D&D 3.x D20 Modern: Edition Experience - Did/Do You Play d20 Modern? How Was/Is it?

[atanakar]

34 votes on 49 lean towards the positive or interested in. Not bad at all.

 

[3catcircus]

Tried it, hated it; too generic. "Strong Hero" and "Fast Hero?"

Spycraft 1.0 did d20 Modern better than d20 Modern. Shadowforce Archer was an amazing implementation of science fantasy, conspiracy theories, world-shattering things with Chemical Monsters, Psionics, and Mystics. d20 Dark Matter, no so much.

Twilight:2013 did combat way better than d20 modern.

The various d20 modern setting books (future, ultra modern, apocalypse, cyberscape, future tech, etc.) The old TORG RPG did them way better.

d20 Modern tried to be a jack of all trades and didn't do any of them well. The d20-based mechanics are just terrible at trying to impart any verisimilitude on a setting that the players are more familiar with than the pseudo-medieval trappings of D&D.

 

[Stormonu]

I agree with 3catcircus - Spycraft was far superior than straight-up d20 modern. As was d20 Cthulhu. Probably the best derivative to come out of d20 modern turned out to be Mutants & Masterminds.

I absolutely abhorred d20 Star Wars; it was a mangled mess that did not feel like Star Wars (I can tolerate SAGA, but much prefer WEG D6).

I think a second edition of d20 modern might have possibly saved the system, but it would have required a major rebuild and rethink on the "classes" as well as the power level of the game itself. Low-level characters were too inept, and high-level characters were too superheroic. Current 5E mechanics might be good to produce a new version of Modern, as I think the bounded accuracy will keep things from getting too silly - just HP needs to roped in.

 

[Greg K]

While I prefer other systems (e.g. Savage Worlds) these days, if I had a group wanting a non-D&D fantasy using class/level system, I would have no issue using it provided I did the following:
1. borrow some combat options from D&D Unearthed Arcana and institute a house rule with regard to automatic weapons.
2. bring in parts of Blood and Fists (RPGObjects) for martial arts with the possibility of additional options from the book for certain styles of martial arts campaigns.
3. Replace the official magic fx system with Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth. (EN Publishing) for games using magic.
4. Replace the psionic fx system with The Psychic's Handbook (Green Ronin) which has an option for d20Modern for games using mental powers
5. Use third party genre supplements,

 

[atanakar]

I agree with 3catcircus - Spycraft was far superior than straight-up d20 modern. As was d20 Cthulhu. Probably the best derivative to come out of d20 modern turned out to be Mutants & Masterminds.

I absolutely abhorred d20 Star Wars; it was a mangled mess that did not feel like Star Wars (I can tolerate SAGA, but much prefer WEG D6).

I think a second edition of d20 modern might have possibly saved the system, but it would have required a major rebuild and rethink on the "classes" as well as the power level of the game itself. Low-level characters were too inept, and high-level characters were too superheroic. Current 5E mechanics might be good to produce a new version of Modern, as I think the bounded accuracy will keep things from getting too silly - just HP needs to roped in.

I always started characters at level 3 and never went beyond level 10. Seven levels was enough to spin a good tale.

 

[Greg K]

Honestly, I don't like Spycraft 1e and I like Shadowforce Archer even less. Out of the box...er, book, what I like about Spycraft 1e are wounds and vitality (however, I prefer borrowing some options from the 3e D&D Unearthed Arcana) , Armor as DR being default, its handling of Action Dice, and mission based XP. I even like several of the Weapon Basics and Martial Arts Basics feats. To be honest, I don't recall how Spycraft 1e handled automatic and short burst fire (probably, better than the mechanics for d20Modern). My big turnoff to Spycraft 1e, however, is the classes (and I know for Spycraft 1e fans it is the reverse). I have a strong preference for the Feat and Talent approach of d20 Modern classes to the Spycraft classes (even if I do not like one of the d20 Modern Tough class's Talent trees).

In addition to not liking the Spycraft 1e classes, I dislike Spycraft 1e martial arts beyond the various Basic Feats. For myself, the wire-fu/wuxia focus/feel of martial arts in Spycraft 1e (which the designers state in the rulebook is intentional), is a major turn-off. I also found the Shadowforce Archer Martial Artist class to be a major a disappointment for what I want. While, it is an extra purchase, for d20 Modern, I vastly prefer Blood and Fists from (RPGObjects) both in how it handles martial arts and martial artists. Depending upon the "dials" used, I feel it allows for a wider range of martial arts portrayals as seen in television and movies and just does distinct martial arts styles better.

The above stated, my preference for Espionage would not be either. I would turn to Bond 007, Top Secret SI, Savage Worlds (with the Agents of Oblivion book), or even either GURPS or Hero System. As for modern or future gaming in general, there are several other systems that I would choose before a d20 class/level system, but, as I wrote in an earlier post, I could use d20 Modern if a group really wanted a class/level system.
.

 

[3catcircus]

Honestly, I don't like Spycraft 1e and I like Shadowforce Archer even less. Out of the box...er, book, what I like about Spycraft 1e are wounds and vitality (however, I prefer borrowing some options from the 3e D&D Unearthed Arcana) , Armor as DR being default, its handling of Action Dice, and mission based XP. I even like several of the Weapon Basics and Martial Arts Basics feats. To be honest, I don't recall how Spycraft 1e handled automatic and short burst fire (probably, better than the mechanics for d20Modern). My big turnoff to Spycraft 1e, however, is the classes (and I know for Spycraft 1e fans it is the reverse). I have a strong preference for the Feat and Talent approach of d20 Modern classes to the Spycraft classes (even if I do not like one of the d20 Modern Tough class's Talent trees).

In addition to not liking the Spycraft 1e classes, I dislike Spycraft 1e martial arts beyond the various Basic Feats. For myself, the wire-fu/wuxia focus/feel of martial arts in Spycraft 1e (which the designers state in the rulebook is intentional), is a major turn-off. I also found the Shadowforce Archer Martial Artist class to be a major a disappointment for what I want. While, it is an extra purchase, for d20 Modern, I vastly prefer Blood and Fists from (RPGObjects) both in how it handles martial arts and martial artists. Depending upon the "dials" used, I feel it allows for a wider range of martial arts portrayals as seen in television and movies and just does distinct martial arts styles better.

The above stated, my preference for Espionage would not be either. I would turn to Bond 007, Top Secret SI, Savage Worlds (with the Agents of Oblivion book), or even either GURPS or Hero System. As for modern or future gaming in general, there are several other systems that I would choose before a d20 class/level system, but, as I wrote in an earlier post, I could use d20 Modern if a group really wanted a class/level system.
.

I generally don't like hit points, wounds/vitality, etc. in games that are trying to emulate the world we are familiar with in the modern era. For a more fantastic Bond-esque world or superspies, SPECTRE, etc. I think it works well enough.

Automatic and Burst Fire was relatively straight-forward. Autofire was a full round action for weapons with the Strafe ability. Select a number of 3-round volleys equal to 1/3 of the remaining ammo in your magazine and roll a single attack roll at -1 for every volley. For every 4 whole points your attack roll beats the targets defense, you add one volley to the number that hit. Criticals are only on the first volley. Burst fire was a half-action only for weapons with the burst ability. You could fire narrow or wide bursts with different penalties to attack and different bonuses to damage if you hit and it used 3 rounds each time. Strafing was a full round action that allowed you to attempt to hit multiple targets in adjacent squares as long as you had line of sight to all of them and none of them were blocking each other. You used up to half of the remaining ammo with a -2 attack penalty on every square beyond the first. Compare that attack roll against every targets defense roll one damage roll against all targets hit (GM's optional rule to allow individual attack/damage rolls). It used 2 rounds of ammo per square. Definitely felt cinematic mowing down mooks in this manner.

I tend to agree regarding martial arts, but Blood and Fists is easy to just drop in as a replacement. The Pan-Asian Collective supplement definitely expanded and improved the basic Spycraft unarmed combat feats in that regard, as well. YMMV.

The thing I absolutely love about Spycraft's Shadowforce Archer is in how they treated psionics.

1. Everyone has a psion level of 0. Either take a level in a psionics class or take a feat that raises your psion level.
2. You can only take feats from the psion class you have levels in.
3. Put ranks into the skills that you gain when you take psion feats.
4. Make a skill check to use your fancy psion abilities, along with Concentration checks as necesary.

All that having been said - my absolutely most favoritest system for modern/near-future gameplay is Twilight:2013. Lifepath system - check. A basic game mechanic that feels like it implements realism - check. A damage/wound system that allows for shock, blood loss, reduced effectiveness the more damage you take, and the ability to have "lights out" sniper instakills - check.

 

[atanakar]

The above stated, my preference for Espionage would not be either. I would turn to Bond 007, Top Secret SI, Savage Worlds (with the Agents of Oblivion book), or even either GURPS or Hero System. As for modern or future gaming in general, there are several other systems that I would choose before a d20 class/level system, but, as I wrote in an earlier post, I could use d20 Modern if a group really wanted a class/level system.

I have a very bad memory of Top Secret SI. I shot myself in the right foot while shooting at someone at point blank range. The result came from a table IIRC.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Do you remember the survival horror "The Evil Within"? In the begining, the first stages, the main character needs a lot of stealth, but later with enough weapons and ammo can face hordes of enemies like an one-man-army. It is a game with "leveling-up", or at least with "perks" to improve. If a videogame studio tried a title using a d20 Modern system, it would discover the power balance is broken when the PC get enough weapons and ammo.

 

[Greg K]

I have a very bad memory of Top Secret SI. I shot myself in the right foot while shooting at someone at point blank range. The result came from a table IIRC.

Sounds like your GM made it up (or possibly used unofficial material from other sources). There is the possibility of mishaps (called Bad Breaks), but there is no mention (let alone a chart) of shooting oneself on a mishap in the boxed set . The specific examples of Bad Luck given for firearms in the Player's Guide are included on page 8 among a brief discussion of Bad and Lucky Breaks. The two mentions of firearms are a gun jamming (on a roll of 95-98 which is a minor mishap) or shell causing the gun to jam and bending the fire pin (on a roll of 99).