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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Von Ether" data-source="post: 1310653" data-attributes="member: 15582">Ohhh. The irony of that statement .... <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=":)" /> The d20 Modern designers WANTED to make such changes. Orignially, d20 Modern was going to be 1st ed. d20 Star Wars with the serial numbers filed off. They were going to use VP, Armor was going to be focused on DR, no AC, etc. Early mentions of d20 Modern in Polyhedron say as much. The reason why it didn't happen?Feedback from the fans.  The market segment WotC was aiming for made it clear they wanted d20 Modern to hew much closer to D&D than d20 SW. Seeing that there is a 2 to 1 ratio of Fantasy/SF settings in the core book and that the only setting that got its own book was basicly "D&D Modern" it is pretty clear who that audience was.So quite a few basic rules in d20 Modern aren't there because they designers thought they were "right" (by nature, designers are always pushing the envelope -- not neccessarly in the right directions), but to appease fans (who can often over look any "flaws" in a rule book that supports $200 of suppliment material they bought and have used for years.)Personly, I think all of the concepts are valid, it just depends on what I am aiming at for a particular game. But gaming is such a subjective thing and there is no wrong/right answer. It is interesting how one person can see a certain game rule to be a feature -- or a bug -- depending how the game fits in their comfort level.</blockquote>

Verification