Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 2724651" data-attributes="member: 5171">Actually, I both agree and disagree. On one hand, I like magic, and in my completely anecdotal evidence, most d20 Modern games I've played in have had some form of FX, be it SF or Fantasy  or Horror. So saying "No FX in the campaign settings" strikes me as silly.However, on the flip-side, I do think that Urban Arcana and Shadow Hunters are too close. It's like the difference between, say, Buffy and Supernatural. They aren't the same in feel, exactly, but they could easily be two perspectives on the same universe. My personal opinion is that the reason the campaign settings are there is to give GMs some standard settings to work with. That's fine, but I'd rather that the campaign settings be there to give the GMs examples of how to incorporate different optional rules (incantations, spellcasting, psionics) to make the campaign with the flavor that he wants -- with the campaign examples useful for campaigns for folks who want to run those campaigns, but different enough from each other that they're useful as "Here's how to make a _____-type game" tips.For example, I'd love to see several different campaign settings -- to be reasonable-ish, say maybe three of the following (with each having a few advanced classes, a few new feats, a few sub-rules, possibly a new rule-sub-system):Horror: Add a simple shock-and-trauma mechanic (since sanity is a trademarked term?), explain how to change the flavor of the standard D&D spells to make them horrific, explain how anyone can cast spells by making Kn(Arcane) checks but takes s-and-t damage for doing so, lower the massive damage threshold of characters by 5. (So an 18-Con guy, or a 15-Con guy with Improved Damage Threshold, has an MDT of 13.) Demon-summoner and Abjurer as advanced classes.Wuxia: Add wuxia-feats for crazy uses of existing skills (a feat to use Climb to run up a wall, a feat to use Jump leap a huge distance, a feat to use Hide to turn invisible, likely x/day, with an Action Point spent for each time after x, or something like that). Add sub-rules for incorporating skills into combat (using jump for leaping attacks, using balance to slide across smooth surfaces, using climb to swing from a rope as part of a charge). Add Styles, an additional class feature like Occupations, that give cool abilities like Chuck's Blood & Vigilance stuff. Add several Advanced Classes that modify the Martial Artist for different flavor.Investigative: Add expanded rules for using the Investigate, Search, and Knowledge skills, including advice for how the GM can give information in such a way that the player still feels cool giving that information to the team (who, in a real-life game, has just heard the GM say the same thing). Add expanded legal rules, including uses for Diplomacy and Knowledge(Civics), and a trial system modeled after d20 combat (the Prosecutor has X rounds to reduce the Defense to 0 case points, for example). Add expanded rules for how a Dedicated1/Tough1 security guard can be killed by what forensics reveals to be a single wrench-blow to the back of the head -- either a firm delineation between game events and plot events, or more lethal rules for attacks on unsuspecting opponents (effective coup de grace attacks, or automatic massive damage saves, or something). Expansions on the Investigator and Negotiator Advanced Classes.Fantasy: As Urban Arcana and/or Shadow Chasers.Espionage: As much as can be lifted from Spycraft, like a host of cool spy-type gadgets, rules for chases, and so forth. Expanded rules for Hide and Bluff under different circumstances, and expanded rules for hurrying up a Disable Device or Repair check. Expanded takes on the Infiltrator, Negotiator, and Field Scientists Advanced Classes.The thing is, though, that I can understand the decision to put in two fantasy settings, because then you get to use the spell section twice. On one hand, it's repetitive, but on the other hand, that lessens the chance that a reader is going to say "Why is this garbage here? I don't want to play a ____ game", as I at least did for the psionics section. It seems like the choices here, and I don't know which of these is the best, are:1) Shorten those sections, so that someone who doesn't intend to have D&D-like magic only has three or four "useless" pages. The good news is that you can always expand in campaign setting books after figuring out what's popular. The bad news is that with so little crossover, you've really only got a few pages to explain the FX-specialness of your world. (Only a few pages to explain how an Investigative campaign is special, or how Horror is different from Fantasy.)2) Make the FX-system sort of universal, so that it doesn't matter whether that Charm Person is coming from a demon's binding geas (Horror), sheer domination through chi-power (Wuxia), a Diplomacy-check-powered grilling that the detective throws down  in order to make a suspect talk (Investigative), or a Bluff that turns the evil mastermind's hot female sidekick to work with you (Espionage) -- it's always Will save, DC11+Cha, or be turned to Friendly. The good news is that that lets you re-use a lot of spells -- a demon's hellfire looks like a chi-master's explosive-chi-blast looks like a mad scientist's cesium-ignition projector, and they all look like a D&D fireball. The bad news is that people who really disliked all of D&D magic (not just the spells/day rule, but the very way those spells worked) have a lot more trouble extricating themselves from those FX.3) Don't make spell lists, psionic lists, gadget lists, and so forth. Instead, provide guidelines for how to make the FX for the campaign you want, including how to price the item or determine the level or mana cost or whatever, based on how much damage it does, what range it has, how many charges it's got, or how big a bonus it gives. The good news is that this really lets people do what they want. The bad news is that, well, it takes work, and not all GMs are willing to do that -- and not all players are willing to learn. It's a good system for a dedicated group (and I'm aware that several folks here have gone that route in major publications), but it's not a good thing to put into a game that you're trying to sell to first-time players. (This also raises the question of whether d20 Modern IS selling to first-time players, but that's another thread entirely.)Okay, that's enough rambling for now. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification