D&D 4E d20 Modern 4E - I want it!

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Why? Is WotC holding a Setting Search Contest for d20 Modern next editon?

Now that might be cool... But not that I am aware of. Heck, we don't even have any confirmation there will ever be a d20 Modern 4E. Some ideas, wild speculation, but certainly no comittment.

Would you rather it be Urban Arcana? Shadow Chasers? Both don't hold a candle next to the established Dark*Matter setting, originally created for Alternity.

Urban Arcana was just D&D Today, and while it had some neat concepts (We used it Special Unit 2 Style), it's just not what I want from a modern game. Shadow Chasers (I love Buffy & Angel) and GeneTech (DarkAngel) came closer, but I think Dark*Matter surpasses them all. So, if they want a strongly implied setting, and they want to "imply" a known one, it's my favored choice.

 

[DarkKestral]

Now that might be cool... But not that I am aware of. Heck, we don't even have any confirmation there will ever be a d20 Modern 4E. Some ideas, wild speculation, but certainly no comittment.


Urban Arcana was just D&D Today, and while it had some neat concepts (We used it Special Unit 2 Style), it's just not what I want from a modern game. Shadow Chasers (I love Buffy & Angel) and GeneTech (DarkAngel) came closer, but I think Dark*Matter surpasses them all. So, if they want a strongly implied setting, and they want to "imply" a known one, it's my favored choice.

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Urban Arcana and Dark*Matter get mixed, retaining the creatures and flavor of D*M while adding the Urban Arcana idea that the fantasy races are out and about in the modern world, though hidden and largely at society's fringes. It strikes me as a relatively simple way of providing for Hellboy & Special Unit 2 types of campaigns where fantasy races mix with sci-fi technology and character races along with the "modern conspiracy" campaigns associated with traditional Dark*Matter. Since the "all myths are true" idea is somewhat of a setting rule and cryptozoology is an important element of some modern conspiracy theories, the Urban Arcana conceit can play into D*M without needing much tweaking.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Urban Arcana and Dark*Matter get mixed, retaining the creatures and flavor of D*M while adding the Urban Arcana idea that the fantasy races are out and about in the modern world, though hidden and largely at society's fringes. It strikes me as a relatively simple way of providing for Hellboy & Special Unit 2 types of campaigns where fantasy races mix with sci-fi technology and character races along with the "modern conspiracy" campaigns associated with traditional Dark*Matter. Since the "all myths are true" idea is somewhat of a setting rule and cryptozoology is an important element of some modern conspiracy theories, the Urban Arcana conceit can play into D*M without needing much tweaking.

I dunno how familiar you are with Dark*Matter, but I'm very familiar with both settings, and I don't understand how you think the Urban Arcana conceit (D&D monsters are real and hiding in our society and actually there are really quite a lot of them!) is compatible with the cool, distant feel of Dark*Matter. Shooting hobgoblins and beholder crimelords is a pretty long distance from standard Dark*Matter. Things like Illithids can fit just fine, but the majority of the UA stuff? Hmmm, I don't really think so. The tones of the two games are very different.

If UA came back, I'd prefer it if it wasn't so lame about the D&D-ness, either, but made the monsters more "out in the open" for a more Shadowrun-ish feel.

 

[Ranger REG]

I dunno how familiar you are with Dark*Matter, but I'm very familiar with both settings, and I don't understand how you think the Urban Arcana conceit (D&D monsters are real and hiding in our society and actually there are really quite a lot of them!) is compatible with the cool, distant feel of Dark*Matter. Shooting hobgoblins and beholder crimelords is a pretty long distance from standard Dark*Matter. Things like Illithids can fit just fine, but the majority of the UA stuff? Hmmm, I don't really think so. The tones of the two games are very different.

Well, one could do with just a pinch of Urban Arcana elements mixed into Dark*Matter setting, if one were to research the right X-Files episodes and execute it well.

But yes, they established the tones of both setting and they are very distinct from one another.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

*performs Raise Dead Thread ritual*

After having read arscott latest blog post on his idea for a superhero game based on 4E, I found one element that I particularly liked:
The idea of creating "generic" powers with role-specific variations.

This might be an idea that could be useable in other contexts, too, but I think it might be particularly useful for a "modern" game, especially one that doesn't use much different power sources. Lots of PCs in a relatively normal modern setting will either rely on martial arts (unarmed or with a weapon) or firearms (pistols, automatic weapons, rifles).

 

[mfang2]

*performs Raise Dead Thread ritual*

After having read arscott latest blog post on his idea for a superhero game based on 4E, I found one element that I particularly liked:
The idea of creating "generic" powers with role-specific variations.

Lots of PCs in a relatively normal modern setting will either rely on martial arts (unarmed or with a weapon) or firearms (pistols, automatic weapons, rifles).

First post, though I've been lurking here forever. I was particularly intruiged with this thread, and was thinking that these generic powers would perhaps work especially well in conjunction with the gear-based powers that HeapThaumaturgist referred to back on page 5. For example, whilst a any two (proficient-dependent?) characters can fire off a couple of rounds with a pistol, a striker may attempt to gain better positioning through a shift, whilst a leaders may provide covering so that nearby characters can move up. It gives a base level of combat effectiveness while also providing tactical and personal flavor.

The six attributes lack flavor as character classes. Spycraft had the right idea. If you posit that the three physical attribute classes make for fun combat encounters and the three others make for fun skill challenges then you only need nine Modern 4th Edition classes. Strong/Smart, Tough/Wise, Fast/Charisma, Strong/Wise, Tough/Charisma, Fast/Smart, Strong/Charisma, Tough/Smart, and Fast/Wise.

I also quite liked this idea, though after pondering at length over the debate on combat versus non-combat priorities, I was thinking of a relatively simple (and probably uninspiring) solution:

the universal powers pool that Mustrum mentioned differentiates based on role; thus combat powers could have strong/tough/fast branches, and non-combat powers (or skills, situations, or whatever) could/would have smart/wise/charismatic branches. But this is may prove to be unsatisfactory for those that may want to specialize (for realism or other reasons) in or out of combat. Han Solo may talk fast AND shoot first, but a given character may consistently choose one over the other.

Then perhaps for each character (say a Fast/Charisma), he should choose one (say Charisma) as his primary class distinction, over (Fast) his secondary class distinction. Mechanically this would likely amount to no more than a few +2/-2 differences (whatever and wherever they may be without ruining game balance), and Narratively, one could easily construct a character that may just be content with being a gas-station attendent (primary Wise), but is (perhaps reluctantly) willing to take up that shotgun (secondary Tough) when rabble-rousers come by.

Anyways, just my two cents

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

First post, though I've been lurking here forever.

Welcome in the world of active postership, or something.

Then perhaps for each character (say a Fast/Charisma), he should choose one (say Charisma) as his primary class distinction, over (Fast) his secondary class distinction. Mechanically this would likely amount to no more than a few +2/-2 differences (whatever and wherever they may be without ruining game balance), and Narratively, one could easily construct a character that may just be content with being a gas-station attendent (primary Wise), but is (perhaps reluctantly) willing to take up that shotgun (secondary Tough) when rabble-rousers come by.

Anyways, just my two cents

I always wanted to test out running a D20 Modern campaign using gestalt rules, gestalting "physical" with "mental" class. Your idea reminds me of that. My idea of building a character from a "combat" (Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker) and a "non-combat" role (Face, Guide, Sage, Techie) stems from the same idea. As such, I like your approach. And maybe choosing a focus between your non-combat role and your combat-role isn't such a bad idea, either, and can be done without hosing either side. (Maybe if you focus on the combat aspect, you gain an extra at-will (for a total of 3), and if you focus on the non-combat aspect, you gain a role-specific utility power? And you might get further smaller benefits along the line - not more power in the game balance sense, but more options in either your combat or your non-combat role)

 

[mfang2]

Hmm, I like the idea of a role-specific utility power. Perhaps something in line of Crucial Advice or Skilled Companion? An additional at-will may be a bit unbalancing though, especially if the system allows non-humans and humans already get the +1 at will. Perhaps something as simple as the fighter's +1 to attack rolls? At any rate, I feel that these differences should neither be so small as to be cosmetic, but not strong enough to disuade combat-oriented players from trying to barter for a new gun, and vice versa.

 

[gnownek]

Link To Big Homebrew

d20 Modern (Reposted) - Giant in the Playground Forums

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6765222#post6765222

Got a big homebrew that is a near complete game - 3.5 classes done so far, all the way to max level. Major change was giving Defender class some missile capabilities. Also rules for guns and grenades. Would love feedback.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Wow, an interesting thread has been revived from long ago. I was rather surprised to see an old post of mine that I vaguely remembered when I was reading through this thread. Its amazing how my thoughts upon reading through this thread this time were rather different than those from a few years ago (though my opinion that a 4e Modern game would be awesome still stands).

I like a lot of the ideas that were tossed around back then, like having a gestalt system that let players freely link combat roles with non-combat abilities, or implementing the tier system in a way that resets the level count at each tier.

Talking about roles in a modern game has gotten me thinking. If you want to create a role-based system for a modern game, you may very well need to create very different roles than what you see in 4e D&D. A large inspiration for me in this regard is the videogame Valkyria Chronicles, which is an incredibly good tactical RPG set in a pseudo-WW2 setting. That game only has six classes that all fulfill very different purposes, making it into a very interesting study on how to use classes and roles in a game where everyone uses guns. In that game, which is heavily built around the idea of interception fire, classes with high defense (Shocktroopers, Lancers, and Tanks) are the best attackers, while the best defending classes (Scouts and Engineers) tended to be fragile and mobile. At the same time, there are few real absolute distinctions between offensive and defensive classes in that game, since almost any class can be used for either depending on the situation. And there are also classes like the Sniper, which have no mobility, no defense, and can't use interception fire, but are basically guaranteed to kill any opponent who isn't standing behind cover. You really can't describe these classes as 4e Strikers, Defenders, Controllers, or Leaders, but they nonetheless function in clear roles that work quite well.

Based on what I have seen in some of the Valkyria Chronicles classes, I came up with the following roles that might work in a 4e Modern game:

Vanguard: Tough fighters who are designed to charge through enemy interception fire and take down enemies in close quarters combat. They combine high defense with high offense, but they simply lack the mobility of some other classes, and don't have a lot of range. Machine-gunners and melee fighters would both fit into this category. They are better described as short distance sprinters than as endurance runners. Their biggest specialty is taking out opponents hiding behind cover. Not very good at interception fire, but are great at holding guarded choke-points. Good against most types of enemies. The vehicle equivalent would be an armored tank.

Ambushers: Agile fighters who emphasize mobility and range. They don't have a lot of defense or attack power, but they can lay down excellent interception fire and can protect wide areas. They can easily die if they run into an area of enemy interception fire, but they excel at sneaking around the periphery of such areas and striking at enemy vulnerabilities. They more resemble light endurance runners than strong sprinters. They are bad at attacking enemies under cover, but are good at getting around that cover or forcing enemies away from cover. Is great at fighting multiple weak opponents. The vehicle equivalent would be an armed car or helicopter.

Snipers: Skilled masters of weapons who can take down opponents with great accuracy. They have bad mobility and can't take many hits, but have unmatched destructive power. Are generally ineffective against enemies under cover, and have no ways to easily get around enemy cover. Is the best at fighting single strong opponents. The vehicle equivalent would be an artillery piece.

Support: Engineers, medics, and team leaders. Excellent an enabling their allies to achieve greater things, and helping them when they get into trouble. Average-to-low attack, defense, mobility, range, and interception ability. May have a few potent tricks up their sleeve.

I have a few thoughts for non-combat roles, but I'll save that for later.