What would you change for d20 Modern 2.0

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Another thing I'd like to see, if or when a d20 Modern 2.0 should come out, is gadgets from d20 Future added into the base system

No! Broken! You can't use Wealth as a balance tool, which means there's no way to balance gadgets, other than having the GM say "no, you can't have that".

Why do you assume, that what I'm suggesting means all characters are all combat and nothing else!?

Well, wasn't it your example about elite soldier with cool gunfighting skills?

 

[Thanee]

Well, wasn't it your example about elite soldier with cool gunfighting skills?

No. Read again.

Bye
Thanee

 

[JPL]

Thanee, I guess I'm not sure what you're complaining about.

My standard example is a modern elite soldier. Intelligent and well-trained in combat, both close-up and at range. So, you might multiclass between Fast and Smart to get there, but you end up with a weak combatant who gets all sort of weird talents that make no sense for the character you have in mind. Might be a bit exaggerated, just to get the idea.

Hmmm. So what, a Fast Hero 3 / Smart Hero 3 / Solider 1, or something like that?

Let's see...Evasion is always a good pick [what with all the hand grenades]. Increased Speed doesn't seem too "weird" to me, either.

Linguist would be highly appropriate for a Spec Ops guy, as would Savant [K: tactics], and Plan, and Exploit Weakness.

This character is more assuredly not a "weak combatant" --- he can take out probably 95% of the people in the world in a fistfight or a firefight. More importantly [since he is a Spec Op, not a cage fighter], he can move quickly and quietly, survive in hostile climates and not get lost, and speak the local language. He can plan ahead of time, and find an enemy's weak spots in the midst of a fight. He may have specialized training in combat engineering or demolitions or as a field medic.

Compare that to a Strong Hero 7 --- yeah, our Spec Op might not want to go toe-to-toe with this guy, but Strong Hero 7 will be at a disadvantage in many other non-combat situations equally critical, if not moreso, to the life of a commando.

If any of those choices seem "weird" for this character concept, then maybe you really want a different class combo --- say, Strong / Fast / Solider [which still gets you a nice array of skill points].

I think d20 Modern gives the player some tough choices about how to spend character improvement resources while still providing some structure to help keep most characters versatile enough to be fun both in and out of combat.

But....[and this is not directed to Thanee, just in general] I think one big point to keep in mind is that when modeling a highly-skilled character in d20 Modern, there's no substitute for just starting at an appropriately higher character level. Some idiot on RPG.net made a big deal about how d20 Modern was broken because he couldn't stat a ninja at first level. Well, if you expect a ninja to be a combination of a Navy SEAL, Batman, and Jet Li, then no, first level ain't gonna work.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

No! Broken!

You better put that newspaper down and step back, and ain't your dog.

You can't use Wealth as a balance tool, which means there's no way to balance gadgets, other than having the GM say "no, you can't have that".

Sure you can. How easy is it to add in a built-in baffle silencer and laser sight to a Glock-17L, along with mercury recoil dampeners and vairable gas-vents? There's lots of ways to balance it.

BUT, that's the ultimate balance tool, and you know, there's nothing wrong with that.

"I want a chainsaw with a shotgun beside it, computer targeting and anti-grav tech. We're at the right PL and I have the Wealth!"

"No."

And just because I want to see it, worked in and balanced, into d20 Modern 2.0, doesn't mean it'll still be broken by go time.

 

[Thanee]

Thanee, I guess I'm not sure what you're complaining about.

Not complaining really. Just stating, that I don't like the base classes in d20 Modern because of their inflexibility. When you pick up one of the six classes you get a whole bunch of stuff you might not want, or that does not really fit the character you have in mind, unless you happen to have one of the few concepts in mind, which these classes are tailored towards.

But....[and this is not directed to Thanee, just in general] I think one big point to keep in mind is that when modeling a highly-skilled character in d20 Modern, there's no substitute for just starting at an appropriately higher character level. Some idiot on RPG.net made a big deal about how d20 Modern was broken because he couldn't stat a ninja at first level. Well, if you expect a ninja to be a combination of a Navy SEAL, Batman, and Jet Li, then no, first level ain't gonna work.

Yeah, I definitely agree with that. And in some cases, an advanced class is probably the best way to go. But that is another issue.

Bye
Thanee

 

[C. Baize]

I dunno, Thanee... it looks like you're talking about scale, here...
At every level for the basic classes, you have choices, this makes them pretty flexible... far more flexible than ANY of the D&D basic characters. The choices are from a list. Just like any other game (or several lists in the case of Talents).
It looks like all you really want to do is open up the lists so that your character can (JUST as an example, I'm not pinpointing) take Plan, then Damage Reduction 1/-, then Melee Smash, then Savant, then Evasion, then Faith, etc...etc...etc... While still getting good BAB, and defense.... Or worse... that your character can take a number of those at first level if they scrimp on points spent on attributes.

Correct me if I'm not getting it, here... but that's how it appears... To me, at least.

 

[Thanee]

No, that's absolutely not, what I am proposing.

Take a look at the requirements I put on selecting talents.
You cannot just mix and match them as desired there.

What I did mostly is to remove the requirement to get such a talent, you can have them, but you don't have to have them.

And abilities are seperate as usual, so that won't work either.

Bye
Thanee

 

[C. Baize]

Hmm... I see.
Now I dislike it on principle because it's point based.

 

[eyebeams]

What would I do?

1) The nonlethal damage rules really are lousy. Two level 1 PCs can punch each other all day without anything happened. At all. Use the 3.5 rules.

2) The rules for action points aren't particularly well written. Instead, give characters a set of points that increase by level and refresh every session.

3) The hero classes are good ideas, but flawed in that it is harder toget directly to a character concept. Instead, hero classes should have several branches that dovetail into AdClass abilities right from level 1 (A Smart hero can have sceintific or gadgeteer tress, for example). Adclasses should go. Replace them with prestige classes.

4) Get rid of feat-based burst and autofire.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

One of the bigger problems I see is that your controlling aspect for talents becomes a minimum stat of 15 in the "key attribute". Which actually adds MORE limiters than the base classes.

As it stands now, I can definately take levels in Fast with a Dex of 10 and grab Evasion. Nothing says I can't. But if I need a 15 Dex, then I have to focus heavily on Dex and thus Fast talents. With 25 pt buy (standard pt buy) you're not going to get THAT many 15s (2, maybe?) so you're going to be limited to 2 classes' talent lists.

I think the Unified Class Theory is INTERESTING, don't get me wrong. But you're currently in the position of saying: "Wow, I think Internal Combustion is a poor model, we should use fusion for vehicle powerplants. Fusion would be great and have no problems at all!"

--fje