• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Does anybody still play d20 Modern/Future/Past/Apocalypse

Have you played d20 Modern?

  • I have never interacted with it

    Votes: 8 10.8%
  • I own it but never played

    Votes: 18 24.3%
  • I played it, but not any more

    Votes: 28 37.8%
  • I currently play it

    Votes: 7 9.5%
  • I don't play it but would like to

    Votes: 6 8.1%
  • I am/was vaguely curious but that's as far as it went

    Votes: 7 9.5%

NMC

Explorer
I ran a good deal of Modern using the Treasure Hunter setting that I wrote. People enjoyed it, and I miss it, but there's just not enough time to play everything.

-Nate
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ahnehnois

First Post
I wonder if it would be worth - as a fan project perhaps - applying some of the main Pathfinder improvements to it? Not all of them, but some of the easy patches might work.
Like what? PF simplified and consolidated skills somewhat, which I don't think is good for a modern rpg. The class changes don't port over much. The race changes don't mean much. The spells nerfed don't mean much. Some of the new or revised feats might be applicable, but many others aren't.

I'd like to see maybe some of the principles of PF applied, but there's a good deal more than a straight conversion.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Like what? PF simplified and consolidated skills somewhat, which I don't think is good for a modern rpg. The class changes don't port over much. The race changes don't mean much. The spells nerfed don't mean much. Some of the new or revised feats might be applicable, but many others aren't.

I'd like to see maybe some of the principles of PF applied, but there's a good deal more than a straight conversion.

A few bits and pieces; it doesn't need a complete rewrite, just a few tweaks. CMB and CMD for sure. Some of the skills consolidation is appropriate (though not necessary). Like you say, class and race stuff isn't relevant.

It's probably not worth the effort; just idle musings, really.
 


Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I think this put a lot of people off.

Perfectly playable rules (mostly), but those class names and the attempt to make them 'generic' were a real stumbling block... :erm:

A agree 100%. By far the biggest issue. I did try renaming them, but they're broad enough that no name is really enough.

Strong - Brute
Fast - Rogue
Tough - Brick
Smart - Genius
Dedicated - Doctor
Charismatic - Leader

Far, far from ideal though. Helped a little in envisaging characters, but the classes are so mcuh broader than those names imply. Like Fast includes pilots and drivers, and Charismatic includes politicans, con men, and sergeants. Smart includes scientists and tacticians and engineers.
 

delericho

Legend
I have it, and played a couple of games with it. It was fun, but I really can't see myself ever playing it again. The problem, fundamentally, is that for just about anything I'd care to do, either "Savage Worlds" of "World of Darkness" will do the same job with a bunch less hassle.
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
Beyond the names (which are lame), I think the whole idea of six ability-based classes is problematic. One of the characteristic elements of modern human society is specialization. People have much narrower skill sets now than ever before. The rpg implications, to me, are that characters should either be choosing from a plethora of specialized classes, or no classes at all.

The six classes are an effort to create a quick sort of apprenticeship for the advanced classes; unlike in D&D where prestige classes are not assumed, Modern characters are assumed to seek advanced classes quickly. But the generic classes really fall flat, and the math of the d20 system does not support multiclassing that well, and high-level characters become problematically complex. Character creation really needed to be something very different than this.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Beyond the names (which are lame), I think the whole idea of six ability-based classes is problematic. One of the characteristic elements of modern human society is specialization. People have much narrower skill sets now than ever before. The rpg implications, to me, are that characters should either be choosing from a plethora of specialized classes, or no classes at all.

The six classes are an effort to create a quick sort of apprenticeship for the advanced classes; unlike in D&D where prestige classes are not assumed, Modern characters are assumed to seek advanced classes quickly. But the generic classes really fall flat, and the math of the d20 system does not support multiclassing that well, and high-level characters become problematically complex. Character creation really needed to be something very different than this.

Just a few new classes to replace them, surely? I imagine with a little tweaking they could be cribbed from others d20 versions of games like Spycraft, Cthulhu, etc. Whip out those basic classes, put a much more appealing set in its pace, and one of the major issues with the system is reduced.
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
Just a few new classes to replace them, surely? I imagine with a little tweaking they could be cribbed from others d20 versions of games like Spycraft, Cthulhu, etc. Whip out those basic classes, put a much more appealing set in its pace, and one of the major issues with the system is reduced.
Not quite so simple, I imagine. Spycraft and Cthulhu are nice, but each is its own thing. Modern is much more generic.

If one were to keep the class-based approach, I'd think you'd need some better basic classes, as well as a lot more advanced ones. There also need to be some significant math fixes.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Not quite so simple, I imagine. Spycraft and Cthulhu are nice, but each is its own thing. Modern is much more generic.

If one were to keep the class-based approach, I'd think you'd need some better basic classes, as well as a lot more advanced ones. There also need to be some significant math fixes.

Well, it's d20 (i.e. 3.5) maths; and Pathfinder has done a reasonable job at tweaking that. What in your mind are the major issues? Did 3.5 suffer from the same problems?

The Spycraft and Cthulhu classes were just examples; I don't actually have either.

(Mild musing re. the classes - I'm just wondering what happens if you literally drop the basic classes, and use the advanced classes as basic classes (you'd have to drop the pre-reqs). There's craploads of advanced and prestige classes out there in the 3PP arena.
 

Remove ads

Top