What Can Modularity Look Like?

[nexgen]

I'm envisioning my gaming group:

I have two players that started playing in 3.5. One that started in 4e. Two that started with me in 2e and one that started before that.

If WotC can actually create a game where each player at my table can create the type of character he or she wants to play, and I (as the DM) can run the adventures I want to run, I'll damn near pass out.

On the other hand, if that doesn't shake out, I can envision a bunch of front-end work on the DM's part to tailor his house rules (which really is the same thing as modularity) as best as possible to accommodate preferences spanning four or more editions.

Interesting.

 

[Filcher]

So I want to play a 4e wizard. And my friend plays a OD&D wizard. How do you reconcile these play styles? They don't even die the same.

Imagine trying to sign up for a D&D game at GenCon. The 3e folks are lawyering the rules, the OD&D folks want all weapons to do 1d6 dmg, the 4e folks want their dragonborn and dailies ...

It is one thing to make a tablet app that converts pdf adventures on the fly, depending on whatever check box you tick off for your home rule. It is another thing altogether to get folks from different editions to sit around the same table.

I sincerely want to be hopeful for this, but I am extremely skeptical.

 

[DonTadow]

basic
3 or 4 classes (warrior, wizard, priest)
4 or 5 races (human, elf, dwarf, halfling)
Spell spheres (spells are selected and chosen in groups as special abilities)
Special Abilities (100 to 200 separated by class and acting as advanced classes; these abilities include any bonuses to ability use for skill) Player selects one thing each level, an ability. The benefit of this is that books contains ability you can use immediate yin your campaign. No rerolling for ninja abilities or monk. And players aren't overwhelmed with decisions and ability progression charts. As a matter of fact, once you choose a class, you don't need a progression chart, just choose the ability for your next level and add any bonuses). All bonuses are capped either by level or level +10. So, you don't get ability score at every level, but you can raise your cap for ability scores up to 10+ your level or bonuses to an ability score equal to your level.

advanced
more
subclasses special abilities (because there are no set skills (special abilities and items give bonuses for situations - ie: Precise Shot; +2 Perception rolls; )
races divide into Bloodlines - these allow you to become or take on racial traits at later levels. Again, just like classes, no new races are introduced into the game. (why can't a dwarf have demon bloodline)




All necessary rules, full combat, social. You want to confuse a new gamer, have 3 or 4 sets of rules out there. The corebook should be brief and concise and correct. Anyone can not use a grid if they choose, but you loose a marketing point if u produce a dnd product without grid combat.

My most important thing is the book come in under 200 and hopefully 100 pages and require that, if i want to play the complete game, i only need to ever buy the 1 book (as a player). I play a lot of euro game. Want to irk one of us, have 3 rulesets, one for basic, one for advanced and one for expert. Then force us to read this fractured ruleset.

 

[Keldryn]

I can easily see modularity looking a lot like ... Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.

There is a fairly simple base set of rules, derived from OD&D (and later streamlined into B/X and BECMI). The presentation (especially in 1e) wasn't necessarily simple and straightforward, but the core of the game wasn't that complex. It was also pretty easy to swap out some of the more complex AD&D rules (such as initiative) and replace them with the more straightforward versions from B/X. Fiddly bits such as weapon vs AC adjustments could be easily ignored (and often were).

AD&D 2e made this more explicit by cleaning up the presentation and organization of the rules and clearly designating many things as optional, such as the more specialized character classes, weapon vs armor type adjustments, and non-weapon proficiencies.

AD&D 2e expanded on this modularity with the PHBR series, which mostly added additional rules and character options. Much later, the Player's Option series provided expanded and more complex rules for tactical combat, magic user, and character creation that in many ways replaced the core rules, rather than expanded upon them.

It was also easy to borrow rules such as the War Machine (mass combat) or dominion management from the D&D Companion Set and plug them into an AD&D game.

AD&D (and BECMI) consisted of many largely self-contained rules sub-systems, which made it much easier to add or remove "modules" without having too many unforeseen consequences elsewhere in the system. These sub-systems also frequently had very different resolution mechanics, which could make them very confusing. However, I don't see why there couldn't be self-contained modules that make use of a consistent resolution mechanic (d20).

 

[LurkAway]

I think modularity might take the form of distinct self-contained books/boxed sets/bundles, each with a strong identity and brand recognition and probably a default campaign setting that best meshes with the mechanics. So NOT like Essentials, but like Gamma World or self-contained Dark Sun. Enough to offer real choice but not too many to compete/confuse with each other.

 

[tgayoso]

One of the central components of the discussion of ... whatever the next iteration of DnD will be called has been modularity. This seems promising but it has a whiff of being all things to all people -- with very little information as to what it would look like. The more I break it down, the more skeptical I become.

I leave it to the people here to correct my growing pessimism.
...
I wonder how well one could write a Ravenloft of Shadowfell supplement (lets say) in year 3 of the edition. Would it be core only? Would it have to include explanations of how to adapt expert combat, Vancian magic, investigation skills, etc. into Ravenloft such that a third or more of each book is irrelevant to large segments of the community?

I think your break-down works rather well, but your pessimism seems founded mostly on the fact that published adventures/supplements will not be able to cater to all versions of the game. Thing is, I don't see why they would need to. Presumably, with the right set of tools, DMs and Players could adapt a basic published adventure/supplement to suit their rule set(s). An Expert Combat supplement could be published, which would do just that, but it does not have to be officiall published with the same release date as the core supplement. If there is enough demand, it will likely get created or released later. Alternatively, I'm not sure people would reject a Revenloft of Shadowfell, simply because there are whole sections on Expert Combat that they never intend to use.

So I guess it's not clear to me why you think particular adventures or campaign settings need to address lots of rule sets, or why the game system wouldn't work if they didn't address them all.

 

[tgayoso]

By the way, you need to include Race as another module. I am glad you left it out of CORE, since I feel the race rules do more to restrict folks than they do to encourage playing them. It's sometimes hard to avoid the temptation to use the races particularly suited for optimizing certain classes or to not use the races worst suited for some classes.

 

[MortonStromgal]

IMHO

The PHB

first 50 pages - the basic game or OD&D with d20 rules, this is no skils, feats, powers, etc. Classes are Fighter, Theif, Cleric, Wizard, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling.

rest of the book - modules
classes - replaces the basic classes with typical race/class system
skills - adds a skill system
feats - adds feats
powers - adds 4e powers
combat - adds miniatures and terrian
magic - a non Vatican magic system

As a group you deside what modules your group uses, think of it as the 3e unearthed arcana but with less options. Your not going to have a 4e style and a basic style character in the same group but your group can pick to play basic or 4e and still love D&D (and buy that PHB2)

[edit] lol i didn't even notice I put Vatican rather than Vancian until I got XP... obviously I shouldn't post while watching Trinity Blood!

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

By the way, you need to include Race as another module. I am glad you left it out of CORE, since I feel the race rules do more to restrict folks than they do to encourage playing them. It's sometimes hard to avoid the temptation to use the races particularly suited for optimizing certain classes or to not use the races worst suited for some classes.

I still want race-as-class back, combined with an AD&D-style multiclassing system. So if a Human Fighter is just a Fighter, but an Elf Fighter is an Elf/Fighter.