D20 Modern in 2007?

[Ranger REG]

d20M is great system that's simply lacking a "killer app," at least from WotC.

Well, I've always said that a game is not complete if you have rules without a setting. Though it may not apply to D&D 4e (at least from what I've been hearing).

But then, how does GURPS gets to be a major player? I couldn't recall one "killer app" that helped GURPS stay this long.

 

[buzz]

Well, I've always said that a game is not complete if you have rules without a setting. Though it may not apply to D&D 4e (at least from what I've been hearing).

Not to derail the thread, but D&D does have a setting, i.e., the implied setting and "core story" that makes ti so much easier to produce adventures, as mentioned above. At least, there's a lot more there than in d20M or most other toolkit RPGs.

But then, how does GURPS gets to be a major player? I couldn't recall one "killer app" that helped GURPS stay this long.

Good point. I'd venture to say that both HERO and GURPS benefited from being pretty much the first toolkit RPGs, and thus are sort of unique w/r/t our discussion. (Though Champions is the most popular HERO line by far, and it has a very well-developed, involved setting.)

While I think it's possible for subsequent toolkit RPGs to succeed (I'd offer FUDGE as an example), I don't think you're ever going to see one generate kick-ass sales without some sort of hook, a la a compelling setting.

 

[Prest0]

For myself, I'd LIKE to write modules, but I don't know that there'd be a market for them. It has long been my intention to create a line of modules for the conspiracy/occult thriller genre that I like to work in ... but:

a) I think a defined "setting" may be required to draw/keep a critical market level
(snip)

Then maybe you should try writing something for our Pinebox setting.

 

[hobgoblin]

Not to derail the thread, but D&D does have a setting, i.e., the implied setting and "core story" that makes ti so much easier to produce adventures, as mentioned above. At least, there's a lot more there than in d20M or most other toolkit RPGs.

your thinking of greyhawk?

 

[jezter6]

I wouldn't so much give it a name (Ie: Greyhawk), but it has that standard (as Vig put it - Tolkien-Howard) implied nature of fantasy. Elves, dragons, magic, middle age technology, etc. You guys call it 'setting' but I call it subgenre. Much like modern has urban arcana, straight modern, modern military, apoc - and the many sub-sub genres of apoc, future - and the many sub-sub genres of future, etc.

Fantasy - because it is not reality - gives the GM some lee way in involving characters in a given plot. A fantasy military adventure could pull the PCs in as mercs for the king, where a d20 modern military adventure doesn't allow the same freedom. We know the setting, and we know how things go, and mercs are not quite as prevalent in a modern setting (with the understanding that they do exist, but are not likely).

A fantasy adventure featuring a dragon is likely usable in 90% of fantasy campaigns, as dragons are a fantasy standard. A modern adventure featuring a dragon is NOT a modern standard, and are only usable in that certain arcana subgenre of modern.

 

[buzz]

your thinking of greyhawk?

jezter6 basically sums up what I mean. D&D has a number of very strong assumptions about how things work and the default mode of play. So much so that you don't even really need to identify what world your campaign is set in; you can roll up PCs and run through adventures and never even broach the subject of whether you're playing FR, GH, or a homebrew. D&D works "out of the box" that way.

Toolkit RPGs, otoh, don't.

 

[Salcor]

I concur with everything that has been said here. I think if you look at the different ways of playing, really there are some campaign worlds that exist out there. With the WOTC release of Dark Matter, it could easily become the default campaign setting for D20 Modern ala Greyhawk. And the nice thing about it, is that it contains all the liitle quirky things people are seeing in the Modern fiction. It is definately X-file reincarnated, but the other things like Supernatural, the Dresden Files, FIrestarter, etc all fit into this campaign world. All the other subgenres can be tied into this. For the other genres it varies, for Future you have PA which Darwin's World pretty much has hands down, Science Fantasy is Star Wars, but Dragonstar or Fading Suns could easily be converted to D20 Modern. And for Space Opera Dawning Star is a STRONG contender, with D20 Traveller competing as well (although not D20 Modern). I just don't think it would be economically feasable for WOTC to release a default setting for all these subgenres. So it is best to leave them to 3rd party publishers, however I do think that they need to update the SRD to give these publisher access to some of the information.


Salcor

 

[buzz]

I just don't think it would be economically feasable for WOTC to release a default setting for all these subgenres.

Oh, neither do I. I was thinking of just one, maybe either UrA or D*M, and doing it up they way they do FR or Eberron. E.g., a lavish setting book, a tie-in novel or two, etc.

 

[Prest0]

Oh, neither do I. I was thinking of just one, maybe either UrA or D*M, and doing it up they way they do FR or Eberron. E.g., a lavish setting book, a tie-in novel or two, etc.

Oh man! I'd loooove a shot at writing a D*M tie-in novel.

 

[Ranger REG]

Not to derail the thread, but D&D does have a setting, i.e., the implied setting and "core story" that makes ti so much easier to produce adventures, as mentioned above. At least, there's a lot more there than in d20M or most other toolkit RPGs.

You missed the part where I stated "4e." It may not have a default setting, but I wouldn't be surprised if they offer 3 campaign models (intros to GH, FR, and EB).

Heck, we might as well rename it "d20 Fantasy," though it doesn't have that sweet ring as "Dungeons & Dragons."