The title pretty much sums it up. Why didn't they. The Systems are rather similar. Earn XPs raise levels, gain and advance Talents and Skills. It's not too difficult too imagine a 4th level arbitrator, with class skills, weapon specialisation (autoshotgun), that will change at the 8th level into the interrogator prestige class, right?

It's not that I think the d20 System might be superior, it's just so similar, that I wonder, why they did the work again?

Anachronist said:

I think their similarity stops at "levels". Black Industries didn't put in saving throws, spells with levels, a comprehenisve monster guide, etc. The skill and talent system is a lot more open ended than the skills and feats found in D20. Dark Heresy let me buy all the talents I wanted as long as I had xp whereas feats are limited by class and level in D20. Additionally there are no level requirements on talents. There are more differences but I don't want to belabour the point.

The game has way more in common with WFRP 1E then with D20 system. Yes, its true that you have "multi-classing", Talents, skills and ranks/levels but what it is really is a more direct and streamlined verstion of the WFRP 1E/2E career system.

In WFRP 1E/2E after you purchased all your advancements from a career you could move on to another career and begin again in acquiring skills and talents and characteristic advancements.

In DH/RT/DW you do the same thing, but instead of having a set requirement of advances you have to buy, you only need to spend a certain number of XP to change to the next career. And instead of having a vast range of choices for your next career you have to more or less advance linear to the next "rank" career. For example, from Conscript to Guard.

With the options presented in Inquisitor's Handbook (et al) you had more "career" options based at different ranks, but was still similar to just changing WFRP careers.

So the rank/level system is more of a streamlined gamist mechanic to avoid the large selection of "careers" needed if the game went to way of WFRP (1E or 2E).

Also in D20 (unless you use Green Ronin's True 20 version) you develope allof your increases at once, sort of like a bulk purchase. In WFRP/DH/RT/DW (and so forth) you can spend you XPs as you go, buying what you want, not buying what you dont want. So after attaining 1000XP in D20 you become level 2, gaining more hit points, save modifiers, spells, skill points, and feats. While with 1000XP in Dark Heresy you could have purchased nothing but Characteristic advancements, or skills, or talents (and so forth) and not "equally spend" them across the board. It would be possible to make it to rank/level 8 in Dark Heresy without a singe Wound(HP) advancement and never getting better at fighting (WS/BS) while a 8th level character in D20 woudld naturally gain extra "to hit modifiers"and 7 additional hit dice.

And the best reason why the didnt use the D20 system was..... they didnt want the game to suck.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Okay, see there, you stole my response! Maybe they avoided d20 because they wanted a different calibre of player, or simply something that belonged to them alone. Not to mention, once you make a game d20 compatible you have to deal with people wanting to play their paladin and ranger in DH.

And I can tell you for a fact that I would never have bought DH if they'd used the d20 system ... and I am sure I'm not alone in that.

As everyone has said, and D20 is really, really easy to break.

D20 also suffers from the metagame syndrome where players get to the point of having so many hit points they decide to just jump off the cliff and land on the rocks below, because it's faster, I can take it, and I have this potion/spell/item that will heal me instantly.

Wow you guys have never played a good game of D20 where the players and Dm, are involved in the game. I've never played a game where the player decided its quicker to jump off the cliff and take falling damage. The character woudl probably never do something like thaqt becuause regadrless of whether he lives or not it hurts. The System is not necessarily better but it is different. In my experience the system never makes the game (though it can break it) but the people playing and running it do. A system is usually only as gamist as people let it be.

andrewm9 said:

On the contrary,. Ive played and run in both good and bad games of just about every system. And inheritly it is never the system that causes the problem, but allows the problem to exist. The above example of "jumping off a cliff cause I have the Hit Points" is not the example I would use, but the "I wade into the battle alone against a hundred orks becasue they need a 20 to hit me and can only do minor damage to my near 100 hit points" is a factor.

However, True 20 (the D20 version Green Ronin invented for Mutants and Masterminds) has potential and D20 modern was WotC best release.

As others have said, d20 generally sucks, unless the GM and players are great and are masters of not metagaming. d20 just promotes metagaming with it's system way too much.

Also, the d20 system (from DnD4 onwards) is not longer open licence, which could prove a problem. Also, they already had the WFBRP system, so they just tweaked that in order to fit the 40k setting a bit better.

But yea, if it had been d20, I'd have never have gotten the game, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who dislikes d20 that much.

From wiki:

Unlike the OGL, the d20 System Trademark License (D20STL) is revocable and is controlled by WotC.

Anyway D20 is tainted with D&D. It reduces DH into a mere "Campaign Setting". It draws unnecessary comparisons with "power levels" of other unrelated games. I never want to think of a Relic Weapon as a Sword+2 in a DH game. I have too many bad D&D habits that will resurface in a D20 system.

Having said that. The DH system isn't very good either, but good enough with grown up players and sensible GM rulings.

Because D20 is illogical and utter crap.

For most of the reasons above, and because the d20 system just is not conducive to the "feel" of the 40K universe, imo.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Wow, too bad they failed then.

LuciusT said:

On a more productive note. Seriously, Lucius? I know the 3 games have their problems, especially when it comes to compatibility. But I wouldn't say they suck.

LuciusT said:

Well FFG did fail, IMHO, on Rogue Trader and Deathwatch, but BI did not fail at all with Dark Heresy. The first 5 books of the series are very well done and creates a very good, effective and evocative system, mechanics set and setting.

The game itself does break down with "god" level characters and the Rank/Career system is a vulnerable spot. The the rest of the mechanics work fine at the DH level.

I would point out that all of us reading this are playing DH and it's sister-games. Besides that, would you really tolerate a 40K setting where people would play a 7th Level Elf Sororitas serving the Inquisition? Best argument against D20 40K: Go look at some of the D20 Star Wars books... No really... Now try to play it.... Yeah, sucks, doesn't it?

Then there is the ownership issue. Go with the current D20 license (NOT OGL!) and WotC OWNS all of your intellectual property! No way is GW or FFG going to agree to that, and kudos to them for not slitting their own throats.

LuciusT said:

Hehe. Not sure how serious you are, but I'm not particularly impressed by the mechanics of DH. It's not bad, but not particularly good either. By far the most superior gaming system I've played is the one White Wolf uses for the World of Darkness game. No rolling stats, scales perfectly, displays expert levels in a skill very well, gives players a lot of flexibility and balances stats vs skills pretty much perfectly. So much love for that system.

I also hate how badly all the talents, skills and game mechanics are described in DH. Our group has had so many discussions of how <something> works, and it's not because of munchkinism either.

Why use D20 when you have a perfectly working own game system that is easily adaptable to 40k? A system you have the rights for and no worries that another company is going to quibble about your intellectual property? A system that has proven to work and is loved by thousands of fans? A system that reminds the players of the Wargames they are based upon? A system that was devised under the wings of GW?

All good reasons not to use the D20 system. With the added extras that I find it very refreshing to have a game that has it's own game engine that is not a clone of D20.

A system where even a lowly grot (granted one designed for greatness with a FP) can be lucky and strike a high level Acolyte down in a single blow. The D20 system would not have captured the setting as well as the current system does.

Nihilius said:

I will agree on one fact and disagree on another. I will never accept any game that uses a dice pool (other then D6 Star Wars) as a superior system (look at Shadowrun, WoD, WFRP3E, I hate Dice Pools, personal opinion).

But i will agree, the Talents are too much. A stronger skill system (with weapon talents as skills) and fewer talents (Weapon Taletns as Skill, as stated just seconds before, and why have a talent called Talented (skill) when you sould just of had it as Skill +30?).

Reduce the number of talents to one or two pages and the 2nd Edition ot the game will rock more.

For the level of Grit d20 whould have never done it justice.

Magical Boltgun ? to scale damage against a CR 25 Hive Tyrant. no grit

Ork warboss using his Powerklaw +4 Vorpal, LimbLopping 18-20 crit chance . CR 14 no grit

having some dirty crazed fanatic stab himself in the name of his diety and spill open the gates of hell grit

party member missing arm and shiny metal one instead while sporting a pipe taped to his missing leg stump till we can find a surgeon grit

heck, actually needing medical attention. and could die because he removes head instead of the bullet rolls badly grit

Magical Blue and Red potions. no grit

Reliable magic spells with no risk. no grit

D20 game system Character is at no risk of death even in the game guidelines hes supposed to live. no grit

Fate = Quarters Out of Quarters= play SMARTER till can get more or have to start ALL OVER "Game over man! Game over" Grit

D20 inherent flaw cheating metagaming, Min/Max, Munkinism

i look at that last one and i think im done. in my time playing the new (ie 1992 and on)d20 games ive never felt at risk or in jeapardy at any time becuse ive always know the monsters /antagonists never have/had a chance with poor stats and specialised roles. coupled with the gaming associations needs to have you make it to 20+ levels. sadly the d20 is for those people who have to win with no risk. thats what those games are made for.

In Dark Heresy / Rogue Trader / DeathWatch you make it to another game session because you used your brain and RAN .

And not doing some thing so bullheaded stupid you had to have the DM/GM fumble your way on to the next game because your a telflon coated batch of numbers.

Well i don't often indulge in simple abuse but thank the Emperor they didn't go with d20.

It is irredeemably dreadful in every possible way.

DH/RT/DW certainly have some mechanical issues and for me personally is the wrong type of system to model 40k, but AT LEAST its not d20.

d20, on the face of it should work; but it just crushes roleplaying under the junnernaught of its metagame crunch.

Awful, awful, awful.

And i've played Rolemaster...

As to what we've got...well GW threw WHFRP2 at BI and said 'make that into a 40k RPG'.

Somehow...and i'm not sure how...they turned an award-winning system into a bit of a creaking nightmare - which of course won awards!!!

Now, for me, the core rules work brilliantly for 'human scaled' gaming typical of WHFRP. I'm not sure it works too well in modelling the ubermadness of 40k.

Were it me, i'd have gone for a simple and scalable system like WEG d6, WoD, of Fuzion, but that's a personal preference.

But then, i still have a shelf full of DH/RT/DW books full of useful fluff if nothing else!

Sister Cat said:

Well, I think that's just about the perfect reaction.

Seriously, I am not a fan of the Dark Heresy mechanics. At risk of ranting, I think character creation and advancement is horrible, I don't like the DH psychic rules and I dislike the degree to which the task resolution system is dependent on situational modifiers rather than character skill. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a huge fan of d20 either, and for many of the same reasons.

Taken as a whole, yes, I do think that Dark Heresy mechanics suck and further, I think the game completely failed to live up to the promise of 40k roleplay as Agents of the Inquisition. That said, I really enjoy the idea of 40k roleplay and I refuse to let bad mechanics get in the way of a good game. Heck, I ran a d20 Wheel of Time game for over a year (and if you want to talk about bad mechanics that totally fail to live up to the promise of a setting, d20 WoT has it over DH hand down).

LuciusT said:

Thats a valid point. Indeed GW used to produce a Judge Dredd RPG where character skills were stated as more important than gear or conditional mods.

I think its worth remembering though that DH as originally designed had characters with an average 30 base characteristic and which capped modifiers at +/-30 for any test.

That of course meant a PC skill could be doubled or wiped out by modifiers.

Now at +/-60, really ability levels are almost irrelevant.

LuciusT said:

Hear hear!! :¬D

Issues I do have with the game and I have stated since Day 1.

Character Creation. Character Advances. "Elite" Advances. Gear. Part of the game echoes video games too much, such as leveling up and getting better gear for it (at rank 3 I can use a bolter, at rank 5 a plasma weapon and so forth) where character progression in skills and abilities usually pale in comparison to guns and armour.

I read lots of the novels, and many of my favorites show characters who do not upgrade thier gear every fourth or so chapter or every other book. Kal Jerico used the same gear from comic strip number one to novel number 3. Commissar Cain wields a chainsword and laspistol in every novel.

I dislikie the overall selection of psy powers which I dont think refleck 40K very well, but fits more of a D&D style of magic, but i like the psy system overall.

For me the game really breaks down with the release of Rogue Trader and Deathwatch, but was shown to be very flawed at high levels with Ascension. And I blame this fully on the rank system.

Peacekeeper_b said:

What's annoying is that the rank system is really unneed. IMO one of the great strengths of DH, from a GMing standpoint, is ability to create an NPC with whatever stats, skills and talents are needed for their role in the game. Given a properly robust set of prerequisites and some good templates and PCs could enjoy that same flexibility. The entire career/rank structure is just fatally flaws IMO.

The D20 system is about achievement and advancement. Loot collection is a part of that process, it is something that has been provisioned for, but not required in the system, and are there simply to add incentive and character growth. It is purely a rewards based system, the same kind of system that makes MMORG like WOW so addictive.

Dark Heresy on the other hand is all about atmosphere and setting. Ironically, gear in DH is much more important than D20 since your character will not improve as dramatically over their career. And the fact that a group of 1st lvl enemies can be a threat to an 8th level accolyte is part of the game's charm. On the other hand there are figures in the DH universe that fit the D20 mold as well. Inquisitors are basically untouchable, Space Marines, etc these could easily be accounted for in D20 through a level system.

The differnce: in D20 you expect to grow from peon to prince, while in DH it is all about survival. I think DH could have been a D20 game, but the system carries with it so much baggage that it may have changed the tone of the gameplay. I think a perfect example would be Call of the Cthulu, being in survival/horror genere migrated from a propietery system to D20 it would be a good look at what would happen to DH.