Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 6083398" data-attributes="member: 1165">There's at least a few 3rd party d20 Modern/4e rulesets, as linked above. You could always do your own, too.I used to run and really like d20 Modern, but it ran into numerous issues, many of which had nothing to do with the ruleset. People who know stuff about guns are common even in urban Canada. (As a DM, one of the advantage of "Fantasy Gun Control" is you never need to deal with players who know more about guns than you.)Fantasy is just easier. You don't need to know how to jam or intercept a cell phone, or conduct a border crossing, or find a way for legitimate police officers to interfere with badly-behaving PCs. ("Police brutality" was not a crime in the Middle Ages. Usually.)I liked the classes, or more to the points, the talents for the base classes, but they don't mesh very well with 4e's roles. Very roughly speaking, the classes would probably be:1) Strong -> Striker (brute)2) Fast -> Skirmisher or possibly Lurker (the defensive talent tree supports the latter). Note that I didn't say Striker, as the Fast class had no way to boost damage.3) Tough -> The bodyguard, at least, would be a defender, but the generic tough's talents are basically a list of feats or utility powers usable by other classes. They had no special offensive abilities at all.4) Smart -> All of its abilities are utility abilities. It's not really a "class".5) Dedicated -> The most combat-capable of the mental classes, but has no role, except being able to heal slightly better in combat, once per day per person.6) Charismatic -> Controller (Leader)... well, at least the Leadership talent tree does this. Fast Talk is basically a rogue utility power or feat.Things to avoid:Very heavy weapons. In real-life, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher is simply not balanced with a handgun. But the rules either need to make both viable options, or remove one option. (So you can't have terrorists with RPGs, because the PCs might steal them? Major problem there.)Vehicles. Spycraft had a good vehicular combat system, but there's still issues such as all the PCs being in one vehicle that gets blown up, vehicles not interacting well with PC-scale movement at all (Spycraft dodges this, but this isn't helpful if your PCs are walking down the street and are attacked in a drive-by).Hackers. That's like having a diviner PC who refuses to actually adventure, just using spells to give advice and remotely manipulate traps. Hackers force party splits, in a manner that I think isn't very cool. (Adventures should require entry into the target building to do the hacks, you don't make a secure computer accessible via the internet. However, a Shadowrun-style decker, or an Alec Hardison-style Smart Hero hacker, has to run away when "meatspace" combat starts, and 4e does not support that style of play.)Here is my extremely-poorly-done heavy machine gunner. The suppressive fire rules could use a bit of a workout or rewrite.</blockquote>

Verification