in order to be used, in each individual case.

Therefore we could compare Conan d20 vs. Mutants & Masterminds vs. Sorcerer, but not "naked d20" vs. (say) TROS or GURPS.

Best,
Ron

I agree with Ron and, although I snapped up the Conan d20 RPG and read it all from front to back, I'm not sure that this incarnation of d20 really does much more to clarify the system.

First off, as regards rewards:

Experience Points are (pardon the pun) pointless. Not only can PCs run games out of chronological order but there's no real way, in the game, to get Experience Points by *doing* anything. That's what Fate Points are for (kind of). But, then again, Fate Points seemed to me like Buffy's Drama Points with the serial numbers filed off. Don't get me wrong, I like Buffy's Drama Point system. I used to use something similar in my own d20 games. But I'm not sure the addition of Fate Points, on their own, significantly shifted the d20 system to the point where it can easily facilitate narrativist play.

The addition of things like Corruption, Codes of Honor and even a spliced together "relationships" bonus (as memory serves) seem more along the lines of exploring premise, etc. But these are all add-ons to what is, at its heart, the d20 system.

I liked the Conan game. I think it's hands down the best representation of Hyboria in an rpg. But, when all was said and done, I realized it was still just d20. Sure, I *could* run a narrativist style game with Conan. But I could just as easily run it Sim or Gamist. IMO, d20's reward system is so foggy that it could be run in anyway that someone might want... with some work...

But some of the hurdles that I see facing Narrativist play with Conan d20 are:

1 - Feats, feats and more feats: I liked the spells stuff. That seemed to gel with the setting and all. But, IMO, feats are just way too much. IMO, either have attributes or have feats. My beef with feats is that, more often than not, they get in the way of a good story. IME, they encourage min-maxing. They encourage rules-lawyering. Overall, they don't add to the story as much as they distract from it. And not in a HeroQuest-counting-up-your-auto-augments kind of way either. IME, feats pull a story to a screeching halt because players have to stop, open up the book and review what it is a feat does exactly and in no uncertain terms. Learning rules is one thing. But trying to milk one's feat for an advantage in the story is not narrativist play, IMO. Neither is building one's character from the beginning to be the biggest feat monster imaginable. IMO, that just encourages people to focus on things other than premise and conflict. Premise becomes something *outside* of the game and removed from its reward systems. Character advancement, or rather the management of that advancement, becomes the focus, IME. Everything "in game" is predominantly just an engine to further the game of "character advancement". Conan, IMO, expanded on this.

2 - d20's pass/fail mechanics: IMO, pass/fail mechanics and narrativist play just don't mix. Win/lose, Hit/miss, do it/don't really don't leave a lot of room in which to manuever. I've tried playing d20 with a narr bent. It was hard. Real hard. There really isn't a gauge of success, although one could easily be extrapolated, but try explaining that to the d20 vet.

3 - The ubiquity of d20: IMO, one of the things biting any d20 game in the backside is the fact that the majority of players out there already think they know how to play it. So their play styles and expectations carry over, usually from D&D which is where the majority of d20 players first learned how to play d20. This is a real problem in trying to play d20 in any way outside of what these players already know, IME. Believe me, I've tried. I've tried a LOT of things. Drama Points. Changing the pass/fail mechanics. Changing the reward system. But, at the end of the day, I was left with a game that was only nominally d20. It had some similarities, but (after 50 or so pages of house rules) it really wasn't d20 anymore. And I was still wrestling with players who were playing it as if it were.

4 - The primacy of combat: Sure, Conan stories have lots of combat in it. He whoops up on pirates, picts and giant pythons. Don't forget evil sorcerers either! But the Conan d20 rpg follows in D&D's footsteps by making combat resolution its 800-pound flagship. Try to keep the focus on premise when you're measuring out 5-foot steps. It's an act of will, let me tell you! Sure, you can take out AoOs. But then you screw the benefit of reach weapons and, worse, you lose a lot of the kewl feats that give the character classes their distinctive feel. I looked into ignoring AoOs in Conan but it wasn't worth it, IMO. d20 is anything but modular. Conan d20 is no different. In the end, it's d20 and you'll have to jump through hoops to make the non-important bar fight last only 15 minutes when the players break out the battleboard. Sure, you can tweak it to run however you want, but I thought the point of games like Sorcerer, My Life with Master, etc., is that you wouldn't have to *tweak* them to explore premise. You wouldn't have to ignore (or rewrite) the rules to play 'Story Now'. In this arena, IMO, Conan d20 suffers from the same problem as every other d20 game out there.

5 - The system's bipolar rewards: It's arguable whether or not d20, on its own, even has a reward system. In D&D, you get points from killing monsters. But you could also get points for using diplomacy, if the GM likes the way you used it. But what exactly does d20 reward?? Advancement is gauged in experience points and, if you're getting a set number of experience points per game (or a set percentage of whatever the party as a whole received), where does the reward system kick in, exactly?? Other systems, like Mutants & Masterminds and Conan, have introduced outside elements that *could* serve as a reward system but, IMO, these add-ons just don't cut it. And why have experience points at all if Fate Points are your reward system??

Don't mistake me. Conan d20 is a well-written (though poorly edited) game. I think it kicks some serious Hyborean butt. I'd love to play it, but I would never run it. I started putting stuff together for a game of it but then I realized, in the end, it was still just d20. d20 with some shiny, dragon-inlay, 22 inch rims... but still d20. And d20 doesn't *do* anything. It's the silly putty of RPGs. It seems to flirt with all the different styles of play but settles down with no one style in particular. Not that this is a requirement of mine, mind you. Just that I was all hyped that I was going to finally do Narr play with d20 after reading Conan and then I introduced it to a few friends of mine, heard their reactions, and realized I'd been here before.

For my money, I'd say that the Unknown Armies system or something like Sorcerer would go farther towards the goal of Narr play in Hyborea. Perhaps we could use Conan d20 to start a new categorization:

GNS heartbreakers.

But I would like to thank Ian for a beautiful and wonderfully well-researched sourcebook on Conan's world. Too bad we couldn't have dual-statted them with Sorcerer & Sword...

Scripty - while I obviously don't share your hostility to d20 and I don't see d20 as amorphous or undefined - to me, it's clearly a Gamist system (and it is a system, even if the SRD lacks XP-award or advancement rules in order for WoTC to sell more PHBs) at heart, and I think your criticisms of eg the Feat system supports this, I generally agree with your opinion, especially as regards the d20 battlemat combat system. It's about as un-Narrativist as you can possibly get. d20's pass/fail mechanic hurts Nar play too, I think, though this can be abrogated a little by a flexible GM.

S'mon wrote: Scripty - while I obviously don't share your hostility to d20 and I don't see d20 as amorphous or undefined ... It's about as un-Narrativist as you can possibly get. d20's pass/fail mechanic hurts Nar play too, I think, though this can be abrogated a little by a flexible GM.

Scripty,

I actually have exactly the same experience with d20. You put it well, especially with the 'Story Later' part.

Bifi

Scripty wrote: IME, d20 is efficient at making drawn out combats tactically interesting and making characters interesting over long periods of play by means of its character advancement system. I don't see d20 as particularly efficient at making social interaction or roleplaying an integral part of the gaming experience. It just doesn't support it that much and pretty well leaves it out there as something tangential to the game of character advancement and combat resolution, IME.

Scripty wrote: How does this fit in with Conan?

IMO, it fits in great if you want to run Thing in the Crypt or Tower of the Elephant. But, along the same lines, I think it would require more work if you're wanting some epic tale of loves lost and empires won.
...
No matter how you cut it, IME, 'Story Now' becomes 'Story Later' the very second that the DM says: "Roll initiative." Other people's experience may not mirror mine. That's good and healthy. But I own and read the Conan game.

While my gut feeling was also that square-counting d20 combat was unsuited to a Nar game, I have to say I haven't really noticed a problem so far. Just thinking narrativistly as a GM re what the NPCs (can) do, rather than thinking of it as a skirmish wargame, seemed to help a lot. Being very flexible re what Fate Points could do helped too - eg in the last session the PCs were trying to escape the pirate base, one Cimmerian barbarian PC was incapacitated early but I let him spend his FPs to act normally and hold off hordes of pirates from the jetty while the other PCs grabbed a ship and set off. The Cimmerian even survived that battle by a last minute break for freedom, but at 0 FP, ie pretty much 'marked for death'. When later ambushed by the villagers in league with the pirates he was knocked down & had his throat slit, but again that gave his two companions a chance to escape.
As long as GM & players are in a Narrativist mood it seemed to me that the d20 combat system was not nearly as intrusive as I'd have expected beforehand.

Alan wrote:

StalkingBlue wrote: ... leaves some room for cinematic descriptions of actions and with the Fate Points, limited player influence on the outcome of certain scenes and (if the GM allows and you haven't burnt your Fate Points on gamist stuff) on bits of Plot input.

I think you're actually drifting the text as written toward a gamist interpretation. On page 68, the rules provide ...

Hello,

I think this thread has moved well past its original topic. It's time to close it and to take its various new topics into separate threads.

Best,
Ron