[RPG]: True20 Adventure Roleplaying, reviewed by Leroy Van Camp III (3/3)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/12/12270.phtml

Leroy Van Camp III's Summary:

True20 is a system that brims with potential that allows for quick character creation and fast play. Unfortunately, its potential seems somewhat squandered.

Go to the full review for more information.

[Ron]

Nice review! It touches most of the important issues regarding the game.

I haven't finished reading the book but I got some coments. Unlike the reviewer, I sort of liked the settings, especially the Arabian one and I look forward to see them developed. However, I agree with him regarding the classes. I think the game would work much better without them and the only reason they stayed is to please some die-hard d20 fans.

Still, I would like to hear from some people that actually played True20.

[buzz]

Very thoughtful review, Leroy! I found this comment interesting, though:

Originally Posted by Leroy

I would have to houserule some things, and convert it to a classless, point-based system, but otherwise I think it is a solid, smooth system and one of the better versions of d20 out there.

I'm not sure how to reconcile the first half of this statement with the second. How "solid and smooth" could it be if, right out of the gate, you're tossing classes and making houserules?

Nonetheless, very good review; the 3/3 rating seems about on par with what I've heard about True20. I'd love to see a playtest review at some point.

[crimfan]

Originally Posted by buzz

I'm not sure how to reconcile the first half of this statement with the second. How "solid and smooth" could it be if, right out of the gate, you're tossing classes and making houserules?

I suppose it depends on how tolerant of house rules one is. Even a solid system IMO will always require a few house rules. If nothing else tailoring defaults to what I want to do will be necessary and chargen, advancement, etc., are among the most common areas for alteration. My threshold for "solid" seems to be about 80%-90%. If I'm changing much more than 20% of the rules there is a problem.

I'd love to see a playtest review at some point.

Indeed.

Jay

[Tim Gray]

I skipped straight to the conclusion *lazy smiley* and just thought I'd comment on this.

I also do not expect to see much support for True20, either. Because True20 is a d20 System game, that means you can use other d20 resources, but with the changes to the base d20 system implemented in True20, conversions may end up being difficult.

What I think True20 needs is a 2.0. Drop the settings, add more guidelines and rules for other genres, rework the power system to be more flexible, and then start releasing genre supplements: True20 Magic, True20 Fantasy, True20 Future, and so on. I really want a d20-based universal system with extensive support, and so far True20 seems like the best choice to be modified into such a beast.

You might not realise, but there are about 4 support products out already, some of which address genre specifics.

Also, the book you've seen is 2.0. Or 1.5, or 2.5... The first version was in Blue Rose, then it got adapted as a standalone PDF ruleset, then that got tweaked and cleaned up and prettified quite a bit to make the print edition.


Additionally: if the classes bother you, just make everyone an Expert with open access to feats.

[Malacoda]

Originally Posted by buzz

Very thoughtful review, Leroy! I found this comment interesting, though: "I would have to houserule some things, and convert it to a classless, point-based system, but otherwise I think it is a solid, smooth system and one of the better versions of d20 out there."

I'm not sure how to reconcile the first half of this statement with the second. How "solid and smooth" could it be if, right out of the gate, you're tossing classes and making houserules?

Buzz, I understand your confusion, and a lot of it stems from my own approach to RPGs, so hopefully I can explain...

I rarely ever run an RPG without houserules. To me, making some basic houserules for a system is not indicitive of how much I like the system or how solid I think it is (although making tons of houserules would be, I guess!) Other than going with the classless option I mentioned, I wouldn't have to houserule too much in True20. I think the core mechanics are very solid, including combat, skills, task resolution, damage and so on.

As for ditching the classes, I do admit this is a major overhaul. But that doesn't change the fact that I think the classes in True20 are mostly solid, other than the issues I mention in the review. Character creation in True20 seems like it would be easy for many concepts. I don't yet have my point system for True20 complete, but that wouldn't stop me from playing with the system mostly RAW and using the given classes, should the need arise (like a quick adventure while the next GM in our rotation finishes up his work for the next game).

It's just that I really do prefer a classless, point-based system for my universal RPGs, and so I wouldn't make True20 my universal system of choice without first doing that. Plus, I already have such a beast written for d20 Modern, and so all I would have to do is convert it.

Nonetheless, very good review; the 3/3 rating seems about on par with what I've heard about True20.

Thanks!

[Malacoda]

Originally Posted by Tim Gray

You might not realise, but there are about 4 support products out already, some of which address genre specifics.

I did realize that, but none of them are quite what I have in mind when I think of genre support. One is a bestiary, one is only on cybernetics, and one is fantasy archetypes. That last one might have more support for fantasy than I think, but I doubt it is what I am looking for. But, you are right, there is some support, and it doesn't hurt to mention it.

Also, the book you've seen is 2.0. Or 1.5, or 2.5... The first version was in Blue Rose, then it got adapted as a standalone PDF ruleset, then that got tweaked and cleaned up and prettified quite a bit to make the print edition.

Blue Rose is not True20 Adventure Roleplaying 1.0—although it might be version 1.0 of the True20 system—but I would agree that the hardback could be counted as 1.5 in light of the PDF (which I have heard of, but not seen).

Regardless, my point still stands that I would love to see a True20 revision that focuses on making the rules fit different settings, styles and genres, combined with a point-based system, which is not at all unreasonable considering the author and publisher.

Additionally: if the classes bother you, just make everyone an Expert with open access to feats.

That does not solve my issues, really.

I'm more than happy with it as-is. And I love the sample campaigns, especially Mecha vs. Kaiju.

[Destriarch]

I recently picked up a copy of True20, mostly out of curiosity, and I have to agree that the damage system is not just complex, but needlessly complex and could have been described far better to boot. There are also an awful lot of little side rules to take into account in combat in general, even with the loss of attacks of opportunity. It's far from streamlined, that's for sure. I'm not saying it's a BAD system, but it's not hugely simpler than D20.

At least the character classes are more intelligently thought out though.

Ash

[SteelCaress]

I think the Powers section could be useful for other roles thru a simple house-rule: Allow other classes partial access to the Powers, like 1 per level or 1 per 2 levels (to avoid stepping on the Adept's toes). Have the Powers level according to everyone's level.

I like the damage track, as it's a little more logical than Hit Points, though not much. I prefer damage based on how well you hit, rather than a separate to hit and damage roll.

I'd also prefer fewer broader skills, but the lack of point allocation makes that a lot easier to deal with.

Makes me wish I had True20 back in the days when I ran my heavily house-ruled 3E campaign. At least then there would have been a consistent play-tested rules set I could refer to, instead of my point-by-point changes. A lot of True20's deviations seem very much in line with what I was using, like Defense instead of Armor Class (scaled by level), and Armor helping to stop damage.

Good review, though, with an eye on "what I'd do with it." I always like those kinds of reviews, since gamers are going to modify the rules or mine the thing for ideas anyway.