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

[Buddha the DM]

If non-heroic robotic characters can not have class levels then how are they supposed to make use of the Skill Web (PL 8) and the Feat Web (PL 8)? Both of the afformentioned items make reference to a robot having ordinary levels. But according to pg 177 this is not possible.

 

[RodneyThompson]

And this is why I like it when JD comes and helps me out. He has the answers I cannot provide!

ALSO: Could a moderator please change the title of the thread to "D20 Future Q&A With Rodney Thompson and JD Wiker" so that it doesn't looks like I'm hogging the show? JD's insight is at least as valuable as mine, if not more so.

 

[Ranger REG]

The short answer is "simplicity." Location-based hits slow down play. The longer answer is that Wizards' design staff are not big fans of hit locations, for a variety of reasons, though I'll grant that enough people want such a system that it could *at least* be done as an optional rule.

And what is The Game Mechanics' stance on hit locations?

 

[JDWiker]

but 39 rounds could conceivably take several hours to play out at the game table. for me, playability always trumps realism, so i'd like a combat system that plays out a lot faster, even if that means space engagements are unrealistically short.

Well, there's always the system from Star Wars--but if you don't own a copy of that, the simple fix is simply to cut the hit points down, though I don't recommend cutting them down to any lower than 1/10th the current totals.

5 minutes real-time or 5 minutes in-game-time? i think that combat should last about 20 minutes to a half-hour real time, and i don't particularly care how long (or short) that actually turns out to be in-game.

Well, then, you're on one side of an argument that's been going on for years. Others prefer space combat to be more "realistic" (which is to say, within the context of starships that can perform combat maneuvers in the space of less than a minute). No single system is ever going to satisfy both camps. Fortunately, the system in d20 Future can be easily adapted to suit either style (more or less).

i was thinking of upping the weapon damage instead, but that amounts to the same thing. other than this area that i disagreee with, i'm really grooving on d20 Future, and i think you guys did a spectacular job.

Thanks. I wish I could claim more credit for the starship combat system (or less credit, depending on the aspect in question), but I'm happy to take credit for the stuff that I designed that you like and that *wasn't* rewritten. ::grin::

 

[JDWiker]

If non-heroic robotic characters can not have class levels then how are they supposed to make use of the Skill Web (PL 8) and the Feat Web (PL 8)? Both of the afformentioned items make reference to a robot having ordinary levels. But according to pg 177 this is not possible.

I'm not sure I understand your question (partly because these feats weren't in my original design). Where does it state that non-heroic robot characters can't have class levels? My understanding is that they can't have *heroic* class levels, but can still have Ordinary class levels.

 

[Furluge]

If non-heroic robotic characters can not have class levels then how are they supposed to make use of the Skill Web (PL 8) and the Feat Web (PL 8)? Both of the afformentioned items make reference to a robot having ordinary levels. But according to pg 177 this is not possible.

I have a feeling that it was meant to say they cannot have character class levels but might have ordinary levels. (IE: The NPC class levels.)

Also as far as the starships go. I don't think their HP is too high, considering that more than one attack is allowed as part of the normal attack action and d4's example is of two ships not really suited for taking each other out, but that discussion is mainly all over that other page. (It's big.)

One thing I'd like to know, is the targeting system set up so that it can only apply to one attack per round? If so is the targeting system tied to a particular weapon, or do I just pick one each round? Can additional targeting systems be purchased to improve other weapons/additional weapons (That being if the computer isn't tied to a single weapon.), or is it always just going to be a one attack per round gets the targeting computer bonus deal?

And while people are asking about mutation points equal to ECL chart, I'd like to go a step farther and ask what amount of genetic engineering, cybernetic upgrades (perhaps not these so much as there's a high limit but still.), and robotic upgrades might constitute a level? I'm considering writing a campaign setting where high amounts of such modifications, usually by the power groups in the setting, will occur. Perhaps something more of a $ amount of things put into the character equals this much ECL?

How about a vehicle critical hit chart in the web-enhancement?

And I myself grew up on locational based damage points, but that being said I know how that can be a pain as well. I personally think that the critical hits table is a good compromise to that, it gives some of the feel of the advantages of getting just the /right/ spot without the bookeeping.

 

[JDWiker]

And what is The Game Mechanics' stance on hit locations?

I think I just gave it, actually.

Hit location charts are clunky, and slow down play. However, if you want them in your campaign, you can always adapt them from a book like The Galactic Campaign Guide (which is for personal combat, not starship combat, but the principle is the same).

Still, my recommendation is not to do so: Applying a hit location system to personal, vehicle, or starship combat makes the game more lethal for PCs, and while some players prefer a more lethal system, it takes a lot of fun out of the game if your character gets killed by a lucky hit (when you, your vehicle, or your ship still had full hit points).

It also virtually *demands* a "called-shot" system, which makes armor virtually useless, because as soon as players realize they can take a chance on an instant kill, they start going for it, regardless of the penalty. And when they get enough of a BAB that the penalty isn't that much of a penalty anymore, combats become ridiculously short, and PC kills depressingly frequent.

It's a level of realism that takes the fun out of the game. And it's worse than the level of realism represented by starships with high hit point totals, because at least *that* rule doesn't come up in every combat.

I can't say for sure that this is the opinion of all of the GMs, but I can't imagine it's far off the mark. (You'll notice that we didn't like the idea enough to include it in The Modern Player's Companion, even as an optional rule.)

 

[JDWiker]

I have a feeling that it was meant to say they cannot have character class levels but might have ordinary levels. (IE: The NPC class levels.)

That's my impression as well, but I want to be sure.

One thing I'd like to know, is the targeting system set up so that it can only apply to one attack per round? If so is the targeting system tied to a particular weapon, or do I just pick one each round? Can additional targeting systems be purchased to improve other weapons/additional weapons (That being if the computer isn't tied to a single weapon.), or is it always just going to be a one attack per round gets the targeting computer bonus deal?

It applies to all of the ship's attacks, every round.

And while people are asking about mutation points equal to ECL chart, I'd like to go a step farther and ask what amount of genetic engineering, cybernetic upgrades (perhaps not these so much as there's a high limit but still.), and robotic upgrades might constitute a level? I'm considering writing a campaign setting where high amounts of such modifications, usually by the power groups in the setting, will occur. Perhaps something more of a $ amount of things put into the character equals this much ECL?

I'm really uncomfortable with that idea, mainly because it doesn't make sense to me that the amount of cash a character has spent on himself changes his ECL. That's rather like saying that a character with heavy armor should be ECL +3 or whatever. I can see that logic for natural mutations (as opposed to genetic manipulations post-chargen), but purchasing cybernetics is no different to me than purchasing guns and armor.

How about a vehicle critical hit chart in the web-enhancement?

You really should suggest that to Wizards.

 

[HellHound]

Three Cheers for the "no hit locations" camp.

I've been playing a lot of CyberPunk 2020 lately and have been getting bummed out with the time it takes to calculate hits with autofire because of hit locations. Bleh.

Much happier with a no-location system.

 

[Buddha the DM]

I'm not sure I understand your question (partly because these feats weren't in my original design). Where does it state that non-heroic robot characters can't have class levels? My understanding is that they can't have *heroic* class levels, but can still have Ordinary class levels.

Taken from page 177: "Nonheroic robots don't get class levels. However, they can recieve factory-installed skill and feat software, allowing them to emulate specific skills and feats as part of their programming..."

Skill Web (PL 8; pg 186), and Feat Web (PL 8; pg 187): "A feat (or skill) web allows a robot with ordinary class levels to gain feats (or skills) as normal for its class"

These two things seem to be in conflict to me.