Forums of the Megaverse®

Well here is the almighty question. Which is better D&D or Palladium

But lets do more then just a poll I want to know what you like and dis like about them both?

Me for example i like the free flowing of the palladium system but i prefer the battle system of D&D

Skills: Palladium: Skills that alter stats, but I do like that D&D's stats play such a big part of the skill itself

Stats: Palladium: I like the range of attributes, and that through skills I can alter them. However I think the bonuses should start a lot lower

Spells: Palladium: While I really like a lot of the D&D Spells I HATE that you can only learn so many then you "forget" and must study again

Cleric V Mage Spells: D&D: I do like that the spells for mages and priests are different. It's a big consideration in whether to play either or

Monsters: D&D: I do like Palladium dragons, but D&D just has so much more variety, and the pictures are usually pretty too

Combat: Palladium: I like that if I'm 15th level I may have more attacks than the whelp warrior who is still getting his feet tangled in the stirrups

Settings: D&D. While I do like many of the setting for Palladium, they seem more detailed and more accessorized in D&D. I have table maps from the old AD&D (haven't really seen any for D&D v3.1451092374)

Scenarios: D&D: D&D has so many classic dungeon crawls and adventures. Good new is that D&D is easily convertable to palladium. However I DOn't know if this is intentioned, but I guess Palladium is relying on it's players and setting details to inspire adventures,...

Feel: D&D feels over medicated on magic items. That in certain weird wizards homes the toilet paper will use itself. Palladium feels more Hyborian, basic and harder. You don't NEED magic to defeat a high powered foe. A warrior CAN overcome many enemeies and monsters through skill. The measure of a character is in the character itself not the items they carry.

D&D: 4
Palladium: 5, but big one

goodhometownboy wrote:Well here is the almighty question. Which is better D&D or Palladium

But lets do more then just a poll I want to know what you like and dis like about them both?

Me for example i like the free flowing of the palladium system but i prefer the battle system of D&D

Seems like a stupid question to me, especially since it was asked on Palladium's website.

You would probably get a less biased response to said question on a General (Generic) Roleplaying website.

Two Games Enter.

One Game leaves.

Palladium beat D&D out of the water, easily.

I voted for Palladium because Rifts is my all time favorite game (even more so than video games). I like the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition, but the later ones I didn't care for as much. Almost everything I like more in Rifts, except I like the Cleric and healing stuff from D&D. Rifts needs more of that. I really like the combat system in Rifts, and all of the choices of characters and settings.

D&D has never held a candle to Palladium in my opinion. Some reasons?

I much prefer the active combat system vs. armor class, I think having to pick spells at the beginning of the day is just plain stupid for ANY magic class (and please, no arguments about "well there is a feat that...", I've heard it a hundred times and still hold to my opinion), I've heard and seen 10x more munchkin crap and rules exploitation come out of D&D games than I've EVER had the displeasure of seeing from Palladium games (and I've seen stuff that I'm sure would make most sane people cringe come from Palladium campaigns), I feel that D&D has pigeon-holed role-playing (and several of its players) into a somewhat narrow mindset that hinders the creativity of those involved (i.e. the "dungeon crawl" mindset and "party building"), ...and I'm just going to stop now before this post runs for several pages.

Wow... all that and I didn't even go into the way the company does business (including the treatment of its fans). Anywho, before anyone reads the above and decides to start flaming away, keep in mind that these are my opinions based on my experiences and observations. I will give credit to the system for being the original, and if you have had good experiences with it then yay for you. For me, it's a no-contest.

EPIC wrote:

Alejandro wrote:I'm taking that the poll's question means D&D vs Palladium Fantasy.

Now to make the poll fair...go to the official D&D forum and post the same question. Watch what happens.

If we're going for cost, I go for Palladium.

If we're going for customization, I go D&D.

If we're going with skills, I go D&D.

If we're going for setting, I go Palladium.

If we're talking about company support, I definitely go D&D.

If we're talking about art, it's a tie.

If we're talking about the systems in use, I go D&D.

... what he said ...

Seconded. While I like the PF background. The PB system just has too many inconsitencies across the boaord for me to even think of running it at this time. Not to mention that D&D gets better product support. Which is a big thing for me as I no longer have time to build my game world from scratch. I just hope this thread does not go down in flames.

If it's just D&D vs Palladium Fantasy, then D&D blows Palladium out of the water. I can't really comment on D&D's system since i haven't had a chance to play 3rd ed or 3.5 with their new-fangled feats and such, but Palladium's rules are an aging, clunky beast that's basically just a house-ruled 1st ed AD&D with the serial numbers filed off. And setting-wise, Palladium Fantasy loses out big time. It's got one bland, very generic, very typicall fantasy RPG world. D&D has several settings (especially if you include open source stuff, but I won't because that's cheating), and while some of them aren't all that and a bag of potato chips, some of them have been very nice indeed.

If it's D&D vs the whole of Palladium, I can't really cast a vote. I'm not familiar with any D&D rules newer than 2nd ed AD&D, I haven't seen how good or badly the D&D rules handle stuff that isn't a high fantasy setting, and to be honest I'm not all that familiar with what non-fantasy settings they've got (apart from good ol' out of print SpellJammer).

2nd Ed DND Are you kidding me? I got one acronym for ya THAC0m and the monsters had no real stats. Storm giants couldn't lift their own weight, this is all on top of the stuff they didn't change for 3ed

And I don't think they came out with a Darksun 3ed or if they will. But Ravenfloft is pretty creative but what is it other than an elaborate phase town

I love Dragonlance to but it's too bad the 3ed seems to extremely light in the loafers for all the books they've put out for it and all the money it would cost to replace my 2ed

personally I like parrying and dodging. I like that my strength does damage and not just a bonus to hit. I like that my wizard doesn't have to walk very carefully in the wilderness for fear of falling down and taking 1d4 HP and dying, I like that I can cast a spell as many times as I want without having to try to guesstimate about how many times I might need it before I can study it again, or that I don't have to worry about why reading the same spell over and over gives me the ability to cast it an equal amount of times but I forget it even though in the past week I've studied fireball like 30 times, I won't pretend that Palladium isn't a bastard child of D&D. But what isn't? And I am sure d20 got a lot of hints by reading palladium. But still Palladium with all it's flaws and spotty artwork is still a much much better value. Do I buy d20 stuff? Sure. But only for source material.

Warwolf wrote:D&D has never held a candle to Palladium in my opinion. Some reasons?

I much prefer the active combat system vs. armor class, I think having to pick spells at the beginning of the day is just plain stupid for ANY magic class (and please, no arguments about "well there is a feat that...", I've heard it a hundred times and still hold to my opinion), I've heard and seen 10x more munchkin crap and rules exploitation come out of D&D games than I've EVER had the displeasure of seeing from Palladium games (and I've seen stuff that I'm sure would make most sane people cringe come from Palladium campaigns), I feel that D&D has pigeon-holed role-playing (and several of its players) into a somewhat narrow mindset that hinders the creativity of those involved (i.e. the "dungeon crawl" mindset and "party building"), ...and I'm just going to stop now before this post runs for several pages.

Wow... all that and I didn't even go into the way the company does business (including the treatment of its fans). Anywho, before anyone reads the above and decides to start flaming away, keep in mind that these are my opinions based on my experiences and observations. I will give credit to the system for being the original, and if you have had good experiences with it then yay for you. For me, it's a no-contest.

well my friend i'm with you all the way. though AD&D was the first game i plaied, and i had great fun playing it.. hell i still have my first char *g* i'd have to go with PF. just because in AD&D you can tweak/add kits, and everything else to your char don't meen the char is "better", just meens it has more crap you have to keep up with. sure there are lots of things you have to keep track of in PF too, but Nothing like in aD&D. i like the setting better, the history, and the races. Forgotten Realms comes a Close second, i love that setting. PF needs more spells like D&D, and putting in the differences for the clerics would be a nice touch. i never liked the game mechanics of D&D, Palladium is Much better in that reguard, having Miniatures is cool and all, but they arn't ~needed~ in PF like they are now in 3.5. i also like that i don't need 3 "main books" just to play PF, just 1.. all other books are there for setting and to expand on what you already have. i could go on but it's late/early however you want to look at it and i'm not really trying to bash AD&D love the game(well most of it), there's alot Palladium can learn from D&D since it has been around longer i just like Palladium better.

I voted for PB over D&D.

EPIC wrote:i'm not sure why but allot of folks seem to have this thing about PB having an active defense system and D&D having a passive defense system.

unfortunately that isn't a very good measuring stick for comparing PB and D&D to each other. especially seeing as D&D does have an active defense option in place (if you want to use it) and PB doesn't have a passive defense option in place (if you would want to use one).

the really big difference for me is that PB is a rule tinkerer's wet dream while d20 is a rule lawyer's wet dream.

wouldn't the armor rating, if modified, serve as a passive defense system? (none of this if you roll over the AR you hurt the person inside it crap and just make it, if you roll under the AR the person isn't even hurt)

I agree with some of the posters who have said that this comparison will only get a highly biased answer in favor of Palladium.

That being said, I voted D&D. For several reasons:

1. Has much more variety of settings to choose from.

2. Chargen is much more flexible.

3. D&D's rules are much more uniform and tight whereas PF rules are disjointed.

4. Tons of free web support as well as commercial support.

5. Constantly evolving while PF's system growth has mostly been stymied.

EPIC wrote:
the really big difference for me is that PB is a rule tinkerer's wet dream while d20 is a rule lawyer's wet dream.

i couldn't of said it better

Hmmm...
Palladium Fantasy vs. which incarnation of "D&D"?
Against 1st ed, definately... against 3.whatever, oh yes... against 2nd? Even money, at least for me.

Actually, I have developed a recent nostalgia for the old box set D&D game, as compiled in the Rules Cyclopedia.

Much more customizable than the newer versions.

Brian

EPIC wrote:i'm not sure why but allot of folks seem to have this thing about PB having an active defense system and D&D having a passive defense system.

unfortunately that isn't a very good measuring stick for comparing PB and D&D to each other. especially seeing as D&D does have an active defense option in place (if you want to use it) and PB doesn't have a passive defense option in place (if you would want to use one).

the really big difference for me is that PB is a rule tinkerer's wet dream while d20 is a rule lawyer's wet dream.

I have read the "active" defense rules for 3.X thats not an active defense...Its an illusion of active defence...active defense is more than just an opposed roll...its having multiple choices for defense...its having to decide which defense method is best for the circumstance. D20 has (IMO) eliminated the need for a player to actively think.
for just this reason alone Palladium gets my vote. (its not the only reason just the one relevant to this conversation).

Heh...I voted for D&D...

Before I voted, I thought the score would be pretty even. I considered what I thought was better, and what was actually better.

I own one D&D book (3.5 PHB), but own a hugh collection of Palladium books. That's not going to change anytime soon.

D&D is too structured and rule-based. This tends to be restrictive and rigid...but it is a BETTER system all-around.

I don't think there's anything wrong with either system. I've played both and while I thought D&D was fast and efficient (and a nice change of pace), I personally prefer Palladium games.

Just my two cents.

D&D is the better game. As their rules systems became bogged down with options and addendums, new editions were created to clear out the clutter and make it better. Palladium just keeps bogging down their system and hasn't ever really tried to clean it up. Just add new options that in the end only confuses things.

Having never played Palladium Fantasy (Gasp! The Horror!) I really can't comment on it. D&D was my first RPG, & still has a warm place in my heart, no matter what edition.

Danger wrote:Having never played Palladium Fantasy (Gasp! The Horror!) I really can't comment on it. D&D was my first RPG, & still has a warm place in my heart, no matter what edition.

If you've played D&D then Palladium Fantasy should be familiar territory. What with combat, spells, equipment, classes, alignment, monsters, and the setting all being eerily similar to D&D

Well, it's been a very long time since I've been on these boards. This is a topic I've been thinking about a lot lately, though.

At the end of the day, Palladium is easy to start and painful to use. The rules seem to have started out as a basic framework, and there have been hundreds of band-aid solutions slapped onto the problems over the years. Palladium's rules are in desperate need of a clean-up and some form of re-writing. There are (approximately) 100 different things that you can have a bonus to save vs.

This is not to say that D&D is some golden child of a game system, because it is not. It was commented that it is over-reliant on magic items, and it IS. A tenth level wizard standing naked in the middle of a field will destroy a tenth level fighter armed with standard issue equipment. It is, at many points, overly technical.

Palladium has a lot of elements that I enjoy, and it is very easy to pick up and just start playing. I find though that the more I play it the more it hurts.

D&D can hurt in a lot of ways too, just different ones.

At the end of the day, D&D is a better game in and of itself because it is a far more coherent rule structure.

Palladium has wonderful worlds to romp around in, but just has too many holes in it.

Actually not as easily in 3E the mages were ravaged again and again by rules revisions. They are powerful, but only so so now aday. I've still have my 1E Archmage running around. Modified him up to second addition, haven;'t brought him over to 3e. Their rules are just as inconsistent as PBs have been accussed of being. The old 1st and 2nd Edition mages could easily kick a fighters butt, but 3E mages are a pale shadow of what they once were. But this is just my opinion.

100 different saves? I got Psionics Poisons Magic and HF/Awe which is basically an ME save. Coma and death but again just another PE save

anyhow I was thinking about the setting problem. With the world books they basically ARE different game settings just as Dragonlance and Greyhawk are different campaign settings. They each have their own flavor. Western Empire is very different from Mount Nimro or the Northern Wilderness. Also the other campaign books could also take place on a GIANT palladium world as they are basically contienants without expanding past given broders.

I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

Yeah, but you're old and stuck in your way. You can't teach an old Devil Dog new tricks.

True, but it's nothing that a few beers won't fix

Alejandro wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

Yeah, but you're old and stuck in your way. You can't teach an old Devil Dog new tricks.

You can, you just need more painful incentives....like needles. Or marriage.

My marriage is cool- maybe I could use the needles though. LOL!

D&D may have a clearer rule system, but in my opinion that doesn't make it a better rule system, because I really dislike large sections of it, like the magic system, combat, and some of the underlying mechanics (nothing gets my dander up like strength equaling accuracy).

Palladium may be much messier, but it also has more options, and fewer rule mechanics that aggravate me.

Talavar wrote:D&D may have a clearer rule system, but in my opinion that doesn't make it a better rule system, because I really dislike large sections of it, like the magic system, combat, and some of the underlying mechanics (nothing gets my dander up like strength equaling accuracy).

I'm afraid I have to disagree as to whether clearer = better. Now, the effects of the rules, yes, I can definately agree with you that there are big problems with D&D. However, the clarity and cohesiveness of the rules does make it a better system. Whether or not the individual rules are better, a lot of the time I think that's opinion. D&D makes a better system however.

Talavar wrote:Palladium may be much messier, but it also has more options, and fewer rule mechanics that aggravate me.

Fewer rules that aggravate you is as good a reason as any to prefer one system over another, and always I say go with what makes you happy. I again have to disagree though that Palladium has more options. For the most part Palladium's games involve choosing a class, gaining a rigid set of abilities with that class, and then occasionally being able to choose new spells or martial arts techniques as you level. Your choices still tend to be very narrow and rigid though ("Only Biomancers can choose Biomancy spells" "Choose 1 Body Hardening Technique") and many classes really don't get any choices after initial creation.

D&D has a limited number of base classes, yes, but a large number of feats that can customize characters and a vast number of prestige classes that can be used to combine different abilities abilities.

Palladium tends to have a bizarre combination of "You MUST do this and NEVER combine these things" and "The definition of this term is left completely up to your GM" and not a lot of room in between.[/i]

ok those were a bunch things to save against which D&D has to so I don't see the point

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

Alejandro wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

Yeah, but you're old and stuck in your way. You can't teach an old Devil Dog new tricks.

You can, you just need more painful incentives....like needles. Or marriage.

My marriage is cool- maybe I could use the needles though. LOL!

His wife is cool. I'm not sure how she wound up with him, but I wonder how Juli wound up with me too.

Knocked her up

Alejandro wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

Alejandro wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

Yeah, but you're old and stuck in your way. You can't teach an old Devil Dog new tricks.

You can, you just need more painful incentives....like needles. Or marriage.

My marriage is cool- maybe I could use the needles though. LOL!

His wife is cool. I'm not sure how she wound up with him, but I wonder how Juli wound up with me too.

Alcohol. Lots of alcohol.

I kid. Or do I?

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:

Alejandro wrote:

sawg138 wrote:

GreenGhost wrote:I started D&D in '79 at a young 8 years old I played D&D until '87. A guy I knew from school GMed Palladium in NC. I was completely sold by the second gaming session and have been gaming, GMing and buying Palladium ever since. I vote for Palladium hands down.

Yeah, but you're old and stuck in your way. You can't teach an old Devil Dog new tricks.

You can, you just need more painful incentives....like needles. Or marriage.

My marriage is cool- maybe I could use the needles though. LOL!

His wife is cool. I'm not sure how she wound up with him, but I wonder how Juli wound up with me too.

Knocked her up

Ah, her young and dumb moment.

I'm going to show her this

It's like Advanced Dungeons and Dragons lol

Alejandro wrote:

Necronomicus wrote:That and they need to fire whoever does the editing and hire some professionals.

That would be Kevin Siembieda....he's the final editor of every single book.

I suspect he won't be firing himself any time soon.

the layouts though suck harder than a black hole. It doesn't follow any reason known to sane thinkers. The Principia Discordia looks at the books and says "Hey back off my turf"

allhaileris

KillWatch wrote:the layouts though suck harder than a black hole. It doesn't follow any reason known to sane thinkers. The Principia Discordia looks at the books and says "Hey back off my turf"

allhaileris

What sucks harder than a blackhole?

Ah- thanks man.

Josh Hilden wrote:.........and pay for them how?

[sarcasm]But didn't you know? Palladium is a global mega-corporation with kajillions of dollars in assets. The whole "crisis" thing was simply a ploy by the money-hungry gaming-Scrooge known as Kevin Siembieda to trick his fans out of their hard-earned pennies.[/sarcasm]


Silly.

Guys can we get back to the topic of this thread and not get it locked. In any case they will not be able to hire anybody until their debts are paid. Once that is done they better have one hell of a good reason for not hiring an dedicated editor.

Palladium, D&D has been turned into a game for 12 year olds.

Josh Hilden wrote:

sawg138 wrote:He likes freelance writes, why not a freelance editor.

I just think that would make things worse. I honestly believe that the only way for an independent editor to work for Palladium is if they were fulltime. And that couldn't be contemplated without funds.

It all sounds good in theory, but I've done editing work and I just don't think it would make things better.

IMO.

creative or technical writing? thats the problem with editing an RPG...idealy its a combination of both technical and creative writing. so any erditor of an RPG book needs to be well versed in the technical aspects of the game... unfortunatly these editors seem to be in short supply (especially where Palladium is concerned...i belive the only person with a perfect grasp of the system is Kevin himself)

Which is why there should be a core system rulebook. Kevin and his writers should sit down and hammer out all the kinks, inconsistencies etc out of the game. Once that is done compile it all into one book. Then stick to those rules. As it is the rules are too spread out and sometimes hidden in the places you least expect. Which has stopped some of the people I game with from running or even buying Palladium product.

Which is never going to happen, they would rather hammer out Rifts World Book 113: Whos Counting? then fix the inconsistances in thier own system. I'll admit, RUE fixed some of these problems, but its not enough.

A core system rule book is a GREAT idea. It's so obvious like with all the other multi genre systems

I feel like Palladium has showed great loyalty to me as a fan by not putting out a million books. I feel like people who let themselves get too annoyed over the rules and the weird places they find them are forgetting to read the books. A Palladium RPG book reads like a book, compared to a DnD book where it reads like a set or rules crammed between two pages. I mean seriously, Palladium's strength is the huge and consuming world it gives you to have your stories as a back drop to. Eliminating the work to create an interesting world for the GM, allowing him to just enjoy making an adventure.

RUE fixed a lot of problems with rules, but what fixes it even better is if you read Kevin's section on GMing where he tells you that everything in the book is a suggestion, that it's up to the GM to throw out any rules that don't work for them.

For instance, I like my combat to be simple straight forward and not require 10 minutes of rules calculation. So I only use a few bonuses, strike, parry, dodge, and roll with punch. So if someone wants to entangle someone with a whip, I just have them do a strike hit, simple as that. I don't try to remember the rule from a Baal-Rog's description, or some other obscure place, the rules not needed unless my players try to take advantage of my desire for simple battle. I also love that more XP can be had for sacrificing your life and doing good. XP incentive is a good way to keep people playing good characters.

I've found a lot of success with this approach, especially if I explain to my players that we are playing with a narrowed version of the rules and that all rules interpretations are up to me, because if I can't keep it together than there won't be a game to play. I also explain that if I need to bring in a rule previously unused to enforce game balance part way through, then I will. Luckily people haven't been too whiny about it.

I also feel like Palladium beats out DnD because the class systems allow for less choice within them. A DnD character can be 3-4 different things all very well. But it's not a real character, the only way he can survive is by using violence and force to enforce his will upon the rest of the universe. A Palladium character can sit down and start cooking, fishing, boat building, hunting, doing something that allows him to exist as a human being in a village or city without having to be on an adventure.

Not to mention that forgetting spells you cast after you cast them is the stupidest thing ever. PPE is brilliant, and a great limit on the power of mages.

Palladium has it's faults, but they respect me, not asking me to by their 4th version of a book, because they want more money, when they put out a new book I can count on getting a good read and a good bit of new material out of the book. That's why I'm loyal to Palladium and always will be as long as they continue to be loyal to us their fans.