Mark \"Tipop\" Williams wrote:
> Except for the fact that the D&D rules (yes, even the new improved d20
> system) are inferior to some other systems in many people's opinion. I
> would rather use the RuneQuest or Talislanta systems for a sword&sorcery
> game.
I haven't played either, so I (unfortunatly) can't comment.
However, I can share a different experience. About a year ago my wife
and I went with a friend to try a new game--Deadlands, as it happened to
be. We spent half the night rolling up characters, and the other half
of the night going through two one-round encounters... and in which, we
were unable to do anything because, over the course of three hours, we
were unable to learn the totality of the rules.
If Deadlands had been d20, or WEG's d6, or anything else, we could have
just thrown characters together, been told *just what was different*,
and gotten playing. It doesn't matter if Deadlands is "superior" or
not; it was a totally different game, which meant that we had to learn a
totally different system.
Now, I'm sure Deadlands is a great game--but because of the barrier to
entry, I don't play it. (I'll probably pick up d20 Deadlands when it
finally comes out, and I'll probably enjoy it.)
DM
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
