d20 modern Failed...why? (or did it?)

[xechnao]

- The Multiclassing focus of the system. I would change the way classes worked, but the general idea of mixing and matching abilities of different classes or roles is sound. It avoids the complexities and imbalances of a fully fledged point buy build system, but still gives a lot of ways to tailor your character and create interesting archetypes (including unusual ones). For example, mix Strong with Smart!

In D&D classes represent tactical roles regarding the adventuring day (old school) or fighting monsters in the "encounter-arena" (modern 4e). How would you envision classes for the modern D20 game and why?

 

[Umbran]

To determine failure or success, we need a well-defined success criteria.

Or, in simple words - d20 Modern failed to do what?

 

[thundershot]

I know I'm probably in the minority, but I'd love a d20 Modern 2nd Edition using the 4E ruleset as a template...

 

[DaveMage]

Or, in simple words - d20 Modern failed to do what?

Continue to be supported by WotC with new product.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In D&D classes represent tactical roles regarding the adventuring day (old school) or fighting monsters in the "encounter-arena" (modern 4e). How would you envision classes for the modern D20 game and why?

Both approaches I would include.

In D20 Modern, Strong/Fast/Tough were basically combat classes (roles), while Smart/Dedicated/Charismatic shined on the non-combat side. I eventually had the idea - but never implemented it - to run a d20 Modern Gestalt game, where people gestalted one physical class with one non-physical class.

There should also be two or more threads on d20 Modern future, one of them started by me. EN World or rather my Internet Connection is terribly slow today, so I will try to find the link another time, or you can search for threads started by me.

 

[Umbran]

Continue to be supported by WotC with new product.

Well, then all games "fail", eventually. All editions of D&D other than 4e have now "failed", by that measure.

 

[maddman75]

To determine failure or success, we need a well-defined success criteria.

Or, in simple words - d20 Modern failed to do what?

Be an interesting game to me.

Honestly, that's all I judge a game by. I don't spend my time worrying about the market or support or anything like that. Of course, by that measure Dogs in the Vineyard and Dread are more successful that 3.5, so I dunno how helpful that is to everyone else.

 

[Derren]

From what I have seen the game was to generic, but without the flexibility offered by real tolbox systems.
It didn't really interest me enough to try it out because of it.

 

[Desert Hare]

Never played D20 Modern. I have played Mutants & Masterminds.

Eliminating superpowers from it or limiting those powers to gadgets is a great way to run a modern/futuristic setting.

 

[xechnao]

Both approaches I would include.

In D20 Modern, Strong/Fast/Tough were basically combat classes (roles), while Smart/Dedicated/Charismatic shined on the non-combat side. I eventually had the idea - but never implemented it - to run a d20 Modern Gestalt game, where people gestalted one physical class with one non-physical class.

There should also be two or more threads on d20 Modern future, one of them started by me. EN World or rather my Internet Connection is terribly slow today, so I will try to find the link another time, or you can search for threads started by me.

So you would have three combat-arena roles: a tough one(defender?), a strong one(striker?) and a fast one (controler???/but how?).

A problem that I see in this approach though is that modern combat-arenas are more about things like taking cover against firearms, spreading fire to keep enemies controlled, positioning to put your enemies under cross-fire, escape and maneuvering routes and generally longer distances or a fluctuation of distances that a certain miniature scale would be good at helping with -if you want miniatures (but D20 is a game build to be used with miniatures).

And then we go to non-combat roles:
So each combatant could choose anyone non combat role of the following three ones: smart guy (a specialist?), dedicated (a...what??) and charismatic (a face/diplomat).

Is this correct?

And what would levels mean? How and in what would one improve?