D20 modern worth it?

[takyris]

Yo, Synic-mon,

First off, thank you for your opinion. I wasn't the one who asked the question, but I do want to see both sides of the argument.

I've gone through the SRD and looked through D20 Modern at Borders -- I'll probably get it after Christmas with the inevitable Borders Gift Cards I get from friends.

As for your complaints -- the lack of new material -- I'm interested and a bit concerned. I glanced at the driving and shooting rules, since driving and shooting, in my mind, were the two big differences between D20 Modern and D&D. I didn't see enough of them to know if they were improvements or not. Bagpuss, I think, seems to dislike some elements of gunplay, thinking it's unrealistic or cumbersome or just plain silly. Haven't heard about the driving yet. Subdual damage is gone, and the massive damage threshold got changed to something more CoC-ish -- both of which I like. I HATED the ability to have 3 hit points, 268 points of subdual damage, and no permanent injuries, though you'd be asleep for a week and a half. Dunno if those are large changes in your opinion, but I'm interested in your opinion.

You complain about the fact that it's fantasy-oriented, and you complain that people are gonna have to do a bunch of their own work, because it's too generic. I'm not attacking you -- I'm just verifying: Those ARE your complaints, right?

For me, at least, I'm a bit bummed that it's fantasy-oriented, but I've always considered SF and Fantasy to be so closely related that in a lot of cases you can squint and be good to go either way. In the campaign I'm thinking about, I won't tell my players beforehand WHAT kind of world they're in. It'll just be the ordinary world, until things begin to get weird -- and they'll have to figure out for themselves what the weirdness is. I don't really want laser blasters in my game, although I could always use the ones in the DMG if necessary. And I don't want magic duct tape in my game, either, but I can just nix that and be done with it.

As for being too generic, that one really doesn't bother me. I've got experienced players. I was planning on making my own monsters from the get-go. I like the weakness charts that the monsters use, and am considering using it -- or at least being more imaginative in what I come up with in my own monsters. So while it's definitely important for someone to know that it's really generic, I don't see that as a bad thing for me. I can get someone psyched about my world with what I put into it. I'm not saying that you can't, and again, I AM saying that it's a good thing to know. Different tastes, different needs, etc.

Anyway.
-Tacky

 

[Bagpuss]

Bagpuss, I think, seems to dislike some elements of gunplay, thinking it's unrealistic or cumbersome or just plain silly.

(snip)

You complain about the fact that it's fantasy-oriented, and you complain that people are gonna have to do a bunch of their own work, because it's too generic. I'm not attacking you -- I'm just verifying: Those ARE your complaints, right?

I'm not complaining that its too fantasy-oriented or even that its too 'heroic / unrealistic" I'm just saying if you wanted a realistic modern game this isn't the one to use.

I am complaining about the gunplay stuff, but to be honest you can live with it and house rule round it. It just the autofire rules are so stupid they should not have got past playtesting.

As for too generic I don't think so, if anything its too tied to D&D with the settings they give as examples, with the same magic system, same monsters.

Say you want to do Highlander, its great, you want to do Witchblade, its okay, you want to do Stargate its possible. You want to do COPS, The Godfather, or something like that, I'd say its probably not best suited to it.

Same say if you want to do Hong Kong style action movies, D20 Modern can do it, but Feng Shui does it better.

D20 Modern isn't bad, its good at what it does, but even with the reduced Massive Damage rules its still really designed for heroic fantasy type gaming, if you want that in a modern setting then D20 Modern is what you want.

 

[Synicism]

Originally posted by takyris As for your complaints -- the lack of new material -- I'm interested and a bit concerned. I glanced at the driving and shooting rules, since driving and shooting, in my mind, were the two big differences between D20 Modern and D&D. I didn't see enough of them to know if they were improvements or not. Bagpuss, I think, seems to dislike some elements of gunplay, thinking it's unrealistic or cumbersome or just plain silly. Haven't heard about the driving yet. Subdual damage is gone, and the massive damage threshold got changed to something more CoC-ish -- both of which I like. I HATED the ability to have 3 hit points, 268 points of subdual damage, and no permanent injuries, though you'd be asleep for a week and a half. Dunno if those are large changes in your opinion, but I'm interested in your opinion.

Don't get me wrong. I think the *best* part about d20 modern is that WotC took a generic approach to the game. Then again, I'm also a big fan of GURPS, HERO, and BESM, so I like multiplatform systems.

I admit that there have been some changes and additions to the game rules. You've mentioned them.

My main gripe about d20 Modern is that it, quite obviously, didn't need to be a big, massive, and expensive book. It added and changed some things (massive damage, etc) and it got rid of some things (subdual), but I just don't think that the total package, as presented, is worth buying a whole separate book for, instead of a supplement for what's already out there.

I guess when I saw the book I was going to have something new and exciting, like I got with Mutants & Masterminds and Spycraft.

Instead, I got a reprint of the core books, a few updates to the syatem, and a little bit of new material in the way of classes, feats, and rules, some of which are just bad (burst fire requires a high wisdom, I hate the class structure they used, etc...).

d20 Modern was a chance for WotC to come up with a d20-based system that took the same tired old D&D mechanics and brought them into the 21st century. We've seen that it's possible with flexible classes and stuff like that (FCTF, M&M, etc.). They had the chance to make a new roleplaying game.

Instead, we got an incremental upgrade to the existing system.

I understand the need for system compatibility. That's a legitimate reason for taking the approach that WotC did. But then it should have just been a supplement.

 

[Synicism]

Originally posted by Bagpuss D20 Modern isn't bad, its good at what it does, but even with the reduced Massive Damage rules its still really designed for heroic fantasy type gaming, if you want that in a modern setting then D20 Modern is what you want.

Is it?

I thought Dragonstar proved that the Players' Handbook handles exactly this kind of game perfectly adequately.

That being said, if this is what d20-Modern is best at, what is the point to buying it if I've got it already in my D&D library?

 

[Razuur]

I agree with a lot here.

I too had issues with the combat system and feel that Spycraft or SAS handled autofire much better.

I really did not like the fantasy creatures. It was said that it was only 20%.... but 20%! THat is a heck of a chunk of the book to ignore with a price tag that high.

And then there is the inspiration. Yeah, there were a few mini (very mini) campaigns, but for me they were largely uninspiring. The art was ininspiring.

I like that it is generic. I really like the Allegiance system. I think I like the wealth system. I hate the autofire/burst rules, and the whole thing seems very "dry" rather than exciting.

And I have played GURPS, and I find the gurps core rules more interesting. I have just been disappointed w/ WOTC lately. I think they are not living up to what they could be doing.

But dems the breaks. Get it for the rules, and get another modern system so that you can choose which rules fit the situation best.

Razuur

 

[Unseelie]

Well, the #1 answer I suspect would be that you're one of those people that doesn't play fantasy and resented the idea of having to buy the PBH so you could play something else.

Reprinting the core rules was, I suspect, a calculated business decision, and one that I also suspect, will pay off.

 

[Unseelie]

I really did not like the fantasy creatures. It was said that it was only 20%.... but 20%! THat is a heck of a chunk of the book to ignore with a price tag that high.

I'm not trying to weaken your point, but actually, the creatures account for less than 15% of the book.

 

[Razuur]

None of that is true.

i love Fantsy and play it all of the time.

I just wanted a inspiring set of modern rules.

I fork over tons of money on RP... Redundancy in rules is not an issue.

Just my opinion thats all. I respect yours. Please respect mine.

Razuur.

 

[Hollywood]

In a nutshell, yes its worth it. I would get it and the SRD files, or the big .pdf file someone made. Can't remember the location of it.

Yeah, read the SRD first.. if you like the rules presented in it, then buy d20 Modern.

Personally, I had a good laugh when I read the d20 Modern SRD... so no, I won't be buying d20 Modern or any other d20 game system [outside of Spycraft which I bought and like] that isn't D&D, and only D&D because the majority of the group I game with like it.

 

[Mistwell]

For those who have not read d20M yet, please know that the rules really are significantly changed.

I'm going to get some people saying "which ones" and some people saying "not that many rules have changed", so let me address both preemptively as best I can.

Let me take the second group first. the "not many rules have changed". If you think not that many rules have changed, I strongly suspect you skimmed the book, rather than reading all the words. Most rules have the same, or similar, titles to those in the Player's Handbook for D&D. But the text of those rules have, for the most part, changed. All the FAQ's, the errata, much of the sage advice, new playtesting, and alterations to make the rule more "modern", went in to the d20M rules. They are all streamlined, and many have major (though subtle) mechanics changes in them. You really have to read d20M closely to figure out what has changed.

As for the first group asking "which ones", we have not even figured out which rules have changed yet, since the book has less than a month of shelf time to date. I know there are several threads here, and many more at the official WOTC boards, trying to gather all the information on where the rules differ. But do know that it isn't JUST the new classes, massive damage rule, defense points, wealth system, alliegence, guns, or car chases. Most of the skills and feats are worded differently (and for the better). Most of the combat section is also worded differently (and for the better). The whole damn book is worded differently than the Player's Handbook, and for the better.

Frankly, when I go back to playing D&D again (which will be a long time, since I am now 100% addicted to d20 Modern), I will be referencing the d20 Modern book a lot. That's because it is truly the best incarnation of the d20 rules yet, and it explains so much about the core rules in such a better, and more complete, manner.

Don't try to labor through the d20M SRD. That will kill the feel of this game (imagine if all you ever saw of D&D was the SRD!). Go buy the book, or put it on your list for the Holidays. And then read it...REALLY read it, don't just skim over it and go "yeah yeah yeah, Knowledge skills, Two-weapon fighting, blah blah same old same old". It isn't the same.