e20: A Successor to Saga Edition

[NukeHavoc]

Gary Sarli, the developer and editor for Saga Edition, and the author of the Jedi Counseling column, is planning e20: System Evolved, a generic RPG core rule book based on Saga Edition rules, but diverse enough to support science fiction, fantasy and horror. Essentially, he's rebuilding Saga using the d20 fantasy and modern SRDs. The most intriguing part for me (and I'm guessing a few others in our group). is the idea of adding magic rules to Saga.

He set a goal of raising $10,000 by March 15 using kickstarter.com to fund the project; if he got that much of a commitment, he'd go ahead with it, using professional writers, graphic designers, and artists.

He got $13,376.

Details and introductory video here:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gms ... ying-gam-0

So I'm curious. The minimum contribution is $5, $20 gets you access to the forum that discusses the game, and a copy of the PDF when it's released (he's shooting for late 2010). There are other tiers above that that are likely too rich for my blood. This model's worked for Wolfgang Bauer over at Open Design /Kobold Quarterly, and from what I've seen, it's yielded some top-rate product.

I'm thinking about signing up at the $20 level and seeing how it unfolds.

ken

[Jonkga]

Yeah, rather interesting. I'd be curious to hear how this pans out for him.

However, I'm not sure generic Saga is different enough from 3.x rules or pathfinder - aren't they all really d20 rulesystems that are designed to handle the same things? Isn't Saga unique because it is so system-specific? Making it generic just makes it 3.x again. I'm not sure this is something I'd throw money at.

[Lars Porsenna]

Saga is much more simplified compared to 3e D20. So if you like D20 but found the rules too dense, Saga is "lite" enough to get rid of those rules and still maintain a playable game. Also Saga is a hybrid of 3e and 4e in many ways.

I just hope to all the Gods of Kobol there is at least the option for individually allocated skill points, rather than the level/skill rating Saga currently has.

Damon.

[Jonkga]

Saga is much more simplified compared to 3e D20. So if you like D20 but found the rules too dense, Saga is "lite" enough to get rid of those rules and still maintain a playable game. Also Saga is a hybrid of 3e and 4e in many ways.

Yeah, we've said that many times. That doesn't change the fact that they are really still just flavors of the same thing, and not different rulesets. And I'd argue that Saga is not more simplified than 3E d20 - sure it changed some rules, but its just as dense.

[Jonkga]

I just hope to all the Gods of Kobol there is at least the option for individually allocated skill points, rather than the level/skill rating Saga currently has.

Damon.

And, yes, we know you like individually allocated skill points. So, I'll just go on record as saying that's the worst part of the 3E d20 stuff, and if games never do that again I'll be thrilled - I love the level/skill rating that Saga and 4E and such currently use, especially compared to the horrible dreck that was figuring out a rogues skill points (even at first level) and having to allocate them to useless skills that never see a roll in-game, like say tattooing.

[NukeHavoc]

I think what makes Saga unique is the way they implemented talents; d20 modern had something similar, but I think they really refined it and perfected it with Saga. Having played a good amount of D&D 3.x and Pathfinder recently, I'm really reminded of what makes Saga special: no iterative attacks, streamlined skill system, and (of course) being able to choose your own class features through talents.

It's a kissing cousin to D&D, no doubt about it, but I do think the DNA's been shuffled enough that it's not the same as playing D&D and Pathfinder.

There's a FAQ for the system here:

http://e20system.com/faq.html

... and it's a kind of good news, bad news thing. Good because it's keeping the focus on talents and has the simplified skill system (personally I'm with Jon on skills, while I don't particularly mind skill points, Saga's system greatly streamlines character and NPC creation).

But the bad news is it's not a straightforward port (or recreation) of Saga Edition; he plans on introducing weapon skills (basically, you can improve your skill with a weapon through training) and enhancements (basically per-character bumps designed to replicate the enhancements you get from fantasy items, but in modern and scifi games).

Some of these ideas are interesting, and frankly, even best case scenario I'm not looking at something I could replace Saga itself with -- I'd be more interested in something I could use to run a fantasy game that's still more or less compatible with my D&D 3.x books.

[Lars Porsenna]

You know, I think I'm just not going to post on threads like these anymore. Less conflict.

Damon.

[NukeHavoc]

I just hope to all the Gods of Kobol there is at least the option for individually allocated skill points, rather than the level/skill rating Saga currently has.

It seems to me that having a variant skill point system wouldn't be that hard of a thing to do, as long as the total maximum points per skill per level didn't exceed the max "trained skill" ranks of the regular characters. So if regular players are getting +5 for trained skills, and 1/2 level for untrained skills, you have that many points to spend, but you can't exceed +5 (doing so would allow for broketastic characters IMHO ... just ask Bob. )

I personally would still default to the standard trained/untrained because man, it makes it SOOOO much easier for me as a GM (at least when it comes time for NPC creation).

[Jonkga]

You know, I think I'm just not going to post on threads like these anymore. Less conflict.

Damon.

I'm sorry, man. I didn't mean to be conflict-y. Just stating my opinion, as I thought you were stating yours. I don't think we have to agree on everything just to discuss stuff on these boards, or to hang out, or whatever. By all means don't stop posting - it's the other perspectives that you guys bring to our group that helps make ours such a vital crew - at least in my opinion.

I mean, I'd much rather have the Saga or 4E type skill system compared to the 3.x version - but I love playing 3.x stuff, and especially like it when you are at the table as well, so I'm never going to keep counting the skill points to keep me from gaming with you. And, I do choose rogue-y type characters alot, and I recall having to re-do Fonteyn's skills like 5 or 6 times to get the count right, but that never stopped me from bringing "the Hand" to the table when I could.

Please, keep the opinions coming.

[EvilGenius]

You know, I think I'm just not going to post on threads like these anymore. Less conflict.

Damon.

Dude, relax. We're all allowed to have different opinions. Since when has that been 'conflict'? lol!!

[NukeHavoc]

Dude, relax. We're all allowed to have different opinions. Since when has that been 'conflict'? lol!!

Yeah, I'm not seeing any raging infernos here. More like a cigarette smoldering in a pile of wet leaves...

[EvilGenius]

For my part, as far as skill points go, I like both systems well enough. For 3x, I wish the skill list was somewhat condensed. For Saga, I wish that there were a few discretionary skill points and also I wish that certain things were spelled out a little more clearly with skills. For example, if you're on a ship and trying to keep track of enemy ships is that Computer Use (using the scanners) or Percpetion (using your eyes)? Are they distinct and separate (pick up your visual scanning!!)?

I don't think it would be difficult to hybrid-ize the two systems. Use Saga, but add a few skills if neccessary and instead of your beginning Trained giving you +5, have Trained it be +3 and you get 2 discretionary points. Or keep the point allocation the same but allow you to use one "trained" skill to give you discretionary points applied to any skill instead of +5 to one skill.

[T1Mirage]

I think I would like such a system. Ken and I were in a discussion about this on Saturday and it could be a nice change to a fantasy game that is generally locked into a dungeon setting to make it more like what Saga does.

Let me try to say this better (trying to be fast @ work)

It's amazing to hear of the Star Wars games but if I try to think of similar scenarios and such in a D&D setting, they are underlying theme is not typical of a D&D game. I.e., there is generally not a wagon driver making skill checks while archers are shooting out of the wagon, etc. Or you don't have a rogue disabling devices while the party fights orcs, etc.

I would like to incorporate such thoughts into my future games because it seems a little more realistic and different.

Let me add along with getting suggestions for what books to read, etc. these discussions are great and expand gaming knowledge, ideas, concepts, etc.

[EvilGenius]

I agree, George. I like the way the Saga system allows the game to move out of strictly combat situations. That's one of the things that I liked best about Mutants and Masterminds, too. There were a lot of ways to apply your powers to non-combat situations.

Come to think of it, that's always been one of the things that our group has tried to do with the D&D magic system. We always try and use spells to do non-combat things (beds of stone-to-flesh, for example). Which is also why the 4e magical system doesn't do it for me. They've gone the exact oppposite way and made all magic into just a combat application.

[NukeHavoc]

As we were discussing on Saturday, I think that D&D can do these sorts of things, it's just that by default, we don't really *think* to do them because we're using to playing in a certain mode. Rules aside, Star Wars puts you into an entirely different mindset as you try and emulate the movies (which often combine skills and combat).

If/when I run D&D again, I want to do more interesting combats and challenges. e.g. maybe the players are on a ship and are attacked by sahuagin during a storm. As the deck pitchs and rolls underneath the heroes, rigging snaps, sails come down and suddenly the fish people are the least of your problem as the fallen sail threatens capsize the ship. Now in addition to the regular combat, you've got people clearing ropes, making checks to tie the rigging back together, etc. Maybe the barbarian, who would normally be cleaving throw sahaugin, has to jump on the wheel to keep the rudder steady using his massive strength bonuses.

Or take the elephants at the end of Lord of the Rings -- don't just have the beasts there as creatures, make them moveable terrain that you can climb, jump off of, etc. Then there's the The Bridge of Khazad-Dûm, where you have to balance making progress through the collapsing infrastructure.

We've always had skillful characters, and I think we've done some of this in the past, but I think the complexity of D&D itself (and all the prep time that went into it) kept me from doing a lot of this. And really, I think that playing D&D drops us into a fairly conventional combat mode. We're not doing a lot of crazy stunts and skill uses, because well, we just don't do that. (or, perhaps, we've tried and, ahem, fallen short). We *have* done it (Ragnar riding the smashing column trap anyone?) but I don't think it was the standard.

And to bring it around to how Saga's different, I think I've been saving enough time on the GM side of things that I can create more interesting encounters that have skillful (or at least, less combat oriented) options.