D20 Future (SRD) what's (not so) good and what can be improved (and how)?
- Thread starter Cergorach
- Start date
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Bagpuss said:
I remember the first iteration of the 2300AD space combat rules which promised "egg shells with hammers" and the submarine combat analogy - and then presented rules where everyone had perfect knowledge of the location of everyone else well outside weapon range and the weapon damage was pathetic compared to the defences! I had so many house rules I might as well have written the game myself
Bagpuss said:
In ROTJ an A-wing crashed into the bridge of the Super Star Destroyer, but it was presented as a fluke sequence of events which made that possible. Imperial Star Destroyers carry 72 fighters but they're not supposed to be the ship's primary armament, ISDs certainly are 'supposed to' be able to deal comfortably with attacks by enemy starfighter wings, though they have vulnerabilities. I suspect the games make blowing up Star Destroyers rather too easy for gameplay reasons - if they were that fragile it seems unlikely the Empire would bother building them, though admittedly SW space combat is based off WW2 Pacific warfare, a transitional period when huge battleships (Star Destroyers) became obselete in the face of small aircraft (starfighter) attack. Maybe recent advances in SW Starfighter tech have made capital ships obsolete and the Imperials haven't noticed yet - certainly it took the WW2 naval powers, especially Britain, a few years to catch on that the era of the battleship was over.
Upper_Krust
Legend
Hey Bagpuss!
In RotJ we also hear Admiral Ackbar give orders to "...concentrate all fire on that super star destroyer". So its plausible that the majority of the rebel fleet (including the capital ships; since otherwise the command would have been issued by Lando or Wedge) targeted that ship to bring down its shields. However all they managed to do was down the bridge deflector shields which after taking the suicidal A-wing collision simply caused the ship to temporarily lose control and unfortunately it plunged into the Death Star II at this time, otherwise it probably would have been okay after a minute or so.
As S'mon noted it was a series of flukes. Clearly the force was with them.
Bagpuss said:
In RotJ we also hear Admiral Ackbar give orders to "...concentrate all fire on that super star destroyer". So its plausible that the majority of the rebel fleet (including the capital ships; since otherwise the command would have been issued by Lando or Wedge) targeted that ship to bring down its shields. However all they managed to do was down the bridge deflector shields which after taking the suicidal A-wing collision simply caused the ship to temporarily lose control and unfortunately it plunged into the Death Star II at this time, otherwise it probably would have been okay after a minute or so.
As S'mon noted it was a series of flukes. Clearly the force was with them.
Turanil
First Post
I just got my copy of d20 Future (Amazon was so loooong to deliver)
Well, after having got a first look at it by flipping through the pages, I noticed one thing I don't like: BAB progression of advanced classes.
It seems that most of them get medium BAB (i.e.: rogue's bab); as such, the Dreadnought who is a sort of soldier gets the same BAB as a Technosavant who is more of an engineer. IMO: it's like if the sorcerer and fighter had got the rogue's BAB. Then, the Field Officer gets high (fighter) BAB, but I think it's the Field Officer who should get medium BAB while a Dreadnought the high one. After all, a military officer's training is supposed to emphasize on tactics, leading of men, etc., not actual mele fight, where the soldier (in this case Dreadnought) training probably emphasizes on combat. BTW: I already had the same idea with the Soldier AdC of d20 Modern.
Then, getting a look at other classes quickly, I notice that Helix Warriors get Darkvision. Frankly, this is botched work. I mean, there could be many races who already have Darkvision or don't rely on sight at all, so this is a useless special. Then, for a soldier of the future, getting Darkvision is but a waste of class ability: we already have in our present days' technology night googles that enable to see in darkness. They may not be that easy to use, but it's today's technology; in 2020 we can expect googles that enable to see in darkness as well as we see by daylight, plus with several improvements such as incorporated radar and what not. So here again, I am disappointed by this book.
I guess it leaves publishers with room for coming up with more d20 Future stuff.
Well, after having got a first look at it by flipping through the pages, I noticed one thing I don't like: BAB progression of advanced classes.
It seems that most of them get medium BAB (i.e.: rogue's bab); as such, the Dreadnought who is a sort of soldier gets the same BAB as a Technosavant who is more of an engineer. IMO: it's like if the sorcerer and fighter had got the rogue's BAB. Then, the Field Officer gets high (fighter) BAB, but I think it's the Field Officer who should get medium BAB while a Dreadnought the high one. After all, a military officer's training is supposed to emphasize on tactics, leading of men, etc., not actual mele fight, where the soldier (in this case Dreadnought) training probably emphasizes on combat. BTW: I already had the same idea with the Soldier AdC of d20 Modern.
Then, getting a look at other classes quickly, I notice that Helix Warriors get Darkvision. Frankly, this is botched work. I mean, there could be many races who already have Darkvision or don't rely on sight at all, so this is a useless special. Then, for a soldier of the future, getting Darkvision is but a waste of class ability: we already have in our present days' technology night googles that enable to see in darkness. They may not be that easy to use, but it's today's technology; in 2020 we can expect googles that enable to see in darkness as well as we see by daylight, plus with several improvements such as incorporated radar and what not. So here again, I am disappointed by this book.
I guess it leaves publishers with room for coming up with more d20 Future stuff.
Last edited:
Ralts Bloodthorne
First Post
OK, for all of you, here are the quick fixes I applied to the biggest complaints...
Nuclear Weapons: When hitting solid matter (not energy, magnetic or deflection shields) they cause 160d8 to a 60' point of impact, then -1d6 per 10' beyond the impact zone of blast and thermal damage. It's not scientifically accurate, but it works. A 100 foot starship will be taking a massive 160+159+158+157d8 worth the damage. GOODBYE!
MDC: Simple. Revise it to: DC: 10+Damage Works like a charm.
Armor: Make the difference between armored, hardened armor, and milspec armor.
Armor: Treat as normal
Hardened Armor: Treat as having double normal hardness against all weapons that are not anti-armor or explosives. Or give it the additional bonus of DR (Hardness) against ballistic.
Military: Unaffected by anything but fire (treat hardness as normal) and explosive/anti-armor weapons.
There's your quick fix.
As for starships, well...
I'll finish covering it in my other thread.
Hope it helps.
Nuclear Weapons: When hitting solid matter (not energy, magnetic or deflection shields) they cause 160d8 to a 60' point of impact, then -1d6 per 10' beyond the impact zone of blast and thermal damage. It's not scientifically accurate, but it works. A 100 foot starship will be taking a massive 160+159+158+157d8 worth the damage. GOODBYE!
MDC: Simple. Revise it to: DC: 10+Damage Works like a charm.
Armor: Make the difference between armored, hardened armor, and milspec armor.
Armor: Treat as normal
Hardened Armor: Treat as having double normal hardness against all weapons that are not anti-armor or explosives. Or give it the additional bonus of DR (Hardness) against ballistic.
Military: Unaffected by anything but fire (treat hardness as normal) and explosive/anti-armor weapons.
There's your quick fix.
As for starships, well...
I'll finish covering it in my other thread.
Hope it helps.
Has anyone else noticed that the personal armors in D20F seem a bit - less than improved?
Compare the PL5 Concealable Vest (D20M, p. 110) and the PL7 Medium Combat Armor (D20F, p. 74).
The MCA is described as being, effectively, Stormtrooper armor ("almost head to toe in armor plating."). The Concealable Vest is a standard police-type vest, "that can be worn all day under regular clothing."
The difference? MCA has 1 point less in Armor Penalty, weighs twice as much, and slows the wearer down 5' more. That's it. Equipment Bonus is exactly the same.
Checking some of the other armors, it's beginning to look like there's no reason to use anything more than PL5 (D20M) standard armors until you get to the PL8 Unisoldier armor. And a lot of the special effects can be handled under the gadget system, applied to PL5 armors. Space Combat Armor, the "first true powered armor to reach common use," is barely better than a SWAT team high-threat outfit (Forced Entry Unit, D20M).
And the difference between a PL7 Plasma Rifle and a PL8 Pulse Rifle?
Well, the Pulse Rifle is 3 lbs. heavier, and more expensive...
Compare the PL5 Concealable Vest (D20M, p. 110) and the PL7 Medium Combat Armor (D20F, p. 74).
The MCA is described as being, effectively, Stormtrooper armor ("almost head to toe in armor plating."). The Concealable Vest is a standard police-type vest, "that can be worn all day under regular clothing."
The difference? MCA has 1 point less in Armor Penalty, weighs twice as much, and slows the wearer down 5' more. That's it. Equipment Bonus is exactly the same.
Checking some of the other armors, it's beginning to look like there's no reason to use anything more than PL5 (D20M) standard armors until you get to the PL8 Unisoldier armor. And a lot of the special effects can be handled under the gadget system, applied to PL5 armors. Space Combat Armor, the "first true powered armor to reach common use," is barely better than a SWAT team high-threat outfit (Forced Entry Unit, D20M).
And the difference between a PL7 Plasma Rifle and a PL8 Pulse Rifle?
Well, the Pulse Rifle is 3 lbs. heavier, and more expensive...
Pbartender
First Post
Well, I got a hold of a PDF of the Future SRD, and in general I like it... Although, I don't think I'll cough up to the money to buy a copy. The SRD is enough for me, it's got a lot of rules I'll use, and some I'll change a bit.
My idea for a campaign setting is that of a Future Earth... Technology is generally on the border between PL 6 & 7, though it varies from field to field. Most importantly, FTL travel does not exist, and so the setting is confined to the Solar System (for now).
I actually like the idea behind the simplified Starship combat rules... It makes it easy for my players to learn, especially since some of them are a bit adverse to learning new rules. It makes for a higher chance that I'll get to run a long-term sci-fi game. Personally, I will allow for anything you can do in normal combat, with some caveats. Grappling requires a grappling device. Attacks of Opportunity require a point defense system intalled onto a "light" weapon. Pilot checks replace Tumble, Balance and Ride checks. Disarming and Sundering can be used to target specific ship's systems.
Movement will be justified by the technology available... Most ships use ion drives, fusion torches or solar sails for long-distance interplanetary travel. They provide high power, high speeds over long distances, but they are extremely unmaneuverable and can produce dangerously destructive exhaust. For slower, tactical speeds, gravitic drives are used. They are highly maneuverable, reactionless, and they negate most inertial effects and stresses. The downside is that due to the interialless effect, the drives are limited by maximum speed, rather than maximum acceleration; compared to interplanetary drives, gravitic drives are relatively slow.. Only useful for tactical combat, docking maneuvers and atmospheric flight.
My weapons will come in four main flavors of various sizes, and most damages will be revised (Why roll 100d8, when 10d8x10 works just as well?)
Ballistics (mostly rail gun tech)
Lasers
Particle Accelerators
Explosives (missiles... mostly small nukes)
Starship (and vehicle) armor would come in three types...
Ablative Armor (adds hit points)
Deflective Armor (adds Armor Class)
and Hardened Armor (adds DR or Hardness)
I'm going to use a 'tactical' scale for starship combat... A Fine starship is equivalent to a Medium creature... To give more variation in the starship classifications.
Starship equipment will be handled using a gross tonnage calculation... 1 ton of displacement = ~10 cu. ft. of volume. Either you chave space inside the hull for the equipment, or you don't.
I'm going to do a little research into dimension and crew sizes of military submarines, for a basis on starship design. I'd suspect that futuristic spaceships would be built alogn similar guidelines.
There... that's not too painful, and the house rules shouldn't take too much take to cobble together.
My idea for a campaign setting is that of a Future Earth... Technology is generally on the border between PL 6 & 7, though it varies from field to field. Most importantly, FTL travel does not exist, and so the setting is confined to the Solar System (for now).
I actually like the idea behind the simplified Starship combat rules... It makes it easy for my players to learn, especially since some of them are a bit adverse to learning new rules. It makes for a higher chance that I'll get to run a long-term sci-fi game. Personally, I will allow for anything you can do in normal combat, with some caveats. Grappling requires a grappling device. Attacks of Opportunity require a point defense system intalled onto a "light" weapon. Pilot checks replace Tumble, Balance and Ride checks. Disarming and Sundering can be used to target specific ship's systems.
Movement will be justified by the technology available... Most ships use ion drives, fusion torches or solar sails for long-distance interplanetary travel. They provide high power, high speeds over long distances, but they are extremely unmaneuverable and can produce dangerously destructive exhaust. For slower, tactical speeds, gravitic drives are used. They are highly maneuverable, reactionless, and they negate most inertial effects and stresses. The downside is that due to the interialless effect, the drives are limited by maximum speed, rather than maximum acceleration; compared to interplanetary drives, gravitic drives are relatively slow.. Only useful for tactical combat, docking maneuvers and atmospheric flight.
My weapons will come in four main flavors of various sizes, and most damages will be revised (Why roll 100d8, when 10d8x10 works just as well?)
Ballistics (mostly rail gun tech)
Lasers
Particle Accelerators
Explosives (missiles... mostly small nukes)
Starship (and vehicle) armor would come in three types...
Ablative Armor (adds hit points)
Deflective Armor (adds Armor Class)
and Hardened Armor (adds DR or Hardness)
I'm going to use a 'tactical' scale for starship combat... A Fine starship is equivalent to a Medium creature... To give more variation in the starship classifications.
Starship equipment will be handled using a gross tonnage calculation... 1 ton of displacement = ~10 cu. ft. of volume. Either you chave space inside the hull for the equipment, or you don't.
I'm going to do a little research into dimension and crew sizes of military submarines, for a basis on starship design. I'd suspect that futuristic spaceships would be built alogn similar guidelines.
There... that's not too painful, and the house rules shouldn't take too much take to cobble together.
Similar Threads
