Post originally by SteelCaress at 2003-08-03 21:36:50
Converted from Phorums BB System

It is kind of sad, and ordinarily I'd disagree, but my recent experiences running a d20 campaign make me think that Creel and O'Connor are correct.

I run with a world that I developed for a Lord of the Rings campaign. It was sort of the "East" that Tolkien mentions, but never elaborates on. So I did. I was told it was very realistic, the descriptions vivid, and that it was incredible fun.

When I moved to a different city, I switched it to d20, since that was what they were familiar with. Their experience with d20 GM's were pathetic, but at least 2 of them had gamed with me before, so we all decidedto give it a whirl.

Most of the characters are evil, or at least mercenary. They don't care one way or the other whether a NPC is in trouble or not. Bonuses of an extra +1 etc are very important to them. It sort of turns into a "grab the gold, smash the monster" fest, when the world itself doesn't support that very well. Bear in mind these are the same people who are very thoughtful and of higher quality gamer material when it comes to WarHammer, DC Universe, and Call of Cthulhu.

I'll be the first to admit that d20 needs tweaking in order to be run correctly. D20 does one thing really well in it's pure form -- simulate D&D. That's it. Period. Maybe it's time to retire this grandfather game and go play something that still has hair and teeth.