D20 Future (SRD) what's (not so) good and what can be improved (and how)?

[Upper_Krust]

Hi woodelf!

It's a matter of playstyle, not accuracy.

I disagree. Instead of rating the damage appropriate to d20 scaling they totally bent the rules out of shape.

Really, is a full-conversion cyborg withstanding a nuclear blast any more ridiculous than a high-level fighter surviving dragon breath (or a direct blow from a giant's club)? D20 System is, by default, about larger-than-life heroes. And i'm pretty certain there's been at least one action movie in the last few years that had "normal" humans outrunning and/or riding the shockwave from a tactical nuke. Realistic? Hell no. Appropriate? Maybe.

Thats all beside the point.

The point is, in d20, (base) damage scales x1.5 per size category.

In d20 Modern and Future, grenades deal 5d6 damage. That likely represents 125g (or thereabouts) of TNT. By comparison 1 Megaton is 11 size categories more massive. The damage should therefore be 48 times greater than 5d6.

Whether the nuke damage is realistic or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the designers completely failed to be true to the system itself.

If you want realistic, in any genre/era, D20 System ain't what you want (or at least not D&D3E/D20M). Try CORPS or HarnMaster or Millenium's End.

Its fairly easy to fix the flaws inherant in d20 Modern/Future. Its just a pity that such flaws exist to begin with. Especially since you have to go to such physics bending limits to get 16d8 for 1 Megaton.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi BK!

Hi Krusty! Been a busy weekend else I'd have replied sooner.

No problem mate, I was caught up watching the Ryder Cup anyway.

The principle I agree with, my point was to show that the principal needs to take technological progress into account as well, not to invalidate it.

Easily done I'm sure you'll agree.

I knew the 50% was going to come back and bite me in the butt.

He he!

Nope, IIRC X-wings and other Rebel star fighters do a good job of taking out Star Destroyers. Eggshells with howitzers is generally how I view Star Destroyers

I don't know how you came to that conclusion? (Playing Star Wars d20?)

Actually the Abrams frontal armor is the equivalent to approimately 900mm RHA (2.95 feet of armor-grade steel). There are weapons that can penetrate the Abrams frontally but they are few and far between. Almost all the Abrams kills in OIF were either mobility kills or from side or rear shots. So the +32 is for the front with a +21 or +22 for the sides. Personally I prefer Hardness for vehicles as tanks and APCs are big targets and easy to hit, slightly more difficult to penetrate and damage.

Juts turn the +32 into DR 32/-.

However the +32 cannot be correct given that we know 100mm cannon are practically useless against the Abrams armour. Assuming a (conservative) 3d12 for the Barrett 12.7mm, there is no way a 100mm cannon should be doing less than 8d12* (average 52, maximum 96) and thats just the kinetic damage, before we consider the explosion which you could sanction as maybe +50%.

*Which I think is the Abrams damage in d20 Modern anyway.

Simply using hardness means that high level fighters could cut through an Abrams like butter - which is completely unrealistic.

The reproductions of plate armor tend to hover in the 16 gauge area though I don't know what that would be in inches or centimeters.

20 gauge = 0.91mm
18 gauge = 1.21mm
16 gauge = 1.51mm = roughly 1/16th of an inch
14 gauge = 1.89mm

Therefore the Abrams (frontal) armour is considered 9 size categories (and a bit) more massive = +192 (maybe +200), which is definately more accurate than +32. Side and rear armour is probably between 25%-50% effective...what do you think?

 

[The Black Kestrel]

I don't know how you came to that conclusion? (Playing Star Wars d20?)

Nope memories of Star Wars D6 (it's been a decade so they are suspect).

Just turn the +32 into DR 32/-.

However the +32 cannot be correct given that we know 100mm cannon are practically useless against the Abrams armour. Assuming a (conservative) 3d12 for the Barrett 12.7mm, there is no way a 100mm cannon should be doing less than 8d12* (average 52, maximum 96) and thats just the kinetic damage, before we consider the explosion which you could sanction as maybe +50%.

*Which I think is the Abrams damage in d20 Modern anyway.

Simply using hardness means that high level fighters could cut through an Abrams like butter - which is completely unrealistic.

The Abrams main gun does 10d12 (avg. 65, max 120). I'd say DR 65/- would be appropiate for the frontal arc and DR 32/- for the sides and rear. You'll have to give me the example of a high level Strong/X cutting up an Abrams. If nothing else a house rule stating that a melee weapon cannot penetrate modern armor with a Hardness greater than the weapons max damage. In the case of a greatsword that limits it to carving up vehicles with a Hardness of 12 or less

20 gauge = 0.91mm
18 gauge = 1.21mm
16 gauge = 1.51mm = roughly 1/16th of an inch
14 gauge = 1.89mm

Therefore the Abrams (frontal) armour is considered 9 size categories (and a bit) more massive = +192 (maybe +200), which is definately more accurate than +32. Side and rear armour is probably between 25%-50% effective...what do you think?

See above.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey BK!

Nope memories of Star Wars D6 (it's been a decade so they are suspect).

I played d6 Star Wars, but I don't remember attacking a Star Destroyer so I can't comment on that.

However a Star Destroyer should be able to comfortably deal with dozens of fighters - as per the movies.

The Abrams main gun does 10d12 (avg. 65, max 120). I'd say DR 65/- would be appropiate for the frontal arc and DR 32/- for the sides and rear.

That was my initial thought too.

You'll have to give me the example of a high level Strong/X cutting up an Abrams.

Well I was thinking of a 20th-level Barbarian Power Attacking an Abrams.

If nothing else a house rule stating that a melee weapon cannot penetrate modern armor with a Hardness greater than the weapons max damage. In the case of a greatsword that limits it to carving up vehicles with a Hardness of 12 or less

Interesting idea, but I am not sure applying simply mass and not strength/speed is the best way of doing it given that E=MC2.

 

[Cergorach]

It seems that the system needs to make a distiction between hard and soft targets.

 

[Gomez]

Its fairly easy to fix the flaws inherant in d20 Modern/Future. Its just a pity that such flaws exist to begin with. Especially since you have to go to such physics bending limits to get 16d8 for 1 Megaton.

Didn't someone already say that the number was a typo and it should read 160d8 damage from a 1 Megaton bomb.

Well I was thinking of a 20th-level Barbarian Power Attacking an Abrams.

Well if your running a BESM game I could see that!

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hey Cergorach!

It seems that the system needs to make a distiction between hard and soft targets.

I think the problems here are caused by fundamental flaws in the armour rules.

Hi Gomez!

Didn't someone already say that the number was a typo and it should read 160d8 damage from a 1 Megaton bomb.

Yes, but they were only joking.

J.D. Wiker held his hand up in the other thread and said that he simply set the damages too low.

Well if your running a BESM game I could see that!

Well I am personally more interested in Gods vs. Modern/Future although with the rules as they stand Deities will be eating Star Destroyers for breakfast.

 

[C. Baize]

Well I am personally more interested in Gods vs. Modern/Future although with the rules as they stand Deities will be eating Star Destroyers for breakfast.

As well they should, in my opinion.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The point is, in d20, (base) damage scales x1.5 per size category.

Are you sure about the number? 1.5 per points per size category or 1.5 times the previous damage? The latter doesn´t seem to fit.
Dagger: tiny size, 1d4, average damage 2.5
Shortsword: small size, 1d6, average damage 3.5
Longsword: medium size, 1d8, average damage 4.5
The average damage increases by one point for each category until now.
If you switch to large size, this changes a bit:
Greatsword: large size, 2d6, average damage 7
Greataxe: large size, 1d12, average damage 6.5
It seems more like an artifact that they ignore the d10, but at the later size categories, the damage increase becomes bigger (because usually two dice increase)
Huge Greatsword: huge size, 2d8, average damage 9
Gargantuan Greatsword: gargantuan size 2d10, average damage 11
Colossal Greatsword: colossal size 2d12, average damage 13

I think a good way to avoid excessive damage increases is to improve the damage die by 1 step per 2 Progress Levels. Every other 2 Progress Levels, you could improve the range (by 25 to 50 %), improve the magazine capacity (in case of firearms) or add a new special ability ...

 

[Cergorach]

I think the problems here are caused by fundamental flaws in the armour rules.

I think so to, the problem being the equipment bonus to AC, the to low hardness and low hitpoints.

I personally think that there's a difference between weapons aimed at destroying/damaging vehicles and killing/hurting personel. Chances are that no person will survive a direct hit by a 120mm cannon, but the average 10d12 shot is survivable by the average 9th level fighter (or comparable Modern character class). Doubling the damage (20d12) would make the average shot survivable only by a 19th level fighter (or comparable Modern character class). Personally i would find throwing 20 dice a bit problematic, 2d12x10 would be preferable (maybe even 4d6x10).

The next step would be to increase the hardness and hitpoints comparibly, thus doubling. Hardness 20 to hardness 40 and hitpoint from 64 to 128 hitpoints.

But that would be a lot of unneccassary bookkeeping, why not reduce everything for vehicles by a multiplier of 10?

M1A2
Vehicle Hardness: 4
Vehicle HP: 13

120mm cannon
Vehicle Damage: 2d12 (or 4d6)

Vehicle grade weapons (everything that does vehicle damage) instantly kill all personel targets, unless the target is a pc or important npc (in that case multiply all vehicle damage by 10). All non vehicle weapons do not damage vehicles that have vehicle grade hardness (and vehicle grade hitpoints), unless it involves a pc or important npc (in that case every whole 10 points of normal damage translates into 1 point of vehicle grade damage). This way all vehicle combat is resolved quickly and vehicles become a lot thougher (as they should be).