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

[Ranger REG]

I'd also just like to add that minions aka mooks are very suitable for a cinematic-style game. I really think adapting the 4E rules, minus minis,...

Am I reading this right? Is the new rulesystem that are in 4e and Star Wars Saga minis-dependent or is that just an exaggerations from fans?

I don't mind playing RPG old-school, but I also like the fact that IF and WHEN I use minis in my games, there are seamless plug-in game mechanics. Many other games don't support the use of minis in their RPG sesssion and that can cause a lot of ambiguities in gameplay.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Am I reading this right? Is the new rulesystem that are in 4e and Star Wars Saga minis-dependent or is that just an exaggerations from fans?

I don't mind playing RPG old-school, but I also like the fact that IF and WHEN I use minis in my games, there are seamless plug-in game mechanics. Many other games don't support the use of minis in their RPG sesssion and that can cause a lot of ambiguities in gameplay.

4E classes have a lot of movement related powers that work best if you have a reliable way to describe positions - e.g. a board. The framework of the power and class system doesn't rely that much on the board, but the individual powers do.
I don't think Star Wars Saga is that much relying on position, though.

Example: Wizards have an At-Will power that let them target several foes and possibly slide (forced movement) several squares. Fighters have an At-Will power that (if using a shield) lets them push a foe. Warlords have an At-Will power that allows an ally to shift (similar to 5ft step) an adjacent ally. Paladins have an At-Will power that grants them attack bonus if there are multiple enemies adjacent.

My thoughts on d20 modern say that all this movement related stuff relies a lot on melee based combat, and relates less well to ranged combat. Though I might be wrong - taking cover is very important when using firearms. But I think the distances involved in "realistic" firearm scenarios make it hard to use a battle grid.

 

[serow]

Maybe they should be looking at SWSE then, instead of 4E.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Maybe they should be looking at SWSE then, instead of 4E.

I find the power structure itself to interesting to pass on. Even if they might need less focus on slide/shift/pull/push.

SAGA talents seem a little dull compared to 4E powers. But still far better then many d20 modern talents.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Am I reading this right? Is the new rulesystem that are in 4e and Star Wars Saga minis-dependent or is that just an exaggerations from fans?

I don't mind playing RPG old-school, but I also like the fact that IF and WHEN I use minis in my games, there are seamless plug-in game mechanics. Many other games don't support the use of minis in their RPG sesssion and that can cause a lot of ambiguities in gameplay.

It's no exaggeration. For 4E to play out remotely correctly, you need a battlemap, and markers to move around upon it. I've never played an RPG that was remotely as dependent on this, and I've played a whole lot of RPGs over the years.

HOWEVER, the reason for this is not in any of the basic rules of the game. For the rules of the game, if you just convert 1sq. into 5ft, you're fine. The reason for this is the POWERS themselves. WotC chose to make a very large number of the powers have movement-based effects, i.e. you either move an enemy, or get to move your character a short distance, something that's new to D&D.

So there's no reason a d20 Modern 4E would inherit that. You simply don't create dozens of movement-related powers, and create powers with other effects instead. It's not like there aren't plenty to use.

 

[Ranger REG]

It's no exaggeration. For 4E to play out remotely correctly, you need a battlemap, and markers to move around upon it. I've never played an RPG that was remotely as dependent on this, and I've played a whole lot of RPGs over the years.

HOWEVER, the reason for this is not in any of the basic rules of the game. For the rules of the game, if you just convert 1sq. into 5ft, you're fine. The reason for this is the POWERS themselves. WotC chose to make a very large number of the powers have movement-based effects, i.e. you either move an enemy, or get to move your character a short distance, something that's new to D&D.

So there's no reason a d20 Modern 4E would inherit that. You simply don't create dozens of movement-related powers, and create powers with other effects instead. It's not like there aren't plenty to use.

Unfortunately, to emulate many "Jackie Chan" style cinematic elements, movement-related powers may be necessary.

 

[DarkKestral]

Unfortunately, to emulate many "Jackie Chan" style cinematic elements, movement-related powers may be necessary.

I'd say that for the most part, you could probably go better with powers to redirect damage and stall damage instead of movement; his films from Drunken Master onward tend to favor him staying in one place and redirecting combat around himself.

However, I wouldn't think that features which allow for use of skills in some unusual ways (like say Athletics) would be out of place either.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I have a suggestion on Wealth:

Let's say you have wealth and you can spend 10% of the wealth per session (or game month). You can spend more of the wealth but then it's gone.

So my character's got W: 1000 and I need to gear up and travel to South America fast. I've got 100 to spend on equipment and travel fare. Let's say the whole trip will cost 200. Then I'm left with W: 900. Luckily I stumble upon a golden idol. The golden idol is worth W:0 until I get a chance to liquidate it. I hand it over to a museum and receive a reward of 500. Now my wealth is 1400.

This is simple and semi-realistic. Easy when it comes to handling cash but abstract when it comes to savings, investments, wages, funds, and other means.

 

[Frostmarrow]

You pay for your stuff every session you use it. Let's say I've got a Ferrari in my garage. It won't do me much good on an expedition to Antarctica so owning it won't affect my cash. In another session I use the Ferrari as a power called Fast Wheels and that will cost me in cash 50.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Unfortunately, to emulate many "Jackie Chan" style cinematic elements, movement-related powers may be necessary.

If you want lots of movement, the board should pose no problem, does it?

Though, having played Torg last week, I think you can go "moving" without a board, but you have to keep the movement mechanics abstract. Torg has the "Maneuver" skill which is also an attack skill. You use the skill and cause penalties to the enemy. The skill doesn't tell you how or where you move, just that you do. If you fill in the rest with your imagination, things can be fine.

I am still contemplating on an abstract movement/positioning system that requires no boards but still involves using terrain features.