Minor fixes

[Shadowlord]

Although d20 modern seems a very good RPG and I consider it an improvement compared to D&D, there are some things that totally evade my comprehension. I especially appreciate how they worked out the skills, what they did to classes, and in general showed us what options there are beyond combat, but they failed to develop guns decently.

Shotguns for ex have all the restrictions they need (short range, non-automatic, damage decreased with range...) but it seems they forgot to add the benefit(s). Other guns (longarms) either have fully automatic modes, or have better range and inflict more damage. Therefore, shouldn’t shotguns inflict an extra damage die in the first increment or something (-1 dam/incr) or even an extra die in all increments with -2 dam/incr ? I favor the first idea, leaving the second as a special shell/bullet option.

The heavy guns need an Exotic feat but the M-60 for instance doesn’t deal more damage than the smaller M-16. Shouldn’t those HEAVY guns inflict HEAVY damage accordingly? Like an extra damage die (3d8). Eventually it costs you a feat so it remains balanced.

This counts for all guns; shouldn’t there be a different feat for Handguns and Longarms? D&D did a great job with Simple, Martial and Exotic weapons, but modern puts everything into one single collumn, trying to keep balance by assigning almost identical stats to all guns.

Second topic: armor. Armor hasn’t been very desirable in D&D (especially heavy with all its restrictions), but it becomes even worse in modern with class bonus to Def and no free armor feats. In fact, why would you even wanna go through all this effort? Armor has become pretty obsolete (which isn’t very unrealistic on modern Earth but lets not forget this game is meant as a standard for many different settings, some that would emhasize protection. Plus it's still a GAME).
I’m not in favor of DR and VP/WP but I came up with a simple idea that isn’t unlike DR and would work perfectly in modern. -> Armor increases the massive damage treshold (on top of the other benefits), similar to the Imp Mas Dam Tres feat, based on type (if you’re proficient). Light +0; medium +2; heavy +4.

For all the things they show us what’s possible outside combat, it seems XP can only be gained through fighting. Where’s the RP& Story Awards ?? In D&D I always used party CR instead of average party level, thus giving away a lot less XP for combat which I made up with RP & Story awards. But in modern the table for claculating CR for different targets disappeared.

Will any of these topics be adreessed soon, in a 2nd printing maybe? I can’t believe that for all the great work they did, they made such obvious flaws.

 

[malladin]

I agree with you about many of the issues you have raised. However, as a writer I enjoy finding these 'holes' in the system as it provides my with a chance to plug them.

Hence you will see some of these issues adressed by our Modern Heroes lines and other D20M sourcebooks from Malladin's Gate.

Just to give you an idea as to how we are currently thinking about handling some of these problems.

Shotguns: Right with you on this one. I think we will suggest a reduction in damage over range increments as a standard for shotguns, but the extra damage dice in the first increment will most likely be a feat, as this will not massively affect the balance of the game (it's kind of an equivalent of doubletap, after all).

Heavy Weapons: I'm not certain how to handle this. As a writer I don't want to just make the weapons better. Perhaps a feat tree of cool stuff that you can do only with a heavy weapon is called for? I've yet to encounter a player who has wanted to play a Heavy Weapons character, but maybe this is in itself telling...?

Armour is very frustrating in D20M, a Cop in reasonable armour can quite quickly get beyond the realistic scope of a character's to-hit score. I do like the idea of armour modifying the massive damage check. We've been toying with a number of ideas for different ways for armour to work, one that has proved interesting is a random damage reduction; such as 1d4-1, so the character hit must roll to soak the damage, similar to the whitewolf system. So far these are all being tested and we're waiting to hear what the play testers think.

Experience is, IMO, a massive problem for D20. The trouble is, I'm not sure how much you can get away with under the D20 licence. When I run games I usually work out a challenge rating for a given social encounter and award the characters based on their success with it. I have a nice quick litle system for working out the CR based on the character's levels, the importance to the plot and teh general difficult of the situation, but I don't think I could ever publish it under the D20 Licence. It's something I've never had callto actually put in a supplement yet so I've not properly investigated the legal situation.

cheerio,

Ben, Malladin's Gate Press

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Shotguns for ex have all the restrictions they need (short range, non-automatic, damage decreased with range...) but it seems they forgot to add the benefit(s). Other guns (longarms) either have fully automatic modes, or have better range and inflict more damage. Therefore, shouldn?t shotguns inflict an extra damage die in the first increment or something (-1 dam/incr) or even an extra die in all increments with -2 dam/incr ? I favor the first idea, leaving the second as a special shell/bullet option.

I thought about that: the shotguns are the only thing I don't like to much about d20M weapons. There are several possibilities:

Give a +2 attack bonus within the first 15 or so feet: within that range you don't really have to aim in order to hit, not with that scatter effect. And the range penalty is -2 to damage for every range increment, since fewer bullets arrive.

Or, grant an additional damage die, but subract one die per range increment (or even two).

The heavy guns need an Exotic feat

One paragraph down you want an extra feat for handguns and longarms.

but the M-60 for instance doesn?t deal more damage than the smaller M-16.

First, it's a typo: the M-60 does 2d10 (also, I'd make it large, only heavy machineguns being huge)

Then, it's not just about damage: With machineguns you have linked ammo, and can happily fire away.

Then, handling such a big thing, where you are supposed just to pull the drigger and empty the ammo is different from other weapons, where you are advised to fire in short, controlled bursts. Then, they feel different in your hands.

Shouldn?t those HEAVY guns inflict HEAVY damage accordingly? Like an extra damage die (3d8). Eventually it costs you a feat so it remains balanced.

You can use burst fire for two additional damage dice, and they'd either be d10 or d12 (no sense to use a light machinegun, IMO).

This counts for all guns; shouldn?t there be a different feat for Handguns and Longarms? D&D did a great job with Simple, Martial and Exotic weapons, but modern puts everything into one single collumn, trying to keep balance by assigning almost identical stats to all guns.

You see it wrong: we have one proficiency for single fire, and another for autofire (and yet another for burst). Beyond, it's basically point-and-click with both handguns and longarms (if we differentiate those two, we have to go further: one for pistols, one for machine pistols, one for revolvers, one for rifles, one for shotguns, one for assault rifles, one for smgs....)

Second topic: armor. Armor hasn?t been very desirable in D&D (especially heavy with all its restrictions), but it becomes even worse in modern with class bonus to Def and no free armor feats. In fact, why would you even wanna go through all this effort? Armor has become pretty obsolete (which isn?t very unrealistic on modern Earth but lets not forget this game is meant as a standard for many different settings, some that would emhasize protection. Plus it's still a GAME).

First, many players will get a light undercover shirt, which has no armor penalty, a fairly high max dex bonus, and even without proficiency you'll get +1.

Also, characters gain more feats in d20M, so they can afford to spend some on one or two armor proficiencies. If they want.

I?m not in favor of DR and VP/WP but I came up with a simple idea that isn?t unlike DR and would work perfectly in modern. -> Armor increases the massive damage treshold (on top of the other benefits), similar to the Imp Mas Dam Tres feat, based on type (if you?re proficient). Light +0; medium +2; heavy +4.

Well, that doesn't really make sense. It won't reduce the damage, but you'll be able to endure more of it?

For all the things they show us what?s possible outside combat, it seems XP can only be gained through fighting. Where?s the RP& Story Awards ??

Well, the game mastering section actually has guidelines for XP for skill checks and hazards and such. The rest is always up to the DM (and he has to decide how much he awards for story and RP, there's no book helping him with that)

In D&D I always used party CR instead of average party level, thus giving away a lot less XP for combat which I made up with RP & Story awards.

Why not do both? Or do you dislike people advancing to fast?

But in modern the table for claculating CR for different targets disappeared.

They have rules for that, but it's much simpler: The number of enemies increases the CR, if the CR of the individual enemies isn't the same for all, take average CR. Look page 206, Table 7-6

Example: 4 x CR 5 = 5 +4 = 9
Example: CR 3 + CR 4 + CR 5 = 3 * CR 4 = 4 + 3 = 7

Will any of these topics be adreessed soon, in a 2nd printing maybe? I can?t believe that for all the great work they did, they made such obvious flaws.

They aren't really flaws (except for the shutgun matter, maybe, and they probably thought of something as they made that. Maybe just keep it simple). Reading and thinking things through often makes confusion go away (Had that myself, often: Missed a line, and wondered what they are doing, or not seeing the sense in a ruling until I've seen it in-game, with actual characters and a little gaming experience)

 

[Shadowlord]

Re: Re: Minor fixes

Malladin, how do you justify a shotgun feat for extra damage? I can see getting a gun under control when firing a burst, but getting some technique out of firing a shotgun?

I thought about that: the shotguns are the only thing I don't like to much about d20M weapons. There are several possibilities:

Give a +2 attack bonus within the first 15 or so feet: within that range you don't really have to aim in order to hit, not with that scatter effect. And the range penalty is -2 to damage for every range increment, since fewer bullets arrive.

I don't like this idea as a shotgun shouldn't be more accurate than a sniper rifle. It's the damage that must be adjusted, not the accuracy. The option in UMF is trying to fix the problem in vain.

Or, grant an additional damage die, but subract one die per range increment (or even two).

Substracting one die per inc. is too much; then you'll deal almost no dam. in the 3rd incr. and farther. I thought of keeping the rules as they are (-1 HP/incr) but adding one dam die in the 1st incr only.

One paragraph down you want an extra feat for handguns and longarms.

Yes, it's not really two different feats, it's one feat (Personal Firearms) but you have to choose if it applies to Handguns or Firearms, simlilar to the Exotic Firearms feat. Needless to say, when another feat requires PFA (like Burst), you must be proficient in the right type.

You see it wrong: we have one proficiency for single fire, and another for autofire (and yet another for burst). Beyond, it's basically point-and-click with both handguns and longarms (if we differentiate those two, we have to go further: one for pistols, one for machine pistols, one for revolvers, one for rifles, one for shotguns, one for assault rifles, one for smgs....)

Also, characters gain more feats in d20M, so they can afford to spend some on one or two armor proficiencies. If they want.

I see, but I didn't ask for two different feats, just select handguns or longarms (see above). In that case, I don't see any wrong in "splitting" the feat, especially since heroes would have enough feats to distribute (like you just said).

Then, handling such a big thing, where you are supposed just to pull the drigger and empty the ammo is different from other weapons, where you are advised to fire in short, controlled bursts. Then, they feel different in your hands.

I knew it was a typo but even then 2d10 isn't near what this big gun should do. Unless you make it Large; I like this idea very much, it's probably better than keeping it Huge at 3d8 dam.

First, many players will get a light undercover shirt, which has no armor penalty, a fairly high max dex bonus, and even without proficiency you'll get +1.

I wasn't very clear about this; I meant to make heavy armor more attractive. Light armor is often the best armor, cos it costs only one feat and it has hardly any restrictions (like you mentioned) but when you go through all the effort to get the heaviest armor, you still aren't much safer than the guy jumping around in his leather suit.

Well, that doesn't really make sense. It won't reduce the damage, but you'll be able to endure more of it?

It keeps you longer alive, which is all everything armor must do. And (more imptoratantly), it prevents armor from becoming more a nuisance than a benefit, or even obsolete (as is the case in heavier armors).

Why not do both? Or do you dislike people advancing to fast?

Players already increase very fast in levels; adding both would increase this proces twice as fast!

They aren't really flaws (except for the shutgun matter, maybe, and they probably thought of something as they made that. Maybe just keep it simple). Reading and thinking things through often makes confusion go away (Had that myself, often: Missed a line, and wondered what they are doing, or not seeing the sense in a ruling until I've seen it in-game, with actual characters and a little gaming experience)

I always wonder how much we should change. I always try to keep houserules to a minimum and as simple/compatible as possible, but some things really need change.
For ex, what if a player wants a shotgun as he imagines what a blast it sets of, only to find that the rules don't make it "more powerful" than a pistol.
Or that the game boggs down to dungeon hacking & street fighting cos you get almost all XP from fighting.
Or when you didn't see a player in heavy armor for years cos it isn't worth it. Etc

 

[Mistwell]

Okay Coriantis/Shadowlord, this is now the 6th thread on these topics from you. You had one for each of shotguns and armor on both WOTC boards and here, and now a combined topic on both boards. How much discussion do you need on these issues? Just make the house rule already and tell us how it goes!

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

I don't like this idea as a shotgun shouldn't be more accurate than a sniper rifle. It's the damage that must be adjusted, not the accuracy. The option in UMF is trying to fix the problem in vain.

It's not about accuracy. If you spray everything in front of you, you don't need accuracy, you've got something better: you just fill up everything in front of you, so some of the bullets are bound to hit. And of course, a shotgunner will have every advantage over a sniper, at close range! But once you go beyond, say, 300 Meters...

Substracting one die per inc. is too much; then you'll deal almost no dam. in the 3rd incr. and farther. I thought of keeping the rules as they are (-1 HP/incr) but adding one dam die in the 1st incr only.

You aren't supposed to deal much damage at higher ranges, for the same reasons you deal more close up: you use much bullets, which spread. At close range, most of them hit, dealing lots of damage. But once they have traveled a bit, they scatter to much, and only some of those (smaller than normal) bullets will hit the target.

Yes, it's not really two different feats, it's one feat (Personal Firearms) but you have to choose if it applies to Handguns or Firearms, simlilar to the Exotic Firearms feat. Needless to say, when another feat requires PFA (like Burst), you must be proficient in the right type.

That's the same for me: you have to use up two feat slots for the old PFA, so it's not two feats instead of one.

I knew it was a typo but even then 2d10 isn't near what this big gun should do. Unless you make it Large; I like this idea very much, it's probably better than keeping it Huge at 3d8 dam.

It's not how Weapons in d20M work: The M-60 fires 7.62mm rounds, and in d20M they deal 2d10 damage. All the weapons with the same caliber deal the same damage. Differences are in the extras: ROF, weight, size, mag-size and -type....

And UMF d20 has stats for the M-60, too. It's listed as Saco M60E1 or E3 (the E3 Version is lighter and easier to handle. the M-60 from d20M probably is the E3 version). It's Large, deals 2d10 damage, fires 7.62mm rounds, and weights 33lbs (or 19), the purchase DS is 23 (they differ for some weapons that figure in both books).

I wasn't very clear about this; I meant to make heavy armor more attractive. Light armor is often the best armor, cos it costs only one feat and it has hardly any restrictions (like you mentioned) but when you go through all the effort to get the heaviest armor, you still aren't much safer than the guy jumping around in his leather suit.

You can give a damn about whether you are flat-footed or not, that's the main advantage of heavy armor (in addition to the fact that you can have a crappy DEX and still have a good Def), it's what Heavy Armor is about in D&D, and in d20M also. Those armors are seldomly used in RW, since they restrict your freedom of movement to much.

It keeps you longer alive, which is all everything armor must do. And (more imptoratantly), it prevents armor from becoming more a nuisance than a benefit, or even obsolete (as is the case in heavier armors).

I like my rules with consistency and a little logic in them. So either those armors grant damage reduction (whether you use HP or VWP), or an DEF bonus. But if they won't decrease the amount of damage you get they don't increase the amount of punishment you take (it's like armor giving bonus to HP...)

Players already increase very fast in levels; adding both would increase this proces twice as fast!

It usually slows down at higher levels.

I always wonder how much we should change.

In my experience, it's not as much as you think at first.

For ex, what if a player wants a shotgun as he imagines what a blast it sets of, only to find that the rules don't make it "more powerful" than a pistol.

I agree with you on that. As I said, shotguns are the only thing that could use with a change. But I can live with the current rules about them, since they're simple.

Or that the game boggs down to dungeon hacking & street fighting cos you get almost all XP from fighting.

You have to change your mentality here, not the rules: The DM is supposed to give out Story and RP XP. Since there is no hard rule about how you determine them, they left it completely into the hands of the DM (you still have to think a little, as a DM), who can use the present tables for CR-based XP as a guideline.

Or when you didn't see a player in heavy armor for years cos it isn't worth it. Etc

That's how it is: Heavy Armor isn't really worth it. That's how it is used only in special occasions by certain persons. That's the case in the RW and d20M both. (And I have yet to play a D&D 3e char with more than light armor)

 

[Saeviomagy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

That's how it is: Heavy Armor isn't really worth it. That's how it is used only in special occasions by certain persons. That's the case in the RW and d20M both. (And I have yet to play a D&D 3e char with more than light armor)

Incidentally, this is the same reasoning as is used for shotgun damage. Shotguns don't spread, shotguns aren't significantly easier to hit someone with, and shotguns don't cause more damage. A rifle is almost always a better choice unless you're going after very small targets, or you don't want the rounds to penetrate anything for some reason.

So shotguns are not the most effective weapons. So what? I've still got players using them. Most of the time the difference between a shotgun and a rifle is negligable.

Same goes for machine guns. Even in the military, they have a specific use. They're not all-round better weapons. The fact that most of the time an assault rifle will be as good or better is more-or-less a realistic outcome.

 

[lmccauley]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

That's how it is: Heavy Armor isn't really worth it. That's how it is used only in special occasions by certain persons. That's the case in the RW and d20M both. (And I have yet to play a D&D 3e char with more than light armor)

Does it really take much training to be able to use armour effectively? Would a highly trained SWAT team member be more protected by his tactical armour than myself? (I know he would be less likely to be hit in general, but I think that would be because of his tactical experience (class defence bonus) and physical condition (higher Dex))

I'm resurrecting an old Millenium's End campaign and converting it to D20 Modern rules (as my current group have been playing D&D or CoC D20 for most of the last 2 years). In ME, most characters wore light, concealed vests for day-to-day investigation, but once they planned to get involved in a tactical situation they would all don their heavy, tactical armour. To do the same in D20, they are going to have to spend 3 feats. I'm tempted to give everyone Light Armour proficiency for free.

Cheers,
Liam

 

[Yeoman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

Incidentally, this is the same reasoning as is used for shotgun damage. Shotguns don't spread, shotguns aren't significantly easier to hit someone with, and shotguns don't cause more damage. A rifle is almost always a better choice unless you're going after very small targets, or you don't want the rounds to penetrate anything for some reason.

So shotguns are not the most effective weapons. So what? I've still got players using them. Most of the time the difference between a shotgun and a rifle is negligable.

This is the same experience I have with my group. We use shotguns for certain things, just like we use rifles for other things. Mostly rifles for range and shotguns up close, since shotgun ammo is cheaper.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Minor fixes

Incidentally, this is the same reasoning as is used for shotgun damage. Shotguns don't spread, shotguns aren't significantly easier to hit someone with, and shotguns don't cause more damage. A rifle is almost always a better choice unless you're going after very small targets, or you don't want the rounds to penetrate anything for some reason.

So we have no problem at all with shotguns as they are!

So shotguns are not the most effective weapons. So what? I've still got players using them. Most of the time the difference between a shotgun and a rifle is negligable.

Right. A shotgun is stylish. It doesn't outclass every other weapon in the game but it doesn't have to. People will use it nonetheless.

Same goes for machine guns. Even in the military, they have a specific use. They're not all-round better weapons. The fact that most of the time an assault rifle will be as good or better is more-or-less a realistic outcome.

They are usually used to keep the enemy down. They aren't good for accuracy, so you barrage the enemy with it. You won't hurt many of them, but they'll keep their heads down (noone wants to do anything than cover if they hear a MG go....)