Is there no love for d20 modern?

Hey all,
I was just reminiscing about the first time I DM'd a d20 Modern campaign. It ran through levels 1-8, and a great time was had by all players.

There are a few nitpicks (and one major gripe*) I have with the system, and I wonder...

a) Is the system 3.5 compatible?
b) Whether or not it IS 3.5 compatible, is anyone aware of any plans for a re-write to perhaps improve upon the Core rules?

* My major gripe is with the Core classes.

* Part of me can't bend my head around the concept of "levelling" in a Modern setting (Final Fantasy aside) -- I believe that HP should remain static and that skills should increase at a better rate than standard.
* I also noticed in my group that everyone took one level of Fast Hero to gain access to the Evasion talent. It made killing them very difficult.
* I disliked that Prestige Classes require 3 levels of regular classes before you can access them... seemed to me that the PrC's would make much better core classes.
* I found the overall organization of each core class to be, well, clunky, especially regarding the Talent trees. Many Talents just didn't seem to be all that desirable, and when you weigh that with the silly requirements of some PrC's, it doesn't seem worth it to "waste" three levels in an undesired class. Maybe it was just me.

Possible fixes for my own sanity:
* All skills are considered class skills; some skills remain exclusive to certain PrC's (examples: Spellcraft, Autohypnosis). Following the example I found in Blue Rose, I might consider making X amount of skills available to each Core class... maybe 8 to Smart and Fast heroes (forget the actual term) Heroes, 6 to Charismatic and "Wise" (forget the term) Heroes, and 4 to Strong and Tough Heroes... and automatically give max ranks in each. Not sure how that would translate to multi-classing...

* Make spells into skills as well, so that people who WANT to learn them, can... while Mages etc. would obviously get so many for free. Hmm... Blue Rose does that, too...

* Improve on the Talent trees somehow. Maybe make it a Talent "web" where other classes can branch into other Talents, albeit at a reduced rate.

* Find some way to either generalize guns into a damage bracket (with the names of each just being flavour... though I think this is done already), or have more statistical variation between each one.

Thoughts, comments?

I'll move this over to the d20 Modern Forum.

By "3.5 compatible" if you mean are the rules exactly like 3.5, the answer is no. However, they are compatible to about 90% - in fact, a few things that make it into 3.5 are found here first (Two-weapon fighting changes come to mind).

No rewrites that I'm aware of, at least not through 2006.

Levelling in a Modern setting is something that has caused a bit of concern in the past, and it's one of those "you like it or you don't" ideas. I can only offer that, my experience and other gamers, is that it works very well, and Modern's generic classes mean that it's easier to model the hero that you want, rather than sticking to strict archetypes; if fact, many gamers (especially the Grim Tales crowd) have used Modern's base system to model Fantasy gaming, modern gaming, historical gaming, and even post-apocalyptic gaming. There are some who simply prefer strict archetypes and class/level for their fantasy gaming, just because it's what they cut their teeth on, and that's cool; since other, classless & levelless systems got to modern gaming before D&D, it's also what people expect in their modern gaming, & that's cool too.

We we game we tend to take the emphasis off of "levelling" and this helps a lot. Remember that in-character, there's no levelling up, but rather a gradual improvement of abilities over time; it's only represented in levels for game ease of use. Thinking of it cinematically, the hero is better in the second movie than he is in the first, or novelistically, he's more experienced when we see him in book 2 than in book 1. When GMing, I don't usually let the PCs level up in the middle of an adventure; I award XP's in safe zones & downtime, so that it's mroe logical when we see the heroes next that they are better off.

* Improve on the Talent trees somehow. Maybe make it a Talent "web" where other classes can branch into other Talents, albeit at a reduced rate.

* Find some way to either generalize guns into a damage bracket (with the names of each just being flavour... though I think this is done already), or have more statistical variation between each one.

Click to expand...

Grim tales does improve the talent trees IMO, by adding in many abilities from other sources: Spycraft, D&D, etc.

As for your guns quandry, wouldn't your two suggestions counteract each other? Or are you saying that they should have gone solidly in one direction or another, and instead they are stuck half way? Many people prefer that guns be statistically the same, and only their silhouettes should be different, while just as many want every little gun statistic spelled out as much as possible. I tend to fall in the latter camp, though I can see the ultimate bad conclusion you could come to by modelling guns too closely, which is why I think Modern strikes a decent balance between the two extremes.

I've been leaning more heavily towards Grim Tales, myself, but because I'm the only one who owns the book in my group, it's harder to get players involved in a game. Once an SRD is released, I may have better luck.

Levels only really work in a more heroic environment IMHO. If you want more realistic character development, then I don't think a system with levels does that well.

Bye
Thanee

In Modern Games I have ran I tend to do as Henry suggests and do the "leveling" between sessions, with possibly several weeks or months between adventures. From the sound of it Hero you are really comparing d20 M to DnD3.5 and while a lot of people have leveled that accusation against it, especially with Urban Arcana, its not really ment to be that. As for your other points, I agree about Magic, I want it to be something else in Modern settings. Fortunately there is a ton of products, many of them well done, out there to provide alternate magic systems.

Stormborn said:

Fortunately there is a ton of products, many of them well done, out there to provide alternate magic systems.

Click to expand...

Case in point:

--True20, as Herobizkit mentioned
--Black Company Campaign Setting magic (which I hear Green Ronin is doing as a separate system)
--Grim Tales (combination skillcheck, D&D style spells, and spell burn)
--Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth (by our very own Rngerwicket, through EN Publishing)

To name a few.

Huh. You ask if there's any love for d20 Modern and then post a post that makes me wonder if you have any!

Here's my take on your specific questions/comments:

• d20 Modern is mostly compatible with 3.5. Also mostly compatible with 3.0. In fact, it was kinda the bridge between the two, in many ways, leaning more towards 3.5.
• I know of no plans to revise d20 Modern. I wouldn't want it revised; I like it the way it is. Then again, I also think 3.5 was as much a downgrade in some areas as it was an improvement in others. The bigger version number is not necessarily desirable.
• I have no gripe with core classes.
• I don't know what modern has to do with levelling. You either like levelling, or you don't, or you're indifferent, but I don't see what setting has to do with it either way. It's easy enough to get to what you want, though--the bolt-on pdf product "Grim and Gritty Hit Points" sounds like it would do more or less exactly what you want. Honestly, though, I only prefer that for horror or grimngritty games--either modern, future, fantasy or whatever.
• We didn't get that at all. Everyone took levels of what was interesting to them. Sounds like a case of possibly blaming the game for problems with the players.
• I love that "prestige" classes are not core classes. Sounds like you just didn't like the generic classes, and were really trying to find ways around them. Rest assured; that's just personal preference. There are plenty of other people who'd love the generic classes as is, and don't even meddle much with advanced classes.
• It was just you. You clearly aren't very fond of the idea of the generic classes. But, since that's a core attribute of the d20 Modern system, it sounds like you really want to be playing some other game, frankly.
• I would hate this. There's a reason class skills belong to each class.
• I would love this. But, it's already been done, many times. There are all kinds of products that have are d20 skill-based "magic" systems, and can be bolted on to the existing game.
• I don't have a problem with the talent trees, although I wouldn't turn up my nose at more options either.
• I'm not a "gun nut" so I don't mind the more or less sameness to the different types of guns.

Actually, it sounds like most of your problems would be resolved if you used Grim Tales, frankly.

Joshua Dyal said:

*snip*

Click to expand...

Joshua Dyal, thank you typing out everything that I was going to say.

I now live in awe of your telepathic abilities.

Herobizkit said:

* I found the overall organization of each core class to be, well, clunky, especially regarding the Talent trees. Many Talents just didn't seem to be all that desirable, and when you weigh that with the silly requirements of some PrC's, it doesn't seem worth it to "waste" three levels in an undesired class. Maybe it was just me.

Click to expand...

Here's my revised concept (not much more than a concept, that is not completely finished) for the d20 Modern base classes.

CLICK

Bye
Thanee

Joshua Dyal said:

• I have no gripe with core classes.
• We didn't get that at all. Everyone took levels of what was interesting to them. Sounds like a case of possibly blaming the game for problems with the players.
• I love that "prestige" classes are not core classes. Sounds like you just didn't like the generic classes, and were really trying to find ways around them. Rest assured; that's just personal preference. There are plenty of other people who'd love the generic classes as is, and don't even meddle much with advanced classes.
• It was just you. You clearly aren't very fond of the idea of the generic classes. But, since that's a core attribute of the d20 Modern system, it sounds like you really want to be playing some other game, frankly.

Click to expand...

*Raises hand*

I LOVE the base classes... and honestly, I generally pick one, and stick to it until 9th or 10th level.... when I HAVE to get out of it. Love them.
Not like... love.
D&D 3.75 should be done the same way.

WHy do people keep asking if D20 Modern is 3.5 compatible? Why does it have to be? Its like asking if D6 Adventure is compatible with D6 Star Wars. SUre they use a similar ruleset but they aren't the same game. D20 Modern is its own game, let it be its own game and don't worry about 3.5 compatibility. Heck, many of the changes made for D20 Modern made it into 3.5!

Jason