D20 Modern/Future with strong/distinct classes

[Weiser_Cain]

Has anyone altered d20 modern to have distinct classes?
I have my own ideas but I wanted to see if anyone had done it first?

Alternately is there an alternative modern/future RPG system?

[LOTRfan]

I don't know if this helps, but there is a Star Wars d20 (of the non-Saga variety) that has distinct classes. You could try adapting those if you want.

[Grinner]

If I may be so bold, why do you wish for distinct, non-generic classes? I realize the generic classes are often regarded as one of the system's greatest weaknesses, but how many variants of "smart guy" or "bruiser" do you really need?

[Weiser_Cain]

If I may be so bold, why do you wish for distinct, non-generic classes? I realize the generic classes are often regarded as one of the system's greatest weaknesses, but how many variants of "smart guy" or "bruiser" do you really need?

Three I guess, One 'hardware' class, one 'software' and one 'wetware'... though that last one may be a prc as my races are pretty healthy.

[Neoxenok]

When I first tried to get my friends to play a campaign based in the terminator universe* it was a hard sell and I couldn't understand why. It's basically D&D in the modern world (with some major differences, yet, but still fundamentally the same) and we really enjoyed that game.

So after some conversations with them and a few other groups, I've diagnosed d20 Modern's problem as thus:

Yes, it needs character classes - or rather it needs distinct roles for characters to play - a modern equivalent of the "fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric" roles (or samurai, decker, and shaman), or something with associated abilities and skill sets.

d20 modern is very open-ended in this respect and you CAN make whatever niches for yourself that you desire - something I consider a great strength of the system, but I think players are more inspired to particular character concepts if they have a name and a distinct progression for them.

I think a lot of the occupations listed in the character creation section should, themselves, be classes. I'd hate to get rid of the more open-ended character creation but there must be some compromise here. This issue was the basis (and my desire to fix/update d20 modern) for my own project to update D&D 3.5e (in my sig).

I think this would involve classes like -
Soldier (military soldier trained or war and heavy combat)
Enforcer (police, private security, SWAT)
Infiltrator (CIA trained spy, cat burgler)
Socialite (Con Artist, Motivational Speaker, Celebrity)
Medic (Doctor, Combat Surgeon)
Leader (Politician, Naval Commander, Drug Lord)

... and so on. If I were to update d20 modern right now, I would make sure that, like D&D's classes, that they have a definitive role with definitive abilities and skill sets, but are broadly applicable to many actual professions.

The other problem is that d20 modern lacks many of the nifty magic items available in 3.5e - or rather some d20 modern equivalents. The fun of playing the game is getting neat stuff to use in the game.

This would be even more important in a modern game than one based in a fictionalized history because look at a lot of the fiction we watch with all the gadgets and complicated weapons and machinery available and used in those games. I think there really needs to be an entire section just for gadgets and gizmos for players to get or purchase in the game. What's currently available isn't much better than the standard equipment section of the D&D player's handbook.

I hope that helps! :)

[Grinner]

Yes, it needs character classes - or rather it needs distinct roles for characters to play - a modern equivalent of the "fighter, rogue, wizard, and cleric" roles (or samurai, decker, and shaman), or something with associated abilities and skill sets.

d20 modern is very open-ended in this respect and you CAN make whatever niches for yourself that you desire - something I consider a great strength of the system, but I think players are more inspired to particular character concepts if they have a name and a distinct progression for them.

I think a lot of the occupations listed in the character creation section should, themselves, be classes. I'd hate to get rid of the more open-ended character creation but there must be some compromise here. This issue was the basis (and my desire to fix/update d20 modern) for my own project to update D&D 3.5e (in my sig).

A fair point. Why not take True20's method? You would start by creating a few distinct chassis around a few distinct roles. Then, like Pathfinder's Archetypes, create a multitude of different classes from a single chassis by swapping in class features. For example a Mechanic class could be built on the Smart Guy chassis by including a number of class features themed on building and repairing things.

[Neoxenok]

A fair point. Why not take True20's method? You would start by creating a few distinct chassis around a few distinct roles. Then, like Pathfinder's Archetypes, create a multitude of different classes from a single chassis by swapping in class features. For example a Mechanic class could be built on the Smart Guy chassis by including a number of class features themed on building and repairing things.

I'm not aware of True20's rules of play but that sounds like what d20 modern has already - which is the problem.
Depends on how all that falls together, but it certainly sounds valid as long as it's more distinct than what d20 modern has currently.

[Grinner]

I'm not aware of True20's rules of play but that sounds like what d20 modern has already - which is the problem.
Depends on how all that falls together, but it certainly sounds valid as long as it's more distinct than what d20 modern has currently.

More like the generic classes from Unearthed Arcana, but with mandatory Archetypes attached.

[Protocol]

Three I guess, One 'hardware' class, one 'software' and one 'wetware'... though that last one may be a prc as my races are pretty healthy.

Class features need to be inherently exclusive to make sense.

If hardware, software and wetware are all things you can have implanted, they don't work as classes. Because literally anyone can have those things implanted at any time.


As far as D20 Modern classes go, Neoxenok is about right. Although my list would go:

• Burgler
• Detective
• Enforcer
• Hacker
• Revolutionary
• Science Nerd
• Scumbag

A d20 Future class list should go absolutely nuts:

• Ace Hacker
• Battlemind
• Bounty Hunter
• Collective
• Cybergolem
• Death Commando
• Doom Rider
• Drone Queen
• Electrosper
• Fhtagnist
• Genesoldier
• Kata Master
• Laserporter
• Metric Badass
• Mindblower
• Neoatomist
• Psychic Knight
• Rainbow Akashic
• Skinshifter
• Space Cop
• Supreme Commander
• Telepath
• War Machine
• Worm Host

[The Dragon]

You'd have a fictional setting with 1st level supreme commanders? That sounds like a prestige class to me. Although I don't even think it should be a prestige class. It should be a rank in the army.

This actually ties in with the reason why d20modern is bland. It's because fighters are bland, and in d20, everyone is a fighter.

In my mind, a class describes what you can do, not what your job is.

[Protocol]

"Supreme Commander" in the sense that they are very good at commanding people and groups. They would probably have a scaling AoE "inspire" action where they inspire the troops, make them fearless, etc, etc. Probably also some logistic abilities somehow. And of course it would give them significant abilities in the starship battles game you have to scale up to at some points.

Not "Supreme Commander" as in a rank.

You would indeed also change the action resolution and damage to systems to the point that you are not playing D20 Modern/Future.

[Thomar_of_Uointer]

I would recommend you throw out the base classes and allow players to pick advanced classes from first level.

[Weiser_Cain]

Those were crafting classes. Think mechanic, software engineer/hacker, doctor.

I actually want to keep the list down and just do a lot of race substitution levels and PRC's.

I'm thinking there will be a level adjustments that come along with implants.