Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="arscott" data-source="post: 4029611" data-attributes="member: 17969">My experiences with d20 modern bear that out somewhat.&nbsp; But I think a lot of the tactical element remained, for a few reasons.&nbsp; One, of course was that Modern is still very much a tactical game, from a rules standpoint.&nbsp; The other, though, was more complicated.&nbsp; The shift from &quot;action&quot; to &quot;intrigue&quot; was very much a shift from a fast paced, think-with-your-gut experience to something more cerebral.&nbsp; So, circumstances permitting, they usually had fairly complicated tactical plans going into a situation.&nbsp; Of course, the fact that one of the PCs had the plan talent encouraged this too.&nbsp; I'm sure I can come up with quite a few more, though they'd probably get stale pretty quickly.&nbsp; But I think that's a function of the weapon, not the role.&nbsp; Guns are just a lot less versatile that more traditional weapons--They put holes in things, and that's about it.What sort of mechanics do you see being used when a gun-wielding Defender is fighting another gun-wielder?&nbsp; A lot of stuff that I expect 4e fighters to have just doesn't work conceptually with ballistic weapons.Oh, I'm not suggesting that the hacker should suck at combat.&nbsp; I just think that he shouldn't be as good as the gunslinger.&nbsp; I see him as something like a skill-focused 3e rogue.&nbsp; Someone who doesn't focus their character resources toward being good at combat, but nevertheless can have a significant impact with free class abilities like sneak attack.&nbsp; (Ignoring for the moment the rogue's inability to use those abilities against half the monsters in the book and eventual displacement in the arena of skill use by a wizard with the right spell selection).In my d20 Modern Game, the group's hacker was also the group's sniper.&nbsp; Between sniping and hacking in tactical situations, he was basically the &quot;influence the combat from afar&quot; guy.&nbsp; It was pretty cool (and most of the other non-combat characters had similar in-combat shticks).It's just that I, as the GM felt obligated to throw a bunch of random combats at them so just so they (and I, in the capacity of the threats they faced) could use their abilities.&nbsp; That should never happen.&nbsp; Mind you, The one actual combat-focused character rarely got a chance to use his abilities, because they were so conditional in nature.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="arscott, post: 4029611, member: 17969"] My experiences with d20 modern bear that out somewhat. But I think a lot of the tactical element remained, for a few reasons. One, of course was that Modern is still very much a tactical game, from a rules standpoint. The other, though, was more complicated. The shift from "action" to "intrigue" was very much a shift from a fast paced, think-with-your-gut experience to something more cerebral. So, circumstances permitting, they usually had fairly complicated tactical plans going into a situation. Of course, the fact that one of the PCs had the plan talent encouraged this too. I'm sure I can come up with quite a few more, though they'd probably get stale pretty quickly. But I think that's a function of the weapon, not the role. Guns are just a lot less versatile that more traditional weapons--They put holes in things, and that's about it. What sort of mechanics do you see being used when a gun-wielding Defender is fighting another gun-wielder? A lot of stuff that I expect 4e fighters to have just doesn't work conceptually with ballistic weapons. Oh, I'm not suggesting that the hacker should suck at combat. I just think that he shouldn't be as good as the gunslinger. I see him as something like a skill-focused 3e rogue. Someone who doesn't focus their character resources toward being good at combat, but nevertheless can have a significant impact with free class abilities like sneak attack. (Ignoring for the moment the rogue's inability to use those abilities against half the monsters in the book and eventual displacement in the arena of skill use by a wizard with the right spell selection). In my d20 Modern Game, the group's hacker was also the group's sniper. Between sniping and hacking in tactical situations, he was basically the "influence the combat from afar" guy. It was pretty cool (and most of the other non-combat characters had similar in-combat shticks). It's just that I, as the GM felt obligated to throw a bunch of random combats at them so just so they (and I, in the capacity of the threats they faced) could use their abilities. That should never happen. Mind you, The one actual combat-focused character rarely got a chance to use his abilities, because they were so conditional in nature. [/QUOTE]

Verification