Combining "d20 Past" with "Urban Arcana" to make "d20 Fantasy"

Jack Daniel · May 2, 2005

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=422757 (This thread is where I'm archiving all the finished works.)

The idea is basically what's in the thread title: I'm trying to make a fantasy game using the rules of d20 Past, but with more magic (a la Urban Arcana) than the Shadow Stalkers/Chasers game that the book comes with. I'm also trying to make sure that it keeps more of a "fantasy" feel than a "modern" one, and so instead of classes like Strong/Fast/Tough/Smart/Dedicated/Charismatic, I made the basic classes Squire, Thief, Fighter, Scholar, Alchemist, and Performer (I could've gone ahead and used Fighter, Thief, Black Belt, Black Mage, White Mage, and Red Mage, but that might've been going a little too far... still, it's the basic idea. Yes, "Squire" and "Alchemist" were inspired by FF Tactics).

I could always use whatever input/feedback people are willing to give...

sukael · May 2, 2005

Personally, I'd say keep the normal names for the basic classes, and setting up those (Squire/Thief/Fighter/Scholar/Alchemist/Performer) as professions.

Viktyr Gehrig · May 2, 2005

sukael said:
Personally, I'd say keep the normal names for the basic classes, and setting up those (Squire/Thief/Fighter/Scholar/Alchemist/Performer) as professions.

I agree with this.

Aside from that, I have little practical advice, other than to say that I think that this is an excellent idea for creating a magical fantasy game that is a little closer to common fantasy fiction than D&D-- though there is still some digression. It makes the well-trained, hardened adventurer classes, especially casters, rarer, and typically much more distinct than less heroic figures.

Also, I think d20 Modern's grittier combat rules give even high-fantasy games a much harder edge-- PCs are heroic, with powers beyond the common man... but not superheroic. Large groups of lower-level monsters are a dangerous encounter even for high-level characters, and terrors like dragons and giants give even the most legendary heroes pause.

One thing you'll have to do, though, is figure out something for Weapon Proficiencies. Modern (and by extension, Past, though I may be wrong) allows for all D&D "martial" weapons to be taken with a single feat, and all of the Modern base classes grant proficiency in all Simple weapons. I'd recommend something similar to Unearthed Arcana's Weapon Group Proficiencies, giving every base class proficiency in Basic Weapons and one other group, and allowing certain Occupations to grant bonus Proficiency group feats. (They really shouldn't count as whole bonus feats, but I'd make the most granted by any Occupation-- say, Military or Adventurer-- two. That's Basic + Three, or the number given to non-Fighter martial classes.)

VoiceOfReason? · May 3, 2005

You've got to change the title of this thread, may as well call it "Re-inventing the wheel" or "-insert whitty comment meant to draw attention to the fact that 'd20 Fantasy' already exists and is called Dungeons & Dragons and is in fact the predecessor to 'd20 Past' and 'Urban Arcana' here-"

Nyeshet · May 3, 2005

There are enough differences between d20 Modern and d20 D&D that one cannot realistically state that D&D is a true d20 Fantasy. That said, I like where Jack Daniel is going with this. I'm working on my own system, which has already strayed too far from core d20 to be of much use in your project, but I wish you well in your endevour.

How many answering this thread would actually be surprised if an official d20 Fantasy came out some time in the next couple of years? (They have to think of something new to keep interest strong, after all, and with Far Future, Future, Post-Apocalypse, Past, and Horror (?) out of the way, that's really all that's left for new ground.)

Jack Daniel · May 3, 2005

sukael said:
Personally, I'd say keep the normal names for the basic classes, and setting up those (Squire/Thief/Fighter/Scholar/Alchemist/Performer) as professions.

That would rather defeat the purpose of flavoring up the basic classes for a fantasy campaign, though. The Strong/Tough/Smart/ect. thing was pretty much based on the "Buffy" model, back when d20 Modern was being designed primarily for the Shadow Chasers setting. One might as well call them the "Jock", the "Bookworm", etc. They're generic in a modern setting, but to me it just feels out of place in a fantasy setting (and really, it's only the class name that gets changed, apart from a few tweaks).

VoiceOfReason? said:
You've got to change the title of this thread, may as well call it "Re-inventing the wheel" or "-insert whitty comment meant to draw attention to the fact that 'd20 Fantasy' already exists and is called Dungeons & Dragons and is in fact the predecessor to 'd20 Past' and 'Urban Arcana' here-"

I suppose I could make a witty crack about how the Voice of Reason is saying "shut up and play D&D", but I won't. I am wondering, though, why you seem think a different way of doing things is bad? Maybe I want a fantasy game where one weapon blow can kill a character of any level, the players can't cast magic spells until the 4th experience level, and magics more powerful than a 5th level spell can't be used without an incantation. I happen to like that the d20 Modern combat system is deadly, and that magic isn't easy to get - that can represent a lot of settings much better than D&D can, if you're shooting for a world that doesn't have a lot of whiz-bang high-level spells everywhere and a sword is still actually a danger to a fighter with a hundred hit points.

Plus, d20 Modern/Past have a lot classes that D&D's class system can't cover without a lot more work than I've done here. Which isn't to say I'm not in the process of creating 20-level D&D versions of the Explorer, Investigator, Personality, Techie, and so-forth, but it's going to take a much longer time to have those balanced against full-blown rogues, monks, & wizards that would be to just go ahead and play d20 Past (with some fantasy tweaks) right now.