PDA

View Full Version : D20 4th Edition?



falconire
2008-09-23, 01:24 AM
I don't know if or when this has been raised, but has anyone heard about a 4th Edition update for D20 Modern?

Tsotha-lanti
2008-09-23, 02:11 AM
It seems unlikely to happen; the intent of the new license seemed to be to squash alternative games based on 4E. There's no "d20 4E", in effect, there's just D&D 4E.

Tengu_temp
2008-09-23, 07:31 AM
With 4e Wizards no longer seem to live a lie and think that D20 is a good, universal system that can decently represent anything (which is as far from truth as possible). So I wouldn't expect 4e Modern to appear, ever.

AstralFire
2008-09-23, 07:33 AM
d20 modern has reappeared in the main site's boards and there's some discussion about a revival in a few years.

Waspinator
2008-09-23, 07:46 AM
I wouldn't expect it soon, though. As has been said, Wizards seems to be trying to limit the d20 spin-offs as much as possible this time around.

black dragoon
2008-09-23, 09:09 AM
That's kind of depressing really I enjoyed the D20 modern system. oddities and all and thought it to be a fairly solid system if fixed a few minor things. :smallfrown:

Tsotha-lanti
2008-09-23, 09:30 AM
That's kind of depressing really I enjoyed the D20 modern system. oddities and all and thought it to be a fairly solid system if fixed a few minor things. :smallfrown:

Did your 4E book come with embedded nanomachines that crept out and ate your d20 Modern books? I get the impression that happens a lot.

If you've looked at D&D 4E system, you know that it would not even remotely work for a game like d20 Modern, or most of the games / genres / settings that third-party d20 games used.

black dragoon
2008-09-23, 09:38 AM
Actually I have not bought any 4E books out of principle I had hopoed they would continue the line though...if they are trying to completely do away with the system then I've lost faith in WOTC.

AstralFire
2008-09-23, 09:54 AM
Did your 4E book come with embedded nanomachines that crept out and ate your d20 Modern books? I get the impression that happens a lot.

If you've looked at D&D 4E system, you know that it would not even remotely work for a game like d20 Modern, or most of the games / genres / settings that third-party d20 games used.

You sure about that? I'd say 4E would require less effort to convert well to a modern setting than 3E did. I do submit though, that unless you want to play Paladins in New York, there are better options.

Starsinger
2008-09-23, 10:06 AM
You sure about that? I'd say 4E would require less effort to convert well to a modern setting than 3E did. I do submit though, that unless you want to play Paladins in New York, there are better options.

I'm considering just whipping up some gun stats and giving it a shot one of these days. Of course when I say a Modern game, I mean something like Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Hellboy and not particularly Mundanes and Malls.

AstralFire
2008-09-23, 10:16 AM
I'm considering just whipping up some gun stats and giving it a shot one of these days. Of course when I say a Modern game, I mean something like Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Hellboy and not particularly Mundanes and Malls.

Yeah, the only real problem with Mundanes and Malls (as you cleverly term it) is just that the system doesn't give enough differentiation in its current form to be interesting like that. It'd be playing a game with nothing but Warlords, Rogues and Rangers, when you get down to it. Maybe Fighters.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-09-23, 10:25 AM
Actually I have not bought any 4E books out of principle I had hopoed they would continue the line though...if they are trying to completely do away with the system then I've lost faith in WOTC.

I guess you missed my point: How can they "do away" with a system they've already published? Chaosium didn't "do away" with RuneQuest; they just stopped publishing for it. (A very different situation, obviously, but you get my drift - hopefully.)

And, on the other hand, why would they keep publishing material for a product line they've deprecated already? What kind of crazy business logic says you should put out two competing products? They didn't keep publishing books for AD&D, either, and nobody (except idiots, I guess) wailed about that, either. Every single game publisher works the same. New edition comes out, old edition goes out.


You sure about that? I'd say 4E would require less effort to convert well to a modern setting than 3E did. I do submit though, that unless you want to play Paladins in New York, there are better options.

4E is too heavily invested in the classes, and they wouldn't function for anything except "D&D". Modern games are pretty much impossible to run with rigid classes - that's why d20 Modern used incredibly broad classes based on which attribute you focus on (and prestige classes that were actual narrow roles, which worked nicely). For any and every different kind of 4E game, you'd need a couple hundred pages of new classes and powers. It just ain't gonna work. (That, and while it was easy to retool d20 games deadlier by making death from massive damage non-optional and reducing the point limit, while taking away magic items that are the only way to raise your defenses significantly, doing something similar for 4E would require pretty fundamental changes in the basic assumptions about characters and levels.)

It's just as well - I'd rather see the market left open for games that want to deal with specific genres and subgenres. They're always better at it than generic games.

black dragoon
2008-09-23, 10:27 AM
Yeah that was the nice thing about D20 modern it led to parties needing certain roles. 4E goes to point of you needed X combo for any success. D20 modern had suprising variety at the same time though with just the core.

Tengu_temp
2008-09-23, 10:27 AM
If you've looked at D&D 4E system, you know that it would not even remotely work for a game like d20 Modern, or most of the games / genres / settings that third-party d20 games used.

Of, course, neither really does d20.

List of things d20 represents well:
Bleach

List of things 4e represents well:
Basic 4e setting
Disgaea
Settings based on action video games
Sword and Sorcery settings
Silly games

List of things GURPS represents well:
Gritty, realistic settings
Discworld

List of things BESM represents well:
Most anime, regardless of genre

List of things M&M represents well:
Anything

Starsinger
2008-09-23, 10:49 AM
4E is too heavily invested in the classes, and they wouldn't function for anything except "D&D". Modern games are pretty much impossible to run with rigid classes - that's why d20 Modern used incredibly broad classes based on which attribute you focus on (and prestige classes that were actual narrow roles, which worked nicely). The actual problem is that you're assumed to have combat ability in 4th.

RTGoodman
2008-09-23, 11:10 AM
4E is too heavily invested in the classes, and they wouldn't function for anything except "D&D". Modern games are pretty much impossible to run with rigid classes - that's why d20 Modern used incredibly broad classes based on which attribute you focus on (and prestige classes that were actual narrow roles, which worked nicely). For any and every different kind of 4E game, you'd need a couple hundred pages of new classes and powers. It just ain't gonna work.

I disagree - I think you could take the basic 4E system, change some of the stuff, and have a (workable) Modern setting. Like the d20 version, 4E Modern wouldn't have classes with a specific flavor or anything - you'd probably divide it up by role and just have Striker, Defender, Leader, and Controller, though you could change the name. You'd have to make a ton of new powers, but instead of limiting it to a few per level you'd have maybe 5-10 of each level to choose from, making customization pretty easy. It'd be sorta like having a Defender in standard 4E getting to pick from Paladin and Fighter lists instead of just the list from his class, while the Striker would get to look over Ranger and Rogue lists to pick his powers.


(That, and while it was easy to retool d20 games deadlier by making death from massive damage non-optional and reducing the point limit, while taking away magic items that are the only way to raise your defenses significantly, doing something similar for 4E would require pretty fundamental changes in the basic assumptions about characters and levels.)

I think you could probably implement different death rules pretty easily. I don't know what kind you're actually looking for, but how's this - if you take damage equal to your bloodied value, you must make a Constitution check vs. the Medium or Hard DC for checks of your level. Once you use that, you just have to change death saving throws (not sure about that one, sorry) and you're set.

As far as magic items, I'm pretty certain you could do an entirely No-Magic 4E game. Give a Class Defense Bonus for each class that improves every so many levels, and then just use the Magic Item Threshold Rules to add +1-+6 to defenses, attacks, and damage if you're worried about players being too vulnerable, not hitting enough, or whatever. Since everything you fight in 4E increases in levels with you, even mooks/Minions could still be a threat if all you've got to defend yourself from their bullets is a leather jacket and luck, so you don't even really have to worry about getting ridiculously high defenses/AC.

It might not be a perfect fit, but I really think 4E could be adapts to a Modern game in an acceptable, if not perfect, way.

Asbestos
2008-09-23, 11:15 AM
Of, course, neither really does d20.

List of things d20 represents well:
Bleach

List of things 4e represents well:
Basic 4e setting
Disgaea
Settings based on action video games
Sword and Sorcery settings
Silly games

List of things GURPS represents well:
Gritty, realistic settings
Discworld

List of things BESM represents well:
Most anime, regardless of genre

List of things M&M represents well:
Anything

Hey, you left out the HERO System and the Unisystem (HERO I particularly prefer over GURPS)

Tsotha-lanti
2008-09-23, 11:16 AM
The actual problem is that you're assumed to have combat ability in 4th.

And in 3.5, and 3.0, and AD&D 2nd ed., and so on.

Skill-based games get away from this, which is why they're better at modern settings. The level-and-class system is too integral to D&D to really remove.

rtg0922: I was more talking about defenses. Unless you pull out most of the basic assumptions of 4E - like "Defenses are 10 + ½ level" - you're going to, at best, have highly cinematic games. It's not bad in itself, but it does limit the game a lot. d20 could be pretty flexible - CoCd20 characters had their AC stuck at 10+Dex bonus, and their saves stuck at level+stat bonus, with no ways to raise either; Conan d20 managed an awesome balance and an interesting combat system that was gritty, lethal, yet epic.

YPU
2008-09-23, 11:24 AM
List of things M&M represents well:
Anything

Sorry, for giant robots you need mekton zeta, not MnM other than that. I completely agree. MnM is simply best for many, good for a lot more.

RTGoodman
2008-09-23, 11:24 AM
rtg0922: I was more talking about defenses. Unless you pull out most of the basic assumptions of 4E - like "Defenses are 10 + ½ level" - you're going to, at best, have highly cinematic games. It's not bad in itself, but it does limit the game a lot. d20 could be pretty flexible - CoCd20 characters had their AC stuck at 10+Dex bonus, and their saves stuck at level+stat bonus, with no ways to raise either; Conan d20 managed an awesome balance and an interesting combat system that was gritty, lethal, yet epic.

Are you talking but PCs will have HIGH defenses you think no one will touch? If so, I don't think that's a problem. Leave 'em at 10 + ½ level + ability score and their going to be hit MORE than in regular ol' 4E since it assumes armor (at least cloth or leather or something), at higher levels masterwork armor with a high enhancement bonus, plus at least a neck-slot item that boosts non-AC defenses. Like I said, because monsters level alongside you, even mooks could be a threat if your defenses aren't high (since their attack bonus is a function of their level, meaning it goes up as both you and they go up in level), and your defenses aren't going to be that great with just 10 + level bonus + ability. That's why I suggested a class defense bonus so at least Toughs and Fasts (or Defenders and Strikers, or whatever you want to call them) are more adept and dodging, ducking, dipping, diving, and dodging, while not being able to completely avoid hazards.

AstralFire
2008-09-23, 11:29 AM
Frankly, 3e made more assumptions about equipment than 4e did by thinking that a party with say, Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian, Healer Cleric would be able to take on high level equiv CR challenges. It's much easier to deal with 4e equipment requirements by saying "you get a linearly increasing bonus to these scores as you level" than 3e. They don't give you as broad and crazy a group of benefits that are nearly mandated.

All class-based systems inherently assume improved combat ability and that's not an issue for Modern in specific as much as it is an issue for games which don't expect everyone to be carrying equal weight in all types of fights.

Equipment can also be largely replaced in 4E much more easily using my Avatar solution that I proposed for 3E:

The problem, though, is that the Avatar World doesn't take well to the "Christmas Tree effect," a phenomenon in standard 3rd Edition D&D that results in every Fighter carrying a golf club bag full of different weapons, omnipresent bags of holding, and everyone flying by level 15. There are no magic items at all, after all! You might want to ban them all entirely.

But in reality, the martial D&D classes are balanced around having equipment, and ignoring that can cause serious problems. If you find that for whatever reason, your PCs are not adapting well to a no-magic item setting, you may wish to reintroduce them- slyly.

To use this variant, restrict any magic item gains to those items which enhance already present abilities, like straight enhancement bonuses to weapons, or things that are feasible non-magically, like Fortification to Armor. Magic items that improve ability scores can be thought of in new ways. Gloves of Strength might really just improve your grip and balance to provide a functional improvement to strength without actually making you Hercules. The Carrying and Encumbrance rules rarely come into play anyway.

Make good use of the one-use permanent bonus magic items, like the Manual of Gainful Exercise. To prevent everyone from just reading the book and magically getting stronger, attaching 'sidequest' adventures for PCs to train and gain the most out of their newly found pamphlet gurus can be a fun diversion, especially during downtime.

Players should not be walking around with large amounts of money under this rule set, and will honestly be lucky to have more than a couple pieces of gold as spending money most of the time. They can find, craft, or barter for new equipment, and even if they want to sell things, truly fine weaponry is well beyond the purse limits of the average citizen. The oft-neglected chapter on services and equipment in the Player's Handbook might even see use this way.

Of course, in such a no magic, low technology setting, having more than a handful of money isn't as large a benefit to anyone interested in adventuring, so if a PC in a campaign with this variant wants you to play up her massive inheritance from the Bei Fong family, you may wish to play along. The additional resources can be quite game-changing in the hands of clever PCs, but rarely will they be game-breaking, especially with regards to intraparty balance.

You and your players will, of course, know that they really are using magic item rules, but it's not like it'll matter. Last I checked, there's no Anti-Magicbender.

Starsinger
2008-09-23, 11:30 AM
Just scale defense bonuses along with the "magic" bonus to AC. Although, without magic item properties for crit bonuses, combat may last longer.

Tengu_temp
2008-09-23, 12:21 PM
Hey, you left out the HERO System and the Unisystem (HERO I particularly prefer over GURPS)

Sorry, for giant robots you need mekton zeta, not MnM other than that. I completely agree. MnM is simply best for many, good for a lot more.

I'm listing only games I'm familiar with, so these didn't make it. But yeah, from those I know, M&M indeed isn't the best for mecha - here, it would be BESM.

Another thing that M&M is not good for are those Christmas Tree Effect games AstralFire mentions - where you find or buy more and more magic items that boost your abilities. But seriously, how many books/movies/series have you seen like that? It's a purely video game (and DND) thing.

The Rose Dragon
2008-09-23, 12:25 PM
Not even every video game. Most items I can think of in JRPGs, for example, can be simulated through hero points and (rarely) extra effort.

Kurald Galain
2008-09-23, 12:55 PM
Just scale defense bonuses along with the "magic" bonus to AC. Although, without magic item properties for crit bonuses, combat may last longer.

I seriously doubt those make much of a difference anyway, since they're primarily a source of "hey thats cool!1!" for the players. Unless you're playing at really high level, a 1-in-20 chance of doing 4 or 5 extra points of damage doesn't really matter.