d20 Modern: Too much FX?

[Graf]

There are alot of genres that it's NOT a part of, but unlike cooking, it's actually easier to take something OUT of an RPG than it is to put it in.

I see this as being 90% of the reason.

Here’s an alternative way to think about it:

(I’m stealing some of these ideas from Teflon Billy’s recent review of Game of Thrones).
People want complexity in their games. If everyone is a fighter then the game gets boring after a while. The trick with modern games is that no-one wants to have a required “default” system that is too complex.
Like Gurps. It’s a fine system but most games don’t really require you to have all those absurdly complex skill choices and the overwhelming number of different feats (sorry advnatages); all of which have point costs that can only be justified in the context of the whole system but which are easy for someone to break and wreck the game for everyone.
Yeah, there are things in the world that are complex and important, cryptology, the stock market, child locks on doors; but to make it fun this is all simplified.

So Modern, like White Wolf’s new world, has a relatively simple base system.
And then they paste on lots of alternative systems to provide the mechanical complexity that Billy was mentioning people wanting.

I mean…. F/X stuff is added in because it fulfills a different role; it is made up and precisely as complex as it is and if someone doesn’t like it they say “this is how it should actually work”. Yeah horse riding and handling is stupidly complex in the real world, you could have an exciting and wonderful game with pcs playing cowboys in the old west with just horses and guns and cows to herd.
But it would always be an attempt to mimic a real system, people who like horses wouldn’t like it because they disagreed with the author or the level of detail or what have you and the vast majority of players aren’t going to be into checking for “stirrup failure”.

So additional rules for non-magical games are fraught with threat and danger for a designer.

Magic in d20 plays –very- differently from magic in DnD. Yeah some of the stuff uses the same components but try playing a wizard or casting a fireball…

Have you tried GURPS? its not my cup of tea but you can make a modern game about as complex as you could ever possibily want with it.

 

[King of Old School]

I feel this way, too. I really think that there should've been a sample non-Fx setting, just to show how it's done. I dunno, some sort of techno-thrillerish setting without any funky gengineered freaks or psionics. As is, d20 Modern comes with a "D&D in modern times, yay!" setting, a Buffyish setting that really could've been the first with just a darker lens, and one where we rub out magic and type in psionics. I was *sorely* disappointed with d20 Modern.

Pity that ShadowForce Archer died before releasing the Company and Brotherhood books.

I'm a little confused here... doesn't your second paragraph directly contradict your first?

KoOS

 

[Raptor]

If you are looking for a decent non FX D20 Modern game look into Swords Edge Publishing, they have some decent stuff out there for more realistic gaming.

 

[Desdichado]

What's your take on Modern FX?

Depends on the setting. I kinda do like a bit of occult, but I like to keep it somewhere between Hellboy and X-files level (and similar to both in style), so the default F/X for all the mini-settings except for maybe Shadow Chasers (and Genetech too, I guess) are way too over-the-top for me.

I've also used d20 Call of Cthulhu F/X with d20 Modern before, and been happy with the results. It means adding Sanity into the mix, but I like Sanity anyway.

And for some other settings, I would totally use d20 Modern rules with absolutely no F/X at all.

 

[The Shaman]

What people often forget is that Campaign settings, at least as they are presented in modern, serve to differentiate the setting from the real world, not to describe it in it's entirety. Thus, the core book had four different settings: Agents of Psi, Shadow Chasers, Unearthed Arcana, and the real world. Guess which one took up two thirds of the book.

Calling the basic mechanics commont to running all d20 Modern games a "real-world campaign model" seems a bit of a stretch to me.

Of course there are those who say that having that FX portion means they're paying for a third of a book that they'll never use. But then again, there are folks who use just a some of the FX and complain about a quarter or fifth of the book they'll never use. And there are folks who run using 3rd party AdCs or base classes only, who don't use an entirely different portion of the book than those who decry FX....My moral is this: If you object to d20M FX on the grounds that it's clunky, or it's poorly balanced, or it doesn't take modern innovations into account, or it's got a stupid name, then good for you. I might even agree with you. But If you object because the FX system is taking up precious book space, then quit your whining.

arscott, discussion and constructive criticism aren't "whining." Disagree if you like, but please don't be dismissive - your opinion is worth exactly the same as everyone else's.

Are some people disatisfied no matter what? Probably - some people are just hard to please. Are there valid criticisms of how FX is presented in d20 Modern? I think so, so while a certain measure of disatisfaction with whatever gets published may be a part of human nature, another approach might improve on gamers' enjoyment of d20 Modern, and perhaps more importantly, draw more people to the game.

A number of posts have suggested that d20 Modern isn't really suited to no-FX games, or that other games like Spycraft handle it better - my experience is quite different, so I wonder how much of that is reinforced by the heavy emphasis on FX in the campaign models. If the core rules and supplements offered a good example of a no-FX Modern game, would that increase the draw for gamers who pick up d20 Modern, see magic...magic...psionics...genetech...and move on to something else, because that's not what they're looking for? It seems like a fair question to ask.

 

[Ranger REG]

Calling the basic mechanics commont to running all d20 Modern games a "real-world campaign model" seems a bit of a stretch to me.arscott, discussion and constructive criticism aren't "whining." Disagree if you like, but please don't be dismissive - your opinion is worth exactly the same as everyone else's.

Are some people disatisfied no matter what? Probably - some people are just hard to please. Are there valid criticisms of how FX is presented in d20 Modern? I think so, so while a certain measure of disatisfaction with whatever gets published may be a part of human nature, another approach might improve on gamers' enjoyment of d20 Modern, and perhaps more importantly, draw more people to the game.

I agree with the statement that people are just hard to please. They simply want a striclty no-FX rulebook. The FX material presented in d20 Modern are not as integrated or scattered like those in, say the Oriental Adventures book (it's hard to ignore the Rokugan associated texts, even mentions in the first few chapters).

The FX chapters are way in the back.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those GURPS Basic Set books have some stuff that you can run a game -- be it FX or not -- right off, without picking up a necessary worldbook?

 

[The Shaman]

I agree with the statement that people are just hard to please. They simply want a striclty no-FX rulebook.

For some people, I'm sure that's true - for others, it's somewhere along a spectrum from no-FX to a mixture of FX and non-FX to all-FX all the time.

I'd like to see more love for the no-FX campaign models, but not see FX rules and game models eliminated altogether.

 

[Ranger REG]

I'd like to see more love for the no-FX campaign models, but not see FX rules and game models eliminated altogether.

Personally, I'd shelf d20 Superheroes and do a military-themed (WW II?) splatbook.

Bwah ha ha.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Personally, I'd shelf d20 Superheroes and do a military-themed (WW II?) splatbook.

Bwah ha ha.

In all honesty, I'd like to see that as well. While I know there are quite a few that will get a lot of use out of D20 Superheroes (I may even end up being one of them), I personally would get a lot more use out of a WW2 sourcebook instead.

 

[C. Baize]

Instead?

How about in addition?