D20 Future Q&A With Rodney "Moridin" Thompson and JD Wiker!!

[Laslo Tremaine]

I actually find this thread to be a bit depressing. I try not to bash WotC, and while I like d20 Future for the most part, it does feel a bit skeletal at times.

Then when I see things like this...

Yes, and it got cut when they simplified the system, much to my chagrin

... stated a number of times in this thread. It just gets me down.

d20 Future has a noticeably lower page-count than either d20 Modern or Urban Arcana. Why were all of these things cut? Is there some reason that they could not have upped the page-count?
:\

 

[trancejeremy]

Well, d20 Future is $5 cheaper than d20 Modern or Urban Arcana. I personally would rather have had a 300 page, $40 book than a $35 224 page, but...

 

[JDWiker]

d20 Future has a noticeably lower page-count than either d20 Modern or Urban Arcana. Why were all of these things cut?

Various reasons, mainly dealing with page count (which I address below). My "simple" starship rules, in the spirit of full disclosure, came in at around 100 pages. I warned Chris about the size of that section as soon as I could, and while he seemed not terribly put-out by it, he did let me know that there was a chance that a lot of it could be cut. When it was finally cut, they cut much deeper than I thought they would, to the point where the current rules make, in my opinion, a fine miniatures game, but don't mesh well with an RPG.

Is there some reason that they could not have upped the page-count?
:\

There are three reasons: man-hours, scheduling, and solicitations.

If they had upped the page count, it would have meant that the editors, layout people, and art directors would have had to increase their budgets for the project, which would have meant a lower profit margin on the book. Not a big deal if they raise the price, but that brings up the other two problems.

Adding man-hours increases the time it takes to finish the product, and that seriously affects Wizards' schedule. They only have so many people to do design, editing, layout, art, typesetting, and imaging, and their schedules are tight. That would have pushed back not just d20 Future's, but every other product in the hopper. Now, they might have just moved d20 Future much further back to an open space further down the schedule, instead of pushing everything back, but that relates to the third problem.

Products like this are solicited at least 6 months in advance, meaning that the distributors expect them at a certain time, as well as at a certain price, and they budget for that time and price accordingly. If the product arrives significantly late, it means they don't ship to the retailers on time, which means that they don't collect their money from the retailers on time. And if Wizards had upped the price, they would have had a minor uproar from the distributors *and* the retailers, who would suddenly have had to pay a higher-than-advertised price for the product.

JD

 

[dekrass]

The genetic engineering and nanites seem very similar in effect to cyberware, but no pricing guidelines are given. It would be helpful to have guidelines on things like cost to go with the time and research requirements.
Has any thought been put in this direction, or is it assumed to be too campaign specific?

 

[Olive]

My understanding is that Wizards has no plans to expand on the d20 Future product, except perhaps as web enhancements.

I know that a number of third-party publishers have stepped forward to say that they intend to create products using the d20 Future SRD (when it's released). The Game Mechanics is not among those publishers (yet).

That's not surprising... I'll tell ya what tho, I'm pretty sure that the 100 page starship document you originally wrote would sell like hotcakes! Is it legally wizard's, or do you still have the rights to it? I really do hope that TGM can come together with some d20 Future stuff, cos I'll be up for buying it! A future player's companion would be fantastic, as would a more complete starship construction system.

Then the GM makes it up. As far as I know, there's no system for boarding, partly because there are so many options (blow open the hatch, cut through the hull, override the airlock code, short-circuit the lock mechanism, chew through the portholes ...)

Cool.

For questions like this, I wish they'd kept my system. It still wasn't perfect, but it had more detail than the existing ship-construction system.

As we all do... but you got any advice?

Ask 'em quick. I'll be going to Gen Con on Wednesday morning, and not returning until the following Wednesday night (which means I won't get back to the ENWorld message boards until at least Thursday).

I'll do my best, but I guess if I miss ya, I'll miss ya! Have a good time and thanks for all your help!

One I did remember is about the advanced classes and their BaB progression: why are the future AdCs better at fighting than similar modern AdCs?

 

[JDWiker]

That's not surprising... I'll tell ya what tho, I'm pretty sure that the 100 page starship document you originally wrote would sell like hotcakes! Is it legally wizard's, or do you still have the rights to it? I really do hope that TGM can come together with some d20 Future stuff, cos I'll be up for buying it! A future player's companion would be fantastic, as would a more complete starship construction system.

Legally, it belongs to Wizards.

As we all do... but you got any advice?

Nothing that doesn't boil down to "design it from scratch."

One I did remember is about the advanced classes and their BaB progression: why are the future AdCs better at fighting than similar modern AdCs?

Search me.

JD

 

[Olive]

Legally, it belongs to Wizards.

Bummer... so little to no chance of it being released by you then?

Nothing that doesn't boil down to "design it from scratch."

Ok...

Search me.

Is that because you didn't do the AdCs, or because they were changed by wizards?

BTW, thanks again for answering all our questions. I guess it's a bit frustrating having a book you wrote be changed as much as it was, and knowing you had a system in there to start with...

 

[theRogueRooster]

When it was finally cut, they cut much deeper than I thought they would, to the point where the current rules make, in my opinion, a fine miniatures game, but don't mesh well with an RPG.

I worry about how interesting (or more precisely, how uninteresting) starship combat will be using D20 Future rules. As it stands, I see no incentive to do anything other than move into range of an enemy ship and fire all my weapons every round until one of us blows up. All ships, even superheavies, can stop and turn on a dime, and can accelerate from zero to tactical speed (or even cruising speed) in a single round. Weapons can fire every round and in all directions, removing any interesting tactical decisions involving timing or the lining up of a shot. It bothers me that the Mecha chapter contains a more detailed movement system (in the form of different maneuverability classes and three-dimensional movement while flying) than the chapter on Starships.

In the starship construction rules the choice of weapons is a one-size-fits-all affair, with only a few of the ultralight ships being too small to mount some of the larger weapons. The artificial limit to the number of weapon mounts available on a ship is set up in such a way that a Light ship has the same number of weapon mounts as a Superheavy. For an example, compare the 450-ft length Destroyer to the 2,750-ft length Dreadnought. They both can install at most 8 beam, projectile, or missile weapons. And since one size does indeed fit all, they choose from the same weapon list.

Mix in the fact that unless you are the pilot or the gunner, you're relegated to Aid Another action for the duration of the combat and you are left with a ruleset devoid of any interesting choices or decisions to make.

The really bothersome thing is that I can catch glimpses of some great potential in the ruleset that promises to have been a lot of fun had Wizards not watered it down to the point of being a lengthy and uninspired dicefest.

-tRR

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Bugger bugger bugger bugger bugger.

I hate having to house-rule things. But what the starcraft combat rules seem to have turned into is NOT something I want to play. At all.

I wasn't hoping for a revisitation of Alternity's "Warships", but something with some of the same high points ... one of the major ones being important tasks for different PCs as "members of the crew" to play. That's going to be a major part of my Sci-Fi campaign model. So if everybody but the pilot has nothing to do but "Aid Another", then all that tactical ship combat will be less than fun. Not all of us want to play Star Wars Dogfighter, some of us want to play Space Navy.

--fje

 

[Olive]

For questions like this, I wish they'd kept my system. It still wasn't perfect, but it had more detail than the existing ship-construction system.

Sorry, but thinking about it, this doesn't really help...

Perhas the question really should of been - how do I work out the purchase DC of a template on a ship?

Is the answer 'start from scratch'?