Re: [dq-rules] DQ vs. newer systems

[Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au>]

On Wed, 01 Jan 2003 14:26:56 -0000, "manx2600 <johncfranklin@hotmail.com>"
<johncfranklin@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I still run a DQ version 1 campaign on the rare occasions when 
>the old group gets together. I stick with DQ because I know the 
>rules cold, have added my own variations, and out of affection for 
>old times and the glory of SPI. But I was wondering if any of you 
>have kept up with the development of RPGs over the last 20 
>years, and still think that DQ, while it was once an infinite 
>improvement over AD&D for flexibility, offers real advantages over 
>systems like GURPS (I also hear that the new WOTC D&D is 
>quite good). Or do you all still play DQ for the same reasons I 
>do?

Well, I recently ran a DQ campaign that lasted for about a year or so.  It
was OK but it bogged down because we were finding issues with the magic
system (some spells, it developed, were too powerful as they are described,
especially when they have a few ranks in them; also, spell investments were
getting out of hand); also, characters were dying too often (this is not
really a fault with DQ, per se, rather the way we play emphasises combat).

The magic issues could be revised and refined with playtesting (and indeed a
number of them were) but the whole thing necessitated a "stop and rethink".

We've cast around looking at other games, and so far we've all been mighty
impressed with 3rd Ed D&D.  I never much liked previous editions for a
variety of reasons, but most of the things I disliked about the system have
been fixed in 3E.  It really seems to be a nice, straight-forward fantasy
system now, considerably more flexible than it used to be and the internal
systems have been reworked to be more logical (which contributes to its
flexibility).  The addition of a real skill system (rather than the vague
"proficiencies" of previous editions), the addition of the "feat" system and
the concept of an easier multi-class path make for the possibilities of
diverse character types that never were a previous aspect of D&D.  And, you
can't knock the support and expansion network.

I'll always love DQ and I do think it was the best "generic" FRPG system for
many many years, but I'm coming to the conclusion that the make overs it
needs to remain "top of the heap" require more effort than I'm currently
prepared to invest.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst              bprobst@netspace.net.au    ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia      MSTie #72759  SCA #80160
"Hi-Keeba!"
ASL FAQ              http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ