D&D 4E d20 Modern 4E - I want it!

arscott

First Post
If we ever see a modern 2.0

I think that in practical terms, the only modern-style product we'll see in the next few years is a 3rd party GSL release.

From what I understand, the GSL is going to make Übertweaks like the Gestalt rules much harder to pull off. You're expected to write new classes, but not present new rules for how classes work.

Plus, you have a point in regards to lack of archetypes as a problem for d20 Modern. So I'd guess that a class-by-class approach might be the better one.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If I wanted to pretend that Startrek was a d20 Modern/Future 2.0 game, what roles would I give the characters of a bridge crew:

- Kirk: Face/Defender -> Archetype/Class: Officer?
- Spock: Sage/Striker -> Archetype/Class: Scientist
- Sulu: Guide/Striker -> Class/Class: ?
- McCoy: Sage/Leader -> Archetype/Class: Doctor
- Scotty: Sage/Controller -> Archetype/Class: Engineer

- Picard: Face/Leader -> Archetype/Class: Officer?
- Riker: Face/Striker -> Archetype/Class: Officer?
- Data: Sage/Defender -> Archteype/Class: Scientist?
- Worf: Guide/Striker -> Archetype/Class: Warrior
- Troi: Face/Leader -> ARchetype/Class: ?
- Geordy: Sage/Controller -> Archetype/Class: Engineer

I still have trouble identifying appropriate class/archetypes for each. There seems to be one, but I can't pinpoint it. Spock's Vulcan Nerve Pinch makes him a perfect Striker, but Data's resilience and strength make him a good defender - but both seem to be Scientists!
 

arscott

First Post
On the other hand, Both the Vulcan Nerve Pinch and Data's Resilience are probably best seen as Racial Abilites rather than class-based ones.

If racial mechanics are going to be separate from class mechanics, then Star Trek doesn't seem to be a particularly useful guide--there simply isn't enough variation in combat styles.

On the opposite end, we have superheroes. Their Combat styles are so differentiated that they're obviously not useful when determining class abilities, but I think they're a useful case study in that:

a) Supergroups represent well-defined adventuring parties. The Enterprise Bridge Crew doesn't all beam down to the planet each week, but The Fantastic Four all show up when A monster tries to destroy Manhattan.

b) From a space-sharing standpoint, they're a good guide to what works and what doesn't. Wolverine and Colossus can work on the same team even though they're both defenders, but Kitty Pride and Jubilee seems redundant.

Case study--The Fantastic Four:

Mr. Fantastic:
In combat, I think he's probably a controller or a defender. His elasticity is tough to place, because it lets him be a serious hindrance to one powerful foe, or to literally spread himself across the entire map. His super-science practically makes him the party wizard--definitely a controller role--but is often reserved for out-of-combat uses.
And speaking of out-of-combat, Reed is pretty clearly a sage. It's interesting to note, though, that Reed Richards the Sage is very different from Sherlock Holmes the sage, in that one is very technical and hands-on, and the other is purely descriptive and theoretical. Perhaps "Guy who builds stuff" is an entirely different archetype than Sage.

The Invisible Girl:
In Combat, Sue is probably a Leader. Sure, her primary role is to defend, but she doesn't accomplish that by interposing herself between the bad guy and the squishy folks--indeed, she is one of the squishy folks. I see her shielding powers to be much more akin to a cleric's healing than to anything that a fighter does.

Out of Combat, Sue's probably pure sage. She's almost as accomplished as a scientist as Reed, but much less hands on, much more purely analytical.

The Human Torch:
Maneuverable and blasty, Johnny is an exemplar striker. Out of Combat, he's probably the face--he's got a little bit of star quality, and tends to be friendlier with outsiders simple because he's not too nerdy, grumpy, or just plain shy.

The Thing:
Defender, probably. He's a classic fighter (good melee, can shrug of hits well), but he doesn't evidence any of the 'stickiness' that fighters and paladins are supposed to be getting this time around.

Out of Combat is tougher. Ben is a pilot, which suggests guide, but that seems like a pretty minor part of his character. Ben is gruff, imposing, and entirely without tact--it seems like his contribution is almost that of an anti-face: to stir up trouble. Not sure how you'd translate that into RPG terms, though.
 

Ranger REG

Explorer
arscott said:
If we ever see a modern 2.0

I think that in practical terms, the only modern-style product we'll see in the next few years is a 3rd party GSL release.

From what I understand, the GSL is going to make Übertweaks like the Gestalt rules much harder to pull off. You're expected to write new classes, but not present new rules for how classes work.
Or new builds (sets of talent trees), new talents, new talent trees, in addition to the usual (new feats, new equipment, new combat options, new spells, etc.).
 


Frostmarrow

First Post
I think you have forgotten one important modern campaign; the treasure hunt. It can be a great campaign along the lines of Indiana Jones, Da Vinci Code, and National Treasure. Going after MacGuffins is not exactly new to us.
 
Last edited:

Frostmarrow said:
I think you have forgotten one important campaign; the treasure hunt. It can be a great campaign along the lines of Indiana Jones, Da Vinci Code, and National Treasure. Going after MacGuffins is not exactly new to us.
Might be part of Investigation, but maybe that makes Investigation to wide as a concept, or at least not the right term.
 

Ingolf

First Post
Greg K said:
There is the Serenity RPG. There is a Unisystem version with the serial numbers filed off in an issue of the magazine Eden put out. Finally, I heard that Firefly was based on a Traveller campaign (don't know if there is truth to that).

That was the first thing I thought watching the show. "Somebody played a lot of Traveller."
 

invokethehojo

First Post
Personally I liked the modern ability score based classes. I don't think rigid rules fit for a modern system, unless you give it a rigid setting (old west, world war II, etc)

I would like to see a free form system for the new modern in the core book, something that allows players to build their characters from scratch with no molds.

Have a seperate book for abilities that are outside the norm (magic, psionics, cybernetics, mutant super powers)

Classes would belong in the other books, which would be setting/adventure books. After Have a book for old west campaigns thats historically based with hooks and classes that fit that setting. The free form system could still be used but there would be classes specifically for that setting. A gunslinger fits in the old west, it doesn't fit in world war two. A covert spy fits in the espionage setting book, it doesn't fit the old west. Include options in these setting books for how to adapt it for magic, psionics or abilities.

Esentially this method would have a larger number of smaller books. The core rule book would probably be only 150 pages (this could be used to make any setting if the DM took the time and his imagination), the magic,psionics,powers,cyber book might be beefy (250 pages or more) but all the setting books could be 100 to 150 pages.

What I really want out of modern is options and consistancy. I want the books to offer several ways of doing things (I hate the abstract money system but some like it, I don't think a modern person, no matter how heroic, should still be walking after 4 gunshots, but some people don't care), more systems that are interchangable with eachother and abilities that can fit in any setting.
 

Frostmarrow

First Post
Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Might be part of Investigation, but maybe that makes Investigation to wide as a concept, or at least not the right term.

Yeah - but treasure hunt has a nice ring to it.

Roles:

LEADERS: Jack O'Neill, John Sheppherd, Mal Reynolds
TECHIES: Daniel Jackson, Rodney MacKay, Kaylee Frye
BIG GUYS: Teal'c, Ronon Dex, Jayne Cobb
PEOPLE PERSONS: Samantha Carter, Teyla Emmagan, Inara Serra
 

Remove ads

Top