Has enthusiasm died?

[Desdichado]

Well, that's true. It's not seriously handicapped I suppose, but I have no interest at all in using the systems presented with the game. I'm really looking forward to what Badaxe does to Modern with their Grim Tales book, actually. That sounds like it's much more to my taste.

 

[jcfiala]

Yeah, the wealth system is so horrible, that folks on the T20 Traveller message boards are talking about how to incorporate it into the Traveller game. As far as the bullet point questions, I'd have to look again to be sure, but I seem to recall that most of those questions could have been answered by repeating "It's in the book, try actually reading it for a change." But then, I feel the same about most of the questions in Sage Advice too.

I like the wealth system so much I'm considering adding it to my CoC game. And this isn't d20 CoC - I'm talking old-style BRP Call of Cthulhu.

I've been reading the d20 Modern SRD, and I'm liking it more the more I look at it... and I'm sketching out a possible gameworld to maybe try publishing as a PDF.

-john

 

[Ranger REG]

I don't completely agree. What, because you believe that, we should all stop talking about it? I believe d20 Modern is a great system that's been seriously handicapped by the D&Disms attached to it.

And I disagree. The very last thing I want for Wizards to do is follow the same STOOPID BUSINESS mistake that TSR once did: make many completely different products for small audience. Yes, Alternity may have been a fine product, but not ALL of TSR Customers, the majority of which are D&D fans and Player's Handbook owners, didn't buy it. At least, I haven't.

So what if d20 Modern has a D&D stigma? Big effin' deal! Wizards is smart enough to know what comprised of their largest RPG customer base (D&D fans). They gotta know how to pitch a completely new product to them. If they have to do it by way of showing the D&D fans that they can do a D&D game using a modern ruleset as a way to boost sale of d20 Modern by all means ... DO IT!

 

[buzz]

If they have to do it by way of showing the D&D fans that they can do a D&D game using a modern ruleset as a way to boost sale of d20 Modern by all means ... DO IT!

The question is whether incorporating all the D&Dism has helped sales at all. I don't know if there's any evidence of this or not.

What I do know (and it's purely anecdotal) is that a) d20M seems to be a game that people who otherwise don't like d20 seem to enjoy, and 2) that the most common complaint I hear from people who otherwise like the game is "I wish they hadn't stuck so much D&D stuff in the main rulebook."

Ergo, I think that d20M has an appeal that doesn't need to rely upon any connection to D&D. Actually, I think it's the *differences* from D&D that are it's primarly selling point.

I dunno. If I want to play D&D, I'll play D&D. d20M would have been better served, IMHO, being handled like Star Wars or Call of Cthulhu, i.e., a game in its own right that need not rely on D&D for anything. Some simple conversion notes in UA would have sufficed for people who wanted to mix in some D&D.

Regardless, the game still rocks, and the D&Disms aren't going to stop me from playing it.

 

[Ranger REG]

Again, we're going back to the failed TSR method that you guys seems to prefer, which you believe that it is inappropriate to have D&D elements in a completely new ruleset.

They did well with Star Wars and CoC because they already have established fan bases for those two (the former, WEG is no longer printing the d6 version; for the latter, beat the hell out of me since Chaosium's supposed support is sorely lacking for that one rulebook).

d20 Modern doesn't have an established fan base prior to the product's debut, but it is steadily growing. To have ready-made D&D elements would make the transition easy for D&D fans to get into d20 Modern.

Could this product be any better? Yes, I personally do. But it is a good product NOW.

 

[takyris]

Honestly, I agree with both of you.

I personally wish that it had less D&D-in-modern-day focus, but I also know that the only way I convinced my group to start it was by showing how they didn't need to learn a new rules system, because it was exactly the same as D&D, for the most part.

There are parts that I like -- I love being able to use Monster Manual monsters right out of the book (with new names: hello "victim of mutagenic steroid", good-bye "ogre"), and I like having a ready spell system that I can use for a rule of thumb for how my campaign FX (which I'm self-making) can work. For example, I can make Hold Person, with flavor-text changes, into a neural disruption ray that can be fought by focusing your concentration to break through the disrupting effect.

I didn't need that stuff in the book, but I can see how their marketers would have thought it important -- since it so obviously WAS important to a large part of my group, even though we're not even PLAYING D&D-in-modern-times.

They really tried hard to sell d20 Modern on two levels, from what I can see:

1) It's a core system that can make any kind of campaign you want
2) It's the core book for these three campaign worlds, each with different FX

I could care less about the latter, but it was definitely important to some people. Not everybody does homebrew, so (1) wasn't going to sell the thing all by itself.

 

[Vigilance]

I believe d20 Modern is a great system that's been seriously handicapped by the D&Disms attached to it.

Ok- I have watched this debate with a bit of interest- d20 Modern is a big source of my bread and butter, and I just plain like it. I just have to jump in on this point.

I have no interest in D&D in the modern world and would have rather it not been included.

That said, the fact that I have written five d20 modern sourcebooks without a single D&D-ism, and never felt hindered by the rules in ANY way, in fact I frequently felt supported in those decisions by the rules, allows me to confidently assert that that statement is so far from the truth.

The game is a tight design, VERY well done.

Chuck

 

[Johnny Angel]

The problem for me is that I want to run a Star*Drive campaign, but there are no rules for Cybernetics. They've made rules for people who want to run a modernized fantasy campaign, but a full set of science fiction rules is not available. I don't have time to create them myself, especially given that I don't want to have to convert to whatever they get around to creating later. So, I'll get into the non-D&D system when they've got Sci-Fi rules.

 

[darkbard]

on the bright [?] side, d20 future is due soon....

 

[Ranger REG]

The problem for me is that I want to run a Star*Drive campaign, but there are no rules for Cybernetics.

Hero's Guide for Star Wars have rules for cybernetics.

They've made rules for people who want to run a modernized fantasy campaign, but a full set of science fiction rules is not available. I don't have time to create them myself, especially given that I don't want to have to convert to whatever they get around to creating later.

* Sighs * Don't worry, you're not the only one who wants "ready-made" rules, although I wonder if it is worth your time to have this kind of hobby. But that's me. I make the time. If I don't, I'll just be a player.

So, I'll get into the non-D&D system when they've got Sci-Fi rules.

* Sighs * If you can't wait...

T20: The Traveller's Handbook is "hard" sci-fi d20.
Stargate SG-1 is based on the popular film and TV series.