Minor fixes

[Kae'Yoss]

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

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))

Dunno for sure. Maybe they know what the armor will protect them from, and what they are useless against, and then will dodge some things. D20M is meant to capture the feeling of action movies, and we often see someone get a shot in the chest, but surviving because they have a bulletproof vest (In 300 Miles to Graceland Kurt Russel takes a shot from a handgun and later even from a shotgun and survives). If they would let them be shot with a machine gun, that vest probably wouldn't help them...

I think they made that to give people with the proficiencies an extra edge over those without (especially with armor without armor penalty, for which you otherwise would need no proficiency at all).

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.

Since the heavy tactical armours have a very low max dex score, most people will be better off with a medium armor, I think (especially if they are combat-oriented, using ranged weapons): The same defense from dex+equipment (or only 1 less), lower armor penalty, faster movement rate, one feat less needed. So people will need only two proficiencies, at most.

But I think the fact that everyone has to pay for those feats with feat slots is OK, since people get much more feats than in D&D, so it will be allright I think.

 

[Pagan priest]

When I started reading this thread, I felt that the armor proficiencies were fine. As has been mentioned, characters get a lot more feats in d20M. Now, I'm not so sure. While I have no problem with the concept that someone needs training to wear body armor and get the max out of it, I would think that having only 2 feats is enough to cover the whole range of body armors.

Have Light same as is currently in the game, and roll Medium and Heavy in to one feat. The rational behind this should be obvious. Few people get ANY training in the proper wear of armor these days. Of those that do, most will either be police detectives and such, gaining Light Armor, or military or SWAT types, learning heavier armors. In most cases, the actual armor worn will be dependant on the mission parameters. Is there really a greater difference between a special responce vest and a tactical vest than there is between a tactical vest and a concealable vest? Is that difference significant enough to warrant two separate feats?

 

[bwgwl]

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

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....)

exactly. as someone who had to carry a "pig" in the Army for a couple of years, we were basically told that if you actually manage to hit someone in combat with an M60 that's just a bonus. the real reason to fire one is to make the enemy scramble for cover and keep their heads down -- giving your riflemen a chance to move up a bit closer. not to mention that the M60 is inherently inaccurate by design -- the flash suppressor vibrates as the weapon is fired, helping to spray bullets over a narrow cone instead of just straight ahead. (amazing what you learn in Armorer's School... )

on that note, i highly recommend the Suppressive Fire feat from Ultra-Modern Firearms to simulate such a tactic.

(i also agree with them only being Large, not Huge. i'm not a big guy and i could carry one fairly well. no firing from the hip, though. 2d10 damage sound right -- there's no way an M60 should do as much or more damage than a 50-cal.)

 

[CharlesRyan]

No XP for Roleplaying?

I've read this thread with interest (as I do many threads on this board). People have made good arguments pro and con on most of the issues--except one. The initial post asserted that d20 Modern only gives XP for combat, and for some wierd reason the posts that followed all agreed with that.

Have you not read the rules for XP in d20 Modern? They begin on page 204.
Experience is awarded for overcoming obstacles--things that "prevent the heroes from achieving a specific goal important to the advneture. An obstacle can be overcome through smart roleplaying, combat, or skill use." (See Encounter Goals, page 205.)

Experience for roleplaying is noted in the EL examples on page 207 (example 2, to be specific). (Granted, in this example, the EL ends up being 0, granting no experience. But then, all we're talking about is questioning a 1st-level ordinary.)

Sorry to be so hot-headed over one minor issue, but I think that if you use the rules as written, you'll find they're great for determining XP awards for roleplaying and all sorts of non-combat situations.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I mentioned XP for Hazards and Skill checks in my first reply in that topic here, though I forgot about the parts about solving through roleplaying.

 

[malladin]

My justification for a feat for extra damage with a shotgun comes from a publishers perspective. I have a reluctance to outright change the rules, and so prefer to offer additions that can be incorporated into the existing systems.

A second argument I would draw on here, again from a publisher's point of view, is game balance. I am not willing to completely change the way in which a certain weapon works when a lot of people have gone to a lot of trouble to playtest a rule and mak sure everything balances. In my experience, often realism has to be sacrificed to gameplay. Personally I'm not a fan of where this happens, but understand that it does, and that once this has happenned, I'm largely provide massive wholesale changes.

So let's suggest that the Shotgun rules are at least balanced. Therefore if I want to add extra damage to a shotgun at close range I will simply add it in as a new feat, thus providing a bonus without an additional penalty.

I admit it's not perfect, but a whole tree of shotgun-specific feats can add together to make some really cool shotgun fighters (I can see the zombies being blasted apart right now!)

cheerio,

Ben, Malladin's Gate

 

[malladin]

Mr Ryan, much respek, but unfotunately I have to disagree.

The experience system in D20M is much better than that presented in the original D&D 3E (which if I remember correctly suggests a flat 50 XP as a roleplaying XP award). It covers a lot of ground in determining ELs for challenging situations, but there is no system given for straight roleplaying awards.

What happens if a player simply plays their character well, showing that they have an good handle on how their character ticks? This invariably impresses me as a GM and brings the other players into the game more, bringing the whole thing alive. When this happens I want to award that player. The stated example from the rules does not provide awards for players who deal with the situation with a degree of originality or panache, which in my book should also be awarded.

For my own games I have the 'EL' for such awards based on the character's own level and modify it according to an arbitary bonus system based on specifically how good the roleplaying was. Thus I can award roleplaying awards in any situation, so that even within combat I can award a character an XP bonus if they came up with some good in-character quips or acted in a way that specifically suited their charactr, even if it was largely deleterious to their over-all combat effectiveness.

Cheerio,

Ben

 

[Kae'Yoss]

That's fine then, right? I very much believe anyone can come up with a flat formula about XP for good in-character playing. You don't roll against a DC of 20 for really good roleplaying, or a result of less than 0 means you play the character wrong. That's something not up to the system, but purely up to the GM!

 

[ristan]

How exactly do d20M characters get more feats?

Occupations can possibly give an extra feat that D&D characters don't get but,
Fighters get a feat at 1st level that no d20M class gets.
And all D&D classes get armor prof feats and weapon prof feats.
It seems to me if any thing D20M characters get less feats.

 

[Shadowlord]

D20M definitely hands out more feats than D&D.
You get a bonus feat every 2 levels and every 3 in an advanced class. A level 20 human in d&d would have 8 feats; a 10th level basic class/10th level advanced class in modern would have 16 feats.
Even if you add some free class feats from d&d, modern has occupations and it's still a huge difference!