D20 modern worth it?

[Hollywood]

Exactly, which is why they get a cover bonus... there's less to hit, therefore they're harder to hit.

Yes, that takes care of the cover aspect.

d20 combat is abstract when it comes to whether you hit
or not.

Thats why you can sunder a weapon? Which is attempting to hit a specific part of a combatant. To me there is little difference in attempting to whack a weapon or attempting to whack someone in the head.

I don't see the problem. d20M is effectively a hollywood action movie RPG... not ultra-realistic.

Even action movies don't just shoot everyone in the torso!

My only difficulty with this is that I have not yet seen it implemented in any game in such a way as to be easy to use.

It was done in the fighter's book pretty well back in 2nd Ed. Doesn't need to be anything too complex, say a -4 to hit for heads, arms, legs, -8 for hands and feet, -16 for smaller. Generates a threat. And maybe adds one to the power of the critical if successful or the attacker can choose an effect, say hand being cut off, etc.

Used something similar in nature in WEG SW and it worked fine without slowing down the action.

To me, heroes are supposed to rise above these kinds of things, a la Wesley and Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride.

Not everyone's game is a romantic fantasy comedy.

However, Ryan Dancey made an excellent point about this at www.gamingreport.com - if there were a system as easy to use as hit points, that had specific wound locations, but did not slow the heroes down appreciably as to prevent them from taking heroic actions despite their disabilities - I would be all over it in a flash, and d20 Modern would be the primary candidate for such a system.

Just because Dancey or those who designed d20 can't come up with a good way, doesn't mean it that such a system doesn't exist or that others can't implement it.

Fact of the matter, you can create a simple system that is abstract enough to work with the hit point system, works within the framework of the current rules and gives the illusion to the players of allowing more choice in combat rather than "hack, hack, hack at the torso all the live long day". In fact, I did so above. :/

And just because a hero rises above his disabilities, doesn't mean they don't effect them even in action movies...

 

[Bagpuss]

Even closer than that - we're not even talking completely different languages, more like dialects of the same one!

Ah but the problem there is you 'think' you know what you're saying when actually it means something else.

"I'm going to smoke a fag." means different things either side of the Atlantic.

Same with D20, sometimes its safe to get up form prone other times its leaves you open to attack.... still never mind I imagine that's one of the thing they are going to change in the revised version of the D&D rules.

 

[Synicism]

I don't see the problem. d20M is effectively a hollywood action movie RPG... not ultra-realistic.

Here are a few relatively common scenarios to help clarify:

1. You need to drop someone without killing him, so you shoot him in the leg.

2. You're a master archer hunting a vampire, and you want to stake him through the heart with a wooden-shafted arrow.

3. You're a dirty fighter, so instead of just punching someone, you eye-rake him.

4. Someone is trying to chase you, so you slam his weapon arm in a door.

When your combat system boils down to ticking off hit points, you lose a lot of cinematic moves that are very common in hollywood action movies because they simply don't mean anything. I would have liked to have effects for these sorts of maneuvers.

 

[Synicism]

I have looked at GURPS, Alternity, Rolemaster, Harnmaster, and several D&D variants trying to do this thing - and every one of them was too slow, too chart oriented, amd destroyed the action. To me, heroes are supposed to rise above these kinds of things, a la Wesley and Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride.

Even heroes in John Woo action movies stagger when they get shot in the leg or drop things when they get hit in the arm. Even Jet Li's wire-fu heroes flailed around when they got hit in the eyes and even Arnold Schwarzzeneger crumpled when Sharon Stone kicked him in the groin in Total Recall.

I've played a lot of GURPS - almost as much as D&D. Generally speaking, when you have experienced players, combat takes pretty much the same amount of real-world gaming time. Any time you introduce a novice to the system, things bog down. When we first bought D&D3rd, it took us *longer* to resolve combat that it did with our GURPS campaigns because we had to figure out when you got Attacks of Opportunity, what exactly our attack bonuses were, and so on. Once you get past the learning curve both D&D and GURPS are pretty quick. The difference is in the level of detail that you get during that 20 minutes of dice-rolling.

 

[Perpetrated Press]

Should have been a just supplement?

Several posters here have suggested that d20 Modern could have been just a supplementary 100-page book to the PHB and DMG.

Also, most of the comments have only touched on the rules presented in the book. But there is more to it than that. It's at thing called marketing.

By publishing a very high-quality, substantial, and attractive book, WotC is saying to the other d20 publishers out there: "Look at this! We're investing a lot of money in d20 Modern, and we're going to support it." They didn't invest in a book of this quality only to let it wither away.

When I (or , Sword & Sorcery, Green Ronin, Mongoose, or Malhavoc) look at this book I see quality. I see a definite effort at producing something that will get players excited. I see two years of improvements from the PHB. I see ingenious solutions to modern issues. I see real thought, playtesting, and design skill. I see something worth making a 3rd-party supplement for.

Does anyone here actually think that a 100-page Modern splatbook would garner the industry support that this book will? Would you be as impressed with it if were 1/3 the size and had the quality of Tome and Blood, etc.? And you wouldn't be saving any money. A 100-page supplement would cost $20, just like the other splatbooks. Then you'd have to buy the PHB at $20 and the DMG at $20. Then you'd be searching through 3 books for the rule you wanted. No, WotC went the right way by creating one self-contained book.

WotC needs d20 Publishing community to embrace d20 Modern because the more supplements that get made, the more d20 Modern books get sold. They have made a grand statement with this book. And we publishers have taken notice.

 

[Hollywood]

The difference is in the level of detail that you get during that 20 minutes of dice-rolling.

Yes... good points in both cases Synicism.

Originally posted by Perpetrated PressWhen I (or , Sword & Sorcery, Green Ronin, Mongoose, or Malhavoc) look at this book I see quality. I see a definite effort at producing something that will get players excited. I see two years of improvements from the PHB. I see ingenious solutions to modern issues. I see real thought, playtesting, and design skill. I see something worth making a 3rd-party supplement for.

I'd buy a RPG thats all be photocopied from a master document if the rules and settings were quality. I don't need to ooh and aah over the books... I'm not collecting them to set on a shelf, I got them to use because of the content. d20 Modern, to me, brings nothing that gets me excited, although it give me a good chuckle.

However, I would be interested in what you consider "ingenious solutions to modern issues"... perhaps I'm missing something.

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

Re: Should have been a just supplement?

<snip>
By publishing a very high-quality, substantial, and attractive book, WotC is saying to the other d20 publishers out there: "Look at this! We're investing a lot of money in d20 Modern, and we're going to support it."

<snip>

When I (or , Sword & Sorcery, Green Ronin, Mongoose, or Malhavoc) look at this book I see quality. I see a definite effort at producing something that will get players excited. I see two years of improvements from the PHB. I see ingenious solutions to modern issues. I see real thought, playtesting, and design skill. I see something worth making a 3rd-party supplement for.

Does anyone here actually think that a 100-page Modern splatbook would garner the industry support that this book will?
<snip>

No, WotC went the right way by creating one self-contained book.

WotC needs d20 Publishing community to embrace d20 Modern because the more supplements that get made, the more d20 Modern books get sold. They have made a grand statement with this book. And we publishers have taken notice.

Very well said. If D20 Modern wasn't an impressive product that looked like it was going to be supported, what 3rd party publisher would want to touch it?
I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out for it. There's so many ways to expand D20 Modern that a publisher could take it in any direction.
Martial arts expansions, hi-tech near-futuristic, cyberpunk, near-past WWII, civil war, old west, gangster/prohibition era, pulp heroes, mecha, super heroes, anime, anthro/mutant PCs ala TMNT... The list goes on.

 

[Henry]

Even heroes in John Woo action movies stagger when they get shot in the leg or drop things when they get hit in the arm. Even Jet Li's wire-fu heroes flailed around when they got hit in the eyes and even Arnold Schwarzzeneger crumpled when Sharon Stone kicked him in the groin in Total Recall.

Yes, but they still cinematically recover, despite the pain, a la the stagger that Inigo Montoya undergoes when stabbed in the gut in "The Princess Bride." Some systems I have seen pretty much cripple you too much for your wounded character to even have a chance at succeeding. Penalties to certain actions are fine; but some systems impose as much as a 30 to 40% reduction of capability for wounds to gut, chest, hand, arm, leg, etc.! All realistic, but too "unfun" when your hero needs to have a chance to overcome all odds.

I've played a lot of GURPS - almost as much as D&D. Generally speaking, when you have experienced players, combat takes pretty much the same amount of real-world gaming time. Any time you introduce a novice to the system, things bog down. When we first bought D&D3rd, it took us *longer* to resolve combat that it did with our GURPS campaigns because we had to figure out when you got Attacks of Opportunity, what exactly our attack bonuses were, and so on. Once you get past the learning curve both D&D and GURPS are pretty quick. The difference is in the level of detail that you get during that 20 minutes of dice-rolling.

I claim some truth on this, except when looking at GURPS' most advanced rules for combat, the part that makes it ultra realistic. The simple rules are quite breezy to play, but the masty parts come in when you look at the advanced conditions.

Other systems such as Alternity suffer from this also. You get whole DIE STEPS of penalty when wounded in that game. One or two die steps is fun, but taking one die step per point of Mortal wound has made more than one player in our games roll over and quit, because they was almost NO chance of succeeding in a task. Realistic when your guts have been savaged by a shotgun burst, but again, "unfun" when you are the only thing standing between a madman's wish fulfillment and a happy ending.

 

[JPL]

Here are a few relatively common scenarios to help clarify:

1. You need to drop someone without killing him, so you shoot him in the leg.

2. You're a master archer hunting a vampire, and you want to stake him through the heart with a wooden-shafted arrow.

3. You're a dirty fighter, so instead of just punching someone, you eye-rake him.

4. Someone is trying to chase you, so you slam his weapon arm in a door.

1. You could take a -4 to do non-lethal damage, although that wouldn't simulate the leg injury (just like Book on Firefly, huh?).

2. That's covered by the critical hit mechanic.

3. Take a -4 to do lethal damage, for starters, although again this wouldn't simulate the specific injury.

4. If your intent is to disarm, treat it as a disarm, treating the door as a Large improvised weapon (-4, as I recall).

So -4 seems to be a good starting point for shots which do more than just hit.

Personally, I'd only allow a called shot to cause a specific injury if it cause enough damage to require a massive damage check. If they miss the check, they are down (and probably need some serious work on their eyes or kneecap or whatever). If they make the check, they're still temporarily disabled in that body part (as per that little chart in the DMG).

Alternately, a called shot (at -4) is treated as a normal hit unless it's a critical, in which case it causes normal damage (not crit) PLUS a specific injury.

If it's easier than that, PCs and NPCs alike will always shoot for the kneecap and gouge the eyes, and by 5th level everyone will be blind and crippled.

 

[takyris]

1. You need to drop someone without killing him, so you shoot him in the leg:

Just shoot him and make the heal check?
Or you could make a feat that lets you do this. Doing something like this isn't necessarily easy -- someone trying to shoot someone in the leg could hit a femoral artery or something.

If this isn't a fanatic you're dealing with, reducing him to 10% or less of normal hit points should result in something like this. As a DM, I'd consider anything at really low hit points to be non-fatally shot in such a manner. He gets shot, he's at low hit points, he falls down.

2. You're a master archer hunting a vampire, and you want to stake him through the heart with a wooden-shafted arrow.

For that specific case, where the shot does nothing except on a hit to the heart, consider it a shot at a Fine (-4 to hit) object being held by an opponent (-5 to hit) (on top of the Vampire's natural armor and dodge bonus and all), and on a hit, give the vamp a Reflex save equal to the attack roll to get out of the way or catch the arrow or something equally cinematic.

3. You're a dirty fighter, so instead of just punching someone, you eye-rake him.

Handled by current damage rules. Character hits enemy for piddly amount of damage. Enemy misses on next attack. DM says "You didn't hurt him much with that eye rake, but he's momentarily blinded, and his next attack goes wide."

The rules assume you're doing everything in your power to hurt people. You don't add a rule for kicking people in the groin. You add a rule for if they AREN'T doing that. As in, a moral code that gives you a -2 penalty to hit because you're passing up dirty fighting opportunity, but a +1 on saves because you're so firm in your belief or what have you.

4. Someone is trying to chase you, so you slam his weapon arm in a door.

Treat as a disarm, or a large improvised weapon trying to do damage.

All off-hand, but that's how I'd handle it.

I think you're looking for hard rules on what was consciously chosen to be cinematic.

-Tacky