True20 and Modern Games

[Skywalker]

Perhaps, I should be clear on my own thought about True20 Modern-Style gaming. At the base, I like the idea of having three roles, not one nor two. Granted, the Adept is an FX role, so why not replace it with a non-FX role more suited for the modern world?

* The Brain, aka Expert
* The Brawn, aka Warrior
* The Delegator, aka Leader ... a social-based role that are politicos or spiritual leaders.

In summary, don't just try to plug True20 into the modern genre, tweak it.

This is a fine approach. However, I again note that this is not really tweaking True 20 so much as taking a significantly different approach. In True 20, the Expert is not "the Brain". It is the Skill Role. Both Mouth and Brain are both covered by Skills in True 20/D20. As such, you would need to change the Expert Role as well to achieve the 3 Classes above. You will also need to add in specific class/role skills. At this point you are beginning to move away from the design of True 20 considerably.

True 20 Roles are meant to be concept free. This is different to D20 Modern in which the Classes, even the basic classes are concept based. True 20 Roles really only provide mechanical balance and so are focussed on the 3 aspects of the True 20/D20 rule system - Combat, Skills and FX. The advantage of this approach is that the Roles do little to restrict any concept except to the extent to maintain balance of these 3 elements.

So if you have no FX and wish to use True 20 then I still think the best approach is to just drop the Adept Role as the remaining 2 Roles will be sufficient. An Expert will cover all the Mouth and Brain concepts as these are both defined in True 20 and D20 as "Skills".

So, I am not trying to discourage your idea. However, I am trying to explain that there is an actual distinction between Roles and Classes that may not be immediately apparent. If you revert the Roles to Classes then it will have an impact on the rest of the True 20 System.

 

[GreatLemur]

You know, I've been thinking a bit, and maybe a third, social-focused class could actually make some sense, if you were to steal away the Expert's social feats, then give the new class a markedly superior Reputation progression, and somehow build Reputation into a more important element of the game. Personally, I intend to just ignore Reputation (in my opinion, that's the sort of factor that ought to be story-based, not merely level-dependant), but it could be a way to justify a Leader class if you're dead set on it.

 

[Skywalker]

You know, I've been thinking a bit, and maybe a third, social-focused class could actually make some sense, if you were to steal away the Expert's social feats, then give the new class a markedly superior Reputation progression, and somehow build Reputation into a more important element of the game. Personally, I intend to just ignore Reputation (in my opinion, that's the sort of factor that ought to be story-based, not merely level-dependant), but it could be a way to justify a Leader class if you're dead set on it.

Hmm, what about changing the focus slightly from social ability (which is really covered in Skills) to social standing i.e. a "Fixer" Role. This may suit True 20's existing ethos better.

If you add in a level progressing Wealth bonus which this new "Fixer" Role exceeded in then together Wealth + Reputation would provide a distinct enough benefit from Skills (Expert) and Combat (Warrior). Add in some feats from the Charisma Basic Class from D20 Modern about getting into gigs with ease and seperate out existing feats like Connections and Contacts.

Due to the increased Wealth this Fixer Role could also cover Scientists, Gadget Makers Dilettantes and Politicians. Low Combat Ability, Specific Skill Set yet has Money and Connections.

 

[GreatLemur]

Ooh, nice point about Wealth. Damn, this might actually work. I still don't see it as especially necessary, but I definitely think a non-FX third class along these lines would be viable, in the right kind of game.

 

[Skywalker]

Ooh, nice point about Wealth. Damn, this might actually work. I still don't see it as especially necessary, but I definitely think a non-FX third class along these lines would be viable, in the right kind of game.

Something like this would be a quick fix:

Fixer Role

Combat Bonus: As Adept
Saves: As Adept
Reputation: +2, increase +1 every 3 levels
Skills: 4+ Int
Feats: Wealthy choose 3 from General and Fixer.

Fixer Feats Careful Spender (N), Connected (G), Contacts (G), Fame (N), Fascinate (E), Inspire (E), Mass Suggestion (E), Power Shopper (N), Set-Up (G), Suggestion (E), Taunt (G), Well Informed (E)

(G) were General Feats., (E) were Expert Feats. (N) are new Feats.

- Careful Spender - may spend a Conviction Point to reduce the Wealth loss from any purchase by 1.

- Fame - grants a +2 bonus to Reputation.

- Power Shopper - allows a PC to take 10 on Wealth Rolls.

 

[MadBlue]

IMHO what True20 is missing is a non-SFX character with a non-combat focus. A 3/4 BAB for a scientist, diplomat or technician seems a bit high to me (of course they don't have to take weapon proficiencies, though). In a fantasy world, theres not a whole lot a technician type could do. But high tech could replace the role of the supernatural in a modern game, and lumping most of the Feats that could be used to represent that into Expert/General would make the Expert a bit too overpowered IMHO. Once you get into science fiction, and high technology becomes even more able to replicate supernatural effects, the Expert would become an even more powerful class. There are a lot of technology related d20 Modern Feats or Advanced Class abilities that aren't included in True20. Looking through d20 Modern, I could see the three classes covering the following areas:

Warrior = Strong/Tough/Soldier/Bodyguard/Martial Artist/Gunslinger
Expert = Dedicated/Fast/Infiltrator/Field Medic/Investigator/Daredevil
Non SFX Adept Equivalent = Charismatic/Smart/Personality/Negotiator/Field Scientist/Techie

Well, maybe not that cut and dried, but with the addition of Advanced Class abilities as Feats, I could easily see the Expert being a more physically oriented or combat support "adventurer" role and a non SFX Adept Equivalent being a technical and social skills role (of course in this case, it would have more than two known skills).

MadBlue

 

[Denaes]

There are a lot of technology related d20 Modern Feats or Advanced Class abilities that aren't included in True20.

What Feats or Advanced Class Abilities arn't covered?

I went through and found that 98% of them had been covered in True20 or wern't applicable (related to AoO).

Honestly the only Feats that were commonly useful and missing were some of the Firearms Feats, which should be brought into True20 for a modern game.

 

[solomoncane]

"Expert" issues

I too have been troubled by the idea of a modern, scientist-type Expert with 2 good saves (meaning at least 1 of them will be physical) and Medium combat progression. I like the "Fixer" idea of pumped up Rep & Wealth.
I see the skill divide thusly:
Expert - an adventuring person with a multitude of sklls.
Fixer - a specialist in only a few skills who may or may not be primarily an adventurer. This class could have some extraordinary specialized feats to increase narrowly focused skills beyond what an expert could usually achieve (especially with Craft & Knowledge). Perhaps "Specialist" might even be a more generic title for the role. Thus, an Adept is a "Specialist" in the field of FX.

 

[Macbeth]

Perhaps for the 'Fixer type that's been tossed around what you really need are 'Anti-feats' that can be taken to make a class weaker in exchange for a bonus feat. So you don't want a Scientist with at least one good physical save? Take an Anti-feat that looks something like this:

Weak Stomach: You take a -2 penalty to Fortitude saves.

And then pick up a skill-based feat to counter it. You get an extra skill boost, and your (base) Fortitude save isn't as good as the front-line fighter guy.

Think that your electrician is too good in combat? Take something along these lines:

Non-combatant: You take a -1 penalty to all attack rolls with weapons except one that you designate when you take this feat.


It's pretty easy to see that these are the exact opposite of some standard feats. I haven't thought about it too deeply, but these would seem to balance out so that no character becomes too powerful. Especially if you limited a character to at most one or two.

Not sure if this is really what people are looking for, but it seems like the main complaint with the Expert is that it's 'too good' for many people. Hopefully 'anti-feats' would fix that.

 

[Byrons_Ghost]

The main issues that I can see, from reading over the thread:

#1 Removing the Adept and leaving only two classes leaves things as sort of limited to PC choices. I think that, in a lot of ways, this depends on the sort of campaign being run. If it's a realistic no-FX, military campaign, then it would probably be ok. If it's something like pulp or sci-fi, then the Adept should be tweaked/replaced into whatever FX are suitable for the setting. The Adept could become a steamtech engineer, for example, or a futuristic cyborg. The powers would have to be changed around a lot, but the core concept- a class who has inherent powers as their speciality- would remain the same.

#2 For Experts having too large a BAB, I agree that it does seem a little odd to have scientists etc with that progression. Of course, these are PC scientists, who are going to be superior. At lower levels (which is what most NPC Experts should be), there isn't going to be too much difference. If the Adept is removed, the GM might consider dropping the BAB and Defense progressions for each class by one category: ie Warrior would top out at +15 and Expert at +10. This could especially be more appropriate for modern games, where firearms where probably be making things more lethal.