GoO Version: Why aren't you playing it?

[_x_]

Just curious here, especially with the old guard from teh GoO forums. Why have you given up the GoO version (tri-stat or d20)? Do you think the rulesets were not adept at modeling the books, or is it just the thrill of a new system being released?

[Patchface]

I've played the GoO version quite a bit in the last couple years (and I've run a few games myself as well), and, overall, I still consider the GoO book one of the best RPG books I've ever laid hands on. Also, I'd strongly consider joining a game using the old AGoT rules if the right GM came along.

That said, I've never been too fond of D20 systems in general, and I also don't like the class system used by GoO that much. So this new GR system with its D6's and (hopefully) more options during character creation is a change I welcome wholeheartedly.

or is it just the thrill of a new system being released?

For me, that certainly plays an important role as well.

Also, it's nice to have a system that's, well, not dead. I like treating myself to new sourcebooks, rule extensions, etc. once in a while. And having online support for the system you play with is a good thing, too.

Just my two coppers.

[Pencil Pusher]

Not really old guard but I did surf over there now and then.

I don't do much d20... The group I play with doesn't like it and it leaves me non-plussed. So I never ran a game in the d20 version. Got the book and liked it overall. I'm really hoping for some good supplements, I can always use low powered (no gaggle-pack of exotic monsters) type adventures. Even if all they do is spur ideas for my own game.

Also like the idea of a new system.

[Zapp]

I find the setting very interesting, but mostly because of the adventure potential. No adventures mean no gaming for me. (Yep, I won't buy the main rulebook until I see a properly epic adventure for the SIFRP game line.)

Then as a second reason: yes, d20 was intensely unsuitable for the subject matter. You can't really separate the fluff from the crunch, and I distrust d20 to produce an appropriate atmosphere. I think levels and hundreds of hit points is basically incompatible with the setting.

Having Tri-Stat too was kind of meh, appearing in an appendix only. The little I saw of it gave me the impression it was very rules-light, great for some, probably better than d20 for everyone, but still not delivering that "tightness" only a custom-fit system can deliver for a setting.

[higgins]

For me, it's the system. While I agree it's probably the most solid d20 version I've seen, I'd still never run it. I just plainly hate classes -- the rules should not dictate what kind of characters can be made. Plus, the class description make a dull read.

If I like how the setting info gets covered by GR, then my GoO book goes for sale. I'd miss excellent pictures by Amok though. I really wish there was a chance to print them again in the new material.

[Skyman]

Partially it was burnout on d20 in general, not just GoT. I used to play a lot of d20, but classes and the combat focused system have just gotten boring for me. The GoO adaptation was very good, and worked surprisingly well with the setting, but also was crunch heavy and didn't fit in too well with the sort of rp focused games I like to run/play. This system looks like it'll have the sort of mechanics where I can bring in the occasional major rolls and have some interesting combats, but can avoid the rolling easily if I prefer.

Also, my life just has more time for rping than it used to; I might not have gone back to it though unless there was something like an exciting new system to draw me back in.

[Maester Luwin]

Hey everyone! I have played GoO's version both as a table top game & as a PBP over on RPoL. I even played in Skyman's excellent campaiagn. I found the system a blast to run & play.

I never had a problem with D20. I know its not a perfect system. I know it has faults. Yet every other system I have ever played (& there were many) had these as well. If you do not like D20 I certainly understand. I hope Green Ronin's game will be the perfect system. I know if Robert & the gang have a hand in it ... it will be good. Perfect, well that's a tall order...

I think the atmosphere & how much fun anyone has while playing any RPG depends on the GM & the players themselves (& less on the system played). I have been very blessed to have had great opportunities with both! Maester Luwin

[_x_]

MaesterLuwin (and anyone else) which do you think is better to run a game in westeros; the d20 verison or the tri-stat version?

[higgins]

I think most people cannot comment on that, really. The standard issue was without tri-stat rules, and the special edition was twice the price if I recall correctly.

[Jon Snow]

MaesterLuwin (and anyone else) which do you think is better to run a game in westeros; the d20 verison or the tri-stat version?

Well, I think this would be a matter of preference. I have run both versions extensively and both are great. My group and I ended preferring the tristat version. Again, not knocking the d20 because it was fantastic, but we found the tristat rules to be extremely flexible and quite deadly.

[timemrick]

I used to be at least an occasional visitor at the GoO forums (and briefly at WW's BESM 3e forum, before it got merged in with other orphan games). I'm a fan of the SIF novels (write faster, George!), but never considered picking up the d20 or Tri-Stat AGoT game. Mostly, I like world-building too much to be a big fan of licensed settings (with the exception of Buffy, where my GMs' 'verse is deliberately non-canon). I was also experiencing some d20 burnout at the time. So $50 was too much for a book I'd probably never use.

However, after seeing the SIFRP Quick-Start, I may pick up the core rulebook--though if I ever ran the game, it would probably be for a homebrew setting rather than Westeros. Whether I pick up the campaign guide depends on how well it doubles as a reference for reading the novels (how many POV characters is Martin up to now...?!).