Displacer Beasts & Desert Eagles: A D20 Modern Review

 

It seems fairly obvious that White Wolf has accumulated a veritable treasure trove over the years and has informally entrenched itself as the authority on role-playing games in the modern setting. In this light, Wizards of the Coast (WotC) has decided to enter this arena with the hope of providing some useful competition. As the self-proclaimed leaders of the fantasy genre of RPGs since it took TSR under its belt, they now present: D20 Modern. The name is short, with only two words, and too lackluster compared to the other games of its genre. However, there is a reason. D20 Modern sports not one but three game settings and promises to develop each beyond the scope of the Core Rulebook. Hence, what the name reflects is its versatility.

It seems fairly obvious that White Wolf has accumulated a veritable treasure
trove over the years and has informally entrenched itself as the authority on
role-playing games in the modern setting. In this light, Wizards of the Coast
(WotC) has decided to enter this arena with the hope of providing some useful
competition. As the self-proclaimed leaders of the fantasy genre of RPGs since
it took TSR under its belt, they now present: D20 Modern. The name is short,
with only two words, and too lackluster compared to the other games of its
genre. However, there is a reason. D20 Modern sports not one but three game
settings and promises to develop each beyond the scope of the Core Rulebook.
Hence, what the name reflects is its versatility.

Player characters are made in the usual fashion of D20 rules with a plethora of
skills and feats to match the overabundance of options available in the modern
world. The Core Rulebook contains six basic classes; known as Heroes, each
emphasize a certain ability from a familiar list of traits hewn from the AD&D
system (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma). Players also get to choose a starting occupation that may affect their characters' beginning age, skills, feats, or Wealth Bonus.

What sets D20 Modern apart from other RPGs? There are several points, both good and bad. First of all, D20 Modern makes the hallmark as the first RPG to have PCs with limited abilities. Your PCs are created with a trait known as Action Points (APs) which are not refueled during game play. Each character will get new allotments whenever they gain levels. Keep in mind it takes longer to gain higher levels as the game progresses. Although the effect of the points become greater with experience, the points are few and far between. You can refrain from choosing an AP-fueled ability in the process of character growth in order to stretch the points. Simply put, it doesn't make much sense why the incidence of incredible outcomes of your PC goes down with time and experience. Shouldn't it go the other way around? For those who played Top Secret (produced by TSR in 1980), this is in no way comparable to the phenomenon of Fortune points. Fortune points are an optional rule and may only be spent in cases with approval from the GM. Players do not even know how many Fortune points their characters have.

D20 Modern also puts its foot down on a new non-lethal combat rule: all damage produced by non-lethal combat lasts until the next attack. All of it is
superficial (scratches and minor bruises). This is the rule which evokes the
greatest uproar from most GMs and players. If you took a deep breath and a step away from the soapbox, you might give the rule some thought. The game setting is unique in one sense: all PCs are within the scope of the law. In our
respective communities, a person who is not armed with a lethal weapon and does not endeavor to deliver lethal damage will not kill anything. The most damage you can do with a non-lethal attack is a knockout. Call it a psychological barrier against killing.

Lastly, the game brings back die-roll finances akin to TSR's Marvel Superheroes
and the White Wolf system. While it still retains the number-crunching
qualities of a D20 system, it does affect the time and effort a PC may use up
before material gains come into play. Known as the Wealth Bonus, this modifier
increases when selling expensive items and decreases during binge-shopping.
This may also be affected by feats and the Profession skill. There are some
poor conversions to the rule (such as bribery and aiding another) but it
otherwise simplifies what would be a harrowing system of credit cards, loans,
and cold cash.

All in all, the book includes character creation, a hefty section for equipment,
available advanced classes, and alternative campaign settings with corresponding additional advanced classes. On top of all this, there is also an exhaustive list of encounters and a detailed section on storytelling, game-mastering, and NPC creation. Oh, and don't forget the magical and mental power listings.

So why isn't D20 Modern taking the RP world by storm? Unlike White Wolf with
its pre-packaged fully fleshed-out World of Darkness, this game comes with three skeletal scenarios. Not much detail for a modern game when compared to its contemporaries. Most people have also made their choice with which games to play when running which genre and shifting may be too much of a bother. By experience, however, the most common reason why D20 Modern games run dry too fast too soon is most GMs involved with this newborn game are either too inexperienced or have the 'honeymoon' syndrome. The latter occurs when a campaign feels to be a good one while you're reading the book but, after one or two sessions, the GM loses interest.

So what's the bottom line for D20 Modern? For me, it's an alternative. It is
viable if you're a number-cruncher and the White Wolf system has too much angst for your taste. As with all D20 systems, the campaign history will require a lot of input and creativity from the GM unless you're planning a Buffy-esque or X-filish jaunt. Sad to say, most believers in the D20 system have a mean
obsessive-compulsive trait and get hung up on one rule or another (most commonly the non-lethal combat section) and leave the game altogether. There are others who were expecting more bang for their buck and, seeing how much the core rulebook contains, I don't know what else they were looking for. Complaints range from the wish for more feats, to more skills, to better encounters. I guess people were expecting a game on a whole new level and not a D&D game with a modern setting.

I simply fail to see why WotC has bothered to create such an RPG - why, when GURPS provides the player with all the modern setting options he might want. Wealth? Covered by SJ. All contemporary skills? Covered by SJ :D
With the plethora of settings available, from serious to hilarious - Cops, Spec Ops, Illuminati, Black Ops, Illuminati University, Psionics, High Tech - you just don't need a WotC D20 game out there which is just, but barely, managing to cover the fantsy genre, but WILL fail miseraby at providing rules for a contempoary setting - how do they want to cover ... say, armor class (stupid rule) - noone is wearing armor today. Autofire? Even White Wolf has a rule that makes foes HARDER (?!) to hit the more bullets you fire...
I guess that as I found DnD already too restricting, and that in a setting where people could be pigeonholed better than today, I will find it far too restricting for a current setting.
Go for GURPS. Go for WoD. I only use DnD for gaming with my younger siblings who are 15, 13 and 11. Siplicity is the only merit of DnD - I failed to see any other.

Whoa...hate much? There is a reason that DnD outsellf WoD all the time. Better system, easier system that does not require hours of your time to make a character, just to play a simple game with your friends.

It's cool that you do not like DnD, just try not to insult those people who do. It really destroys your arguement.

Personally, I think d20 modern to be very effective. It's main job was to get DnD gamers to tap into a modern setting. A lot of people do not want to learn a new system in order to game. d20 modern let's us have the best of both worlds.

We are not forced to play idiot undead just to game in a modern setting and we can use the ruleset we love. Win-win for those of us who do not have the time or money to buy a bunch of different rules.

I feel sorry for Gurps and WoD. The whinger-angst crowd is all they have and d20 modern already have a larger fan base in a year than they had in 10.

Dave

"It seems fairly obvious that White Wolf has accumulated a veritable treasure
trove over the years and has informally entrenched itself as the authority on
role-playing games in the modern setting. "

The WoD is a typical modern setting? Try GURPS instead.

"First of all, D20 Modern makes the hallmark as the first RPG to have PCs with limited abilities. Your PCs are created with a trait known as Action Points (APs) which are not refueled during game play. Each character will get new allotments whenever they gain levels."

D20 Modern is not the first RPG to do this.
Alternity's Last Resort Points spring to mind. If I bothered to actually go look things up, I'm fairly sure I could find a couple of other ones.
Didn't Spycraft D20 also use Action Points or something...?

"The game setting is unique in one sense: all PCs are within the scope of the law. In our
respective communities, a person who is not armed with a lethal weapon and does not endeavor to deliver lethal damage will not kill anything. The most damage you can do with a non-lethal attack is a knockout. Call it a psychological barrier against killing."

Without proper training, you can not even choose to do lethal damage with unarmed attacks, IIRC. I can assure you that this is not at all like RL. People get beaten and kicked to death more often that you seem to think.

No offense meant Desky, but you seem rather uninformed about the RPG world. This article failed to do anything for me. It did not convince me of any opinions, nor did it inform me of anything revelatory.
What's the deal?

Dave,

So you take the time to bash Echomirage for being narrowminded about d20 , and then in the very next paragraph you mock anyone who plays gurps or WOD.

Pot. This is Kettle. You're black.

Also, WOD and GURPS both have a much larger fan base than d20 modern. Might want to check your sales figures and market shares before you open your mouth. D20, when taken collectively, is the largest piece of the market. But d20 modern is a very small slice of that pie. White wolf is the second largest RPG company, and easily dwarfs D20 modern.

D20 Modern suffers from a lot of flaws. D20 is definitely better suited to handling a fantasy genre. Still, I think its great that people can play modern games without having to learn a new system.

But Shadowrun, WOD and several other systems do a great job of handling technology. A better job, in my opinion, than D20. So rather than bash the systems that you don't seem to know or play maybe you should accept that something good other than d20 exists.

Fanboys. **shudders**

I've only ever played D20; and while it works for fantasy, its too limited for a modren setting. D20 is really meant for a quick and easy sword-swingin-Orc-bashin good time. If modern had about eight more books for very specialized classes it might work, but as is its far too basic.

Thanks Arkelias,
I just anted to add - I have tried DnD - both 2nd ED, 3rd ED, as well as the D20 Star Wars RPG, so I guess no-one can blame me for not having tried. I spent about ... ehhh ... seven hours? making my DnD character, and a similar amount of time working on my SW D20 char, I have even drawn one of them from several angles, so noone can blame me for not taking the system seriously or seeing it with prejudice.
Over the years, I have laid my oh so dirty GURPSist (something like fascist, but far far worse :))¡paws on a whole bunch of RPGs - Toon, Das Schwarze Auge (a pretty much detailed German RPG - Shadows over Riva uses the system), Shadowrun, WoD, and some others unknown in the US, or GB for that matter. I guess that I have a wealth of experience to compare, both from the countless hours of GMing and several characters I have played (I am a gamer for how long? Seven years? Whew!)
The conclusions I have come to are: Shadowrun has a GREAT setting, covers the technology nicely, the attribute vs. skill dilemma (attributes are cheaper and not of so much use) and combat rules leave something to be wished for, but otherwise it is fine (I love the saying: "Drones are a girls best friends") WoD has excellent background that was given much thought (unlike DnD, I might add - noone at WotC has considered for example the consequences of Resurrect spells, Transmute base elements and similar ... communication spells and mind control spells have far-reaching consequences in any society) and a streamlined and balanced system - and you dont roll up stats - any game that rolls up stats has a flaw too large to be overlooked IMHO.
And as for GURPS (okay, I have a soft spot for that - I just love the skills like "Flower Arranging", "Equestrian Acrobatics" or "Explosive Ordnance Disposal" and advantages like "Cool") - for High Tech, they have consulted an Army Weapons Expert and history loonie who has given them detailed descriptions for all guns from a 15th century musket to a modern Barret 82 Heavy ... Sniper? ... Rifle (?! thats a cannon boy!) For GURPS Discworld, they have consulted Pratchett. GURPS Cyberpunk was so well written that the CIA mistook it for actual terrorist/criminal/anarchist material and confiscated it. I guess I dont have to speak further.

Yours

EchoMirage

Dave Said:

I feel sorry for Gurps and WoD. The whinger-angst crowd is all they have and d20 modern already have a larger fan base in a year than they had in 10.

Just wondering if you can back that up. Where are your statistics sourced from.
Normally, I ask d20 fans to back up statistical statements with evidence, it goes quiet.

This is a genuine question - does anyone know where game demographics exist. Lots of threads throw around the statement that d20 saved RPG. Does anyone know how many people played various RPG's pre and post d20?

Dave: difficult to see how you can back up your statement about better easier system. I don't know anyone who took more than 15 mins to role a character up with previous versions of DnD. In version 1, you could do it in 5 mins.
Now you need a computer.

Back to thread: d20 was designed for a mediaeval fantasy setting. Its OK for that. It simply does not ** yet ** deal well with lots of post - gunpowder problems. Of course, not to save d20.5 (...shudder...) won't be able to do it. Though if you look at the mess of 3.5, its unlikely.

See Sean Reynolds and Monte Cooke's thoughts/reviews on 3.5, especially about 'mastery'.
- Grey

I find it extremely annoying to have people tear down d20 because they have an investment in other systems. This is what echo did and while I do not blame him for an opinion, he came off as a snobby gamer who is "past" childish things such as DnD. Considering the numbers that DnD and d20 Modern have over any other system, it is a jerk thing to do to equate all those people with children, especially when the average DnD player is late 20s/ early 30s.

I am not mocking those people who play Gurps or WoD, I am mocking those people who are such snobs that they have to tear people down in order to establish their superiority.

Defend the guy all you want, but I am just not going to take it any longer. He wants to throw out a constructive argument, fine. However, if he wants to insult people, then he better be prepared to receive the same treatment.

Grey,

Simplely look at the published earnings statements the companies provide and you'll get a good picture. Yeah, white wolf is in second place, but it is only at the head of a crowd with WOTC running about a quarter million miles ahead.

I have read both Monte's and Sean's comments. Even they support 3.5. As for mastery, it took me about 3 days to read through the new material. Yeah, I need to read the spells again, but after 3 years, my group still looked up the spells, so not much difference on that front.

Dave

Dave,

You can't compare WOTC's earnings (which include products like Magic: The Gathering and Pokemon card games, who sell very much) with White Wolf. Try backing your arguments with reason, not with your interest on one game.

As a side note, I have no special love for WOTC not White Wolf. Just wanted to set things straight here regarding money and corporate revenues.

While I don't normally reply to rudely phrased comments from what I have written, I decided to make an exception in this case. Before I begin, I would like to state that I will not contribute to flame wars because they are counterproductive.

"The WoD is a typical modern setting? Try GURPS instead."

I based this comment on a peer approval rating which showed that the WoD has a much greater fanbase compared to GURPS. This is reflected by their income as well because, unlike WotC which rakes in a considerable amount of income from the MtG CCG as pointed out by Zig, White Wolf has a comparably limited array of products. This fact has already been mentioned by Arkelias and Dave as well. The reason why I did not include Shadowrun is that it exists in a different genre compared to d20 Modern. Most of it is futuristic already.

"D20 Modern is not the first RPG to do this.
Alternity's Last Resort Points spring to mind. If I bothered to actually go look things up, I'm fairly sure I could find a couple of other ones.
Didn't Spycraft D20 also use Action Points or something...?"

I think Last Resort Points resembled Fame and Fortune Points rather than Action Points. Top Secret (even in its SI version) outdated Alternity. Spycraft uses Budget and Gadget Points instead of Wealth.

"Without proper training, you can not even choose to do lethal damage with unarmed attacks, IIRC. I can assure you that this is not at all like RL. People get beaten and kicked to death more often that you seem to think."

Yes, I agree with your last statement because the first two contradict themselves. That's why I wrote down the following phrase which you also quoted: "does not endeavor to deliver lethal damage." When someone gets beaten or kicked to death, the person dealing such damage usually is trying to kill him for one reason or another. Try killing someone with the full knowledge that you aren't trying to kill (i.e., pulling your punches).

No offense meant, Belphanior, but this article is a critique. It isn't meant to convince you of anything. If it didn't inform you of anything, then you deserve a pat on the back. You're well informed! The next time you go huffy-puffy, try taking a 10-count and a cold shower. That's the deal.

As for Greyshirakwa:
"This is a genuine question - does anyone know where game demographics exist. Lots of threads throw around the statement that d20 saved RPG. Does anyone know how many people played various RPG's pre and post d20?"

As far as I know, game demographics do not exist. That entails corporate research and this will usually support their own company. Otherwise, they will not release it. In my opinion, however, d20 did not save RPG. It was still very much alive when d20 arrived. It did breathe a breath of fresh air into Dungeons and Dragons, though. I would think that there are more post-d20 RPG players than pre-d20 mainly because of gender acceptance (most players in the 70's and 80's were male) and age independence (most would-be players were discouraged by bad media in the 70's and 80's).

Desky said: "I based this comment on a peer approval rating which showed that the WoD has a much greater fanbase compared to GURPS."

Eh, blow it off, Desky. You're right. I'm a hardcore GURPS fan, and even I would concede you this point. GURPS, in its strict form, has no setting at all. That may sound inane, but it's the purpose behind the whole system. Pointing out that GURPS has a number of well-researched worldbooks in the modern setting does *not*, in my opinion, invalidate your assessment that the WoD is a benchmark modern setting. On an anecdotal level, I know many women players who are huge fans of the WoD, and none at all who cherish GURPS. My bad luck? Perhaps. But it seems to reinforce my belief that you're right on this count.

Desky said: "It was still very much alive when d20 arrived. It did breathe a breath of fresh air into Dungeons and Dragons, though. I would think that there are more post-d20 RPG players than pre-d20 mainly because of gender acceptance (most players in the 70's and 80's were male)..."

This is unquestionably true, and I'm happy about it. However, I must say that d20 coincides with gender acceptance rather than being responsible for it. You don't necessarily seem to be making this claim; I'm just trying to point out that the appearance of d20 appears to be a happy accident on this count. A (relatively) user-friendly system appeared just as women were beginning to experiment with tabletop RPGs in greater numbers.

Fellow GURPSers and others: don't trash me on the view of d20 as being user-freindly. You'd be preaching to the choir. I know that other systems are far more internally consistent and easy to use than d20, but the rub is convincing others of this. The perception of d20 is that it's user-friendly, and that perception counts for quite a lot.

Hey, fellows, I am not snobbish - I am just of the pure roleplayer/loonie sort, and frequently a GM besides. You should consider my open-mindedness concerning DnD from this viewpoint: I've got 2nd ed - PHB, DM-Guide and Monstrous Manual. I have bought 3rd Ed to check it out despite living in a former Washau pact country and having about 120 bucks to spend each month, and I have to pay my studies (travel fares, textbooks, utensils) and my clothing out of that, mkay? I spent precious 30 bucks on it and did not like too much what I got. I have even given it a try - both as player and GM. I still did not like what I saw. I have not given up, tried a different GM and ... guess what.
And yes, I AM TRULY PISSED at WotC who consider the marketing worth of their ideas more than their worth to the gaming community. Just see MTG - I have been an avid player from 13 to ... 18? Since they stopped considering the effect of their new editions on the hobby, I stopped playing. I have vasted precious 25 USD on one of the newer editions and was disappointed - but that does not belong in here ... or does it? I consider most of 3rd ED purely commercial, and all who oppose me, please excuse me for demanding some value for my scarce cash. I will not complain again :D
Yes, I am angry. Two of my hobbies have been ruined by commerce already - MTG and Warhammer (have any of you seen the new Ed of WH fantasy? Some truly awesome miniatures, but ... the rules, oh the rules. Check out the Dwarf, Empire and Dark Elf army books) I do not want the RPGs ruined by commerce, no thank you. And woe on me, I have aided WotC in accomplishing just this by giving them my thirty bucks. Crap.
I have bought several WoD books over time - Mage, Changeling, Hunter, and have not regretted a single page. That lovingly detailed material is worth my own lifeblood, and I would rather strve (I sometimes had to - low on cash means no pizza for me, right?) than to let one of them go. I have been reinforced in my medicine studies by reading GURPS Biotech, and have laughed at every single page of GURPS Discworld. I caressed every letter in GURPS Compendum, and can claim to know almost every skill, or (dis)advantage by heart.
What I liked in 3rd Ed was some of the artwork and that my brothers liked the colorful pages. Not enough I guess. Yeah, the book is harcover, and the cover is pretty. Still not enough. To all those who like pretty colors more than true worth - I havent said anything, do not bother yourself with thinking about this letter, and excuse me if I have insulted you.
To Cocytus: true, true. The only gamerchick I know (besides the one writing for this page :D) is using DnD (and one of my players scared her off just before she tried GURPS because he thought with his dick rather than brain for that short, tragic moment) I guess DnD is player-friendly but not GM-friendly. Stupid "shit-into-gold" spells and stupid "I-survive-the-moon-crashing-on-me-if-I-save" Monks and stupid spells that never fail if you are naked. Stupid spell components - If they are missing, the players are pissed, if they are not a restrictive factor, then what is the point of having them? Not GM-friendly at all.

Hmmm. I hope the RPers will see the true way, and the DnD crowd will not lynch me.

Again, the last sentence killed it. So DnD players are not RPers?

This is what I classify as game snobs. A majority of people like DnD, therefore, those people are not "true" gamers because they really have no idea how to roleplay. You have to use a system other than DnD to know the true path.

Ugh.

I have run Gurps, Rifts, Robotech, Vampire etc. The only thing I got for my money was a lot of rule books that have a ton of varied rules and do not offer half the fun of DnD.

I find no problem running DnD games. The system is far more flexible than most people give credit. Players are easy to find and it offers a great system to teach new players.

But I guess I should avoid speaking because while I may have run a variety of games, my love of DnD means that I am not really a true RPer, and thus, have no right to an opinion.

Dave said:

"This is what I classify as game snobs. A majority of people like DnD, therefore, those people are not "true" gamers because they really have no idea how to roleplay. You have to use a system other than DnD to know the true path."

I wouldn't go that far. As I've said before, I ran a lengthy D&D campaign using d20 rules and enjoyed it. I've been gaming for 24 of my 32 years, and the vast majority of my time as a role-player has been spent playing D&D. Good role-playing can and does occur in D&D; that's not the argument (at least, not from my corner).

My beef with D&D is that the system promotes dungeon crawling more than it promotes other styles of play. You may say, "so what? Dungeon crawling made the entire concept of role-playing popular, and it's part of the game's damned title!" That's true. It just gets old to me. When I'm ready for a less combat-oriented mode of play, I find that D&D can only help me so far.

D&D (by default) assigns experience points for killing things. Its spell list is heavily geared toward combat. Its skill list is similarly weighted toward dungeon crawling. While it is true, as some of my d20-fanatic friends constantly remind me, that the system *can* support other modes of play, my point is that it doesn't do so very well. It is my experience, both as a DM and as a player, that even a richly designed, intricately plotted, and culturally complex D&D campaign gravitates back to the dungeon with a heavy inexorability. You can't fault the system for doing what it is designed to do, but you can accuse it of not being very flexible.

I find that PCs, both in the campaigns I've DMed and the campaigns in which I've played, rarely if ever shy away from combat. It's frustrating to me that parties get so complacent that they tend not to run from an encounter even when they're outclassed. The expectation of a typical D&D group is that you should fight something you encounter because A) you can handle it and B) you get experience for defeating it.

Furthermore, despite its combat focus, D&D's abstract combat system of Hit Points and Armor Class discourages tactical thinking. I read a detailed argument by Sean K. Reynolds regarding why 3d Ed doesn't use called shots. In terms of game mechanics, he's right. But I like it when a risky but intelligent tactic pays off for players, even if it does so rarely. In D&D, it's not possible. You can't blind someone with a weapon. You can't cripple an opponent's sword arm with a well-landed blow. All you can do is wait your initiative turn to roll the dice and do as many HP of damage as you can. Let me be clear: the abstract combat system is, after 3 editions, well balanced and thought out. You can't introduce modifications to it to "increase realism" without jeopardizing that delicate balance.

So what's the solution? It depends on what you're in the mood for. Lately, I've been wanting to see gritty campaigns where combat is lethal enough that characters enter it with circumspection, and certainly never view it as the default solution to every encounter. It's my opinion that GURPS is much better for that than D&D is. When I'm in the mood for light and fluffy fantasy, where the role of magic, magic items, and monsters in society requires neither serious thought nor detailed explanation, where dragons need to be slain with sword and sorcery and their hoards plundered, I happily reach for my D&D books.

You can say that I'm shying away from D&D because it promotes munchkinism, but that I'm a hypocrite because my pet system (GURPS) promotes min-maxing (which it does...if GURPS has a fatal flaw, that's it). I'd say: it's all about the players. If I play D&D, I won't play with munchkins. If I play GURPS, I won't play with min-maxers. You have to play with people whom you respect and trust, and you have to know the limitations and capabilities of your gaming system.

Dave said:

"I have run Gurps, Rifts, Robotech, Vampire etc. The only thing I got for my money was a lot of rule books that have a ton of varied rules and do not offer half the fun of DnD.

I find no problem running DnD games. The system is far more flexible than most people give credit. Players are easy to find and it offers a great system to teach new players."

There are a couple of points here. The first is fun, which is the point of any game. It's also highly subjective. If high fantasy is fun for you, then by all means continue playing D&D. It's *the* system for high fantasy, and 3d Ed has brought a great deal of rhyme and reason to a formerly chaotic and piecemeal system.

As for varied rules, I have to say that d20, despite its obvious superiority to 2nd Ed and AD&D, is overrated as a simple system. It has been pointed out many times that creating a 3d Ed D&D character takes quite a long time. More important (to me) than that, though, is the fact that d20 led me into some of the bitterest player-vs-DM arguments I have ever experienced. We argued about Haste; about Potions of Glibness; about Quaal's Feather Token (for criminy's sake!); about Challenge Ratings; and on and on and on. After 9 months of using the system, we were still arguing on a regular basis. I thought to myself: shouldn't we know this system backward and forward by now? Even one of my hardcore-d20-advocate friends had to admit that part of our trouble was that there were just too many damned rules, and that they were as often as not scattered through a number of books.

[I understand that 3.5 has rectified some of the problems that plagued me throughout this last campaign, and all I can say is: I hope so! I'm about to start playing in a 3.5 campaign!]

My point is that d20 has a reputation as being easy to use, and that GURPS has a reputation for being hard to use. At this point in my life, I don't understand either. I told the players in my 3d ed campaign that, had we been using GURPS rules, our arguments would've subsided after the first few weeks. It is (to me) a much more coherent and internally consistent system. 3d Ed, for all its vast improvements over previous incarnations of D&D, still has some of the patchwork feel of the AD&D rule set.

As for being flexible and being a great system to teach new players, well...you've heard my thoughts on that. Dave, I really don't think it is very flexible, and I think some of its ambiguities and inconsistencies can be maddening to "newbies," who at my table were forced to sit listening in bored silence while the "RP vets" berated each other over differing interpretations of the rules. I think d20 has other strengths, especially in the realm of quick, easy-to-follow combat. But you're right that players are easy to find. That's always been truer of D&D than of any of its rivals, and I suspect it always will be.

Dave said:

"But I guess I should avoid speaking because while I may have run a variety of games, my love of DnD means that I am not really a true RPer, and thus, have no right to an opinion."

Don't be silent on my account. My love for D&D is no small thing, and I consider myself a pretty darned fine role-player. I just don't think that d20 is the be-all and end-all that some have represented it as being. It has its strengths, but it also has its flaws. Those flaws, for the time being, do not discourage me from seeking redress in the mechanics of other systems.

Apologies to all for having helped to hijack this thread and drive it willy-nilly across the countryside. I have less experience with other d20 systems than I do with D&D 3d Ed, so my observations in response to Dave were mostly confined to that experience.

However, my reservations about D&D hold true for the two other d20 systems with which I am familiar: Star Wars and Call of Cthulhu. Star Wars compensates by separating physical hit points from a more nebulous kind of defense.

Call of Cthulhu, in my opinion, just didn't need to get remade. d20 has nothing to offer it in the way of realism, which isn't all that appropriate to the genre, and which was the only thing lacking from the Sandy Peterson/Chaosium version of the game.

In some contexts, classes and levels feel bogus. Call of Cthulhu is one of those. My 8th level semiotics professor has more hit points than another professor, simply because of his experience? Come on. That's contrary to the whole spirit of the genre.

With high fantasy, it can be a different story. Even though it only took a few arrows to kill Boromir (just try doing that in D&D!), I often remark that it would be easier to build Legolas and Gimli as high-level 3d Ed characters than it would be to build them in GURPS, where, by comparison, they'd be much easier to kill.

Actually, I was responding to Echo.

That aside, I understand some of your trouble with d20. My solution has always been to assign experience based on what I think people have earned. Unless I run a heavy combat evening, I rarely assign xp based on combat. Usually, I base my xp on story awards.

As for being hurt etc., I do think that can be bothersome. My solution was to create my own unique campaign world were things worked somewhat differently. And Mongoose has released a good "called shot" system, which I use.

d20 can be gritty or high fantasy. It all depends on the GM.

I don't personally hold very much love for D&D, but I have based my opinion on my limited knowledge of it. That means that I have never played D&D or even AD&D, but I know something about it and I surely know what my brother has said about it. I really despise experience system, levels and classes. But, because I have not played it I would certainly try it if oppurtunity comes by because I want to really test to have more accurate opinions.

I personally prefer GUPRS, and even so that it's combat is not as lethal as it could be its pain rules really substitute that one. I personally prefer to have very dangerous and detailed combat and the most importantly actually hard combat is very rare in my games, most of them are just that characters surprises or/and backstabs enemies.

System is not the most important thing.

I've experimented with a good fistful of systems, and not too long ago played a fairly extensive d20 modern campaign, set in a technological/fantasy far future alternate world. It was pretty successful, though the wealth check system did give us some grief. But we all had fun, and the system didn't get in the way too terribly much.
Combat made sense, skills made sense, it all worked quite nicely. Classes and levelling were ok; the more generic titles and no multi-classing restrictions helped to let the players customize their characters the way they wanted instead of locking them down or dishing out penalties. I'll note also that the DM did a fine job on the campaign, as well, which always helps.

I won't say that Wizards outdid themselves with Modern, but I will say it's an acceptable system, no doubt about it. I'd be willing to play it again, and even to DM.

RPG geek credentials: in the past year, I've played Whitewolf's Hunter(DM'd this one-terrible book really, but fun for 'night of the living dead' type games), Hero System, GURPS(DM'd this as well), Pendragon, 3rd ed d&d... Been roleplaying when it's all said and done for about 12 years. In short, I've got basis for comparison.
:)

Okay, I'll throw my hat into the ring here and ante-up my 2-cents. I've been RPGing for 26 years, most of that has been behind the big black drape! I started with D&D ... and then I moved on. I have approximately 20 systems in my library and I'm here to tell you: "No system is perfect!"

There is no perfect universal system. There are pros and cons to every system and while one may be better than most for Fantasy, it will more than likely suck for Modern Techno-Thriller.
I ran a 3-year campaign in a "Highlander/Immortals" style storyline. While the system I used for the beginning eras "Ars Magica" was great for that period, it was useless a few hundred years down the road.
Perhaps "Hero" or "Gurps" would have worked better, but that's not the point.

In any case ... I'm just getting into this whole "D20, 3ed D&D, Modern era, new Star Wars" world and from what I've seen so far, I am impressed. I think it is safe to say that WotC has done something quite awesome.

They have designed a system, and then opened their doors and said "Hey! All you other guys out there ... Come on over, look at this and write up anything you want as long as you put these two pages at the back of the book."

What a concept! Why try to do everything? Why try to steal ideas and people from a dozen other companies when you can invite them all to do whatever comes to mind and allow the public to put it all together themselves.
D20 'is' the ultimate RPG system because nearly 100 companies and 'all' their employees are writing, designing and publishing material that can be used in whatever way the customer wants to.

XYZ company puts out a book with a new and original game world. Why design a new RPG system for it and hope that the public likes it. Better to pay for the D20 rights, put the 2 pages in the back of the book and tell the customer "For use with the D&D 3rd Ed. Players Guide Book".

In the D20 "Urban Arcana" book they tell you to use any D20 material you want, and especially 3rd Ed D&D.
Has anyone paid any attention to what Kevin Sambada (may my mouth be washed out with soap!) 'tried' to do with "RIFTS"? A good attempt, until his ego ate his brain!
He wanted to have a hand in every genre, his "Multiverse" where anything could be brought into anywhere else. Some think it worked, most don't.
"Gurps" came close, but the system is too loose (as least I think so).

In D20: Want to bring your Jedi into D&D? Go ahead.
Want to do a "Resident Evil" campaign? Go ahead.
Want to have D&D style Dwarfs in your "Star Wars" campaign? Go ahead.

What am I looking forward to?
AEG releases "Stargate SG-1 RPG" soon.
I'm psyched!!
Modern era Earth-humans going to worlds that could be anything! Nordic, Chinese, Native American, Stone Age, Victorian Earth, maybe ... D&D??

Call me a nut!
Call me a fool.
That's my 2-cents.

Well, I'm probably opening myself up to ridicule and abuse, but I just couldn't resist commenting on this topic. So, here goes:

I like DnD. d20 Modern's not bad. And GURPS, though I haven't played it *quite* yet, looks excellent.

I'm a female roleplayer who started with a small group of friends, all relatively unexperienced, in a DnD off-the-rack campaign. My DM had only run the demo adventures up to that point, it took me two hours+ to get my character togethor (the first of three half-elf clerics about four months), the group was too big (6 players) and didn't mesh very well, we had two rogues and no fighter, barbarian, or monk (just a cross-dressing female paladin played by a guy, and an overly 'friendly' ranger), and our resident spellcaster was addicted to sleep spells. (The same guy played more or less the same character in the three campaigns we ran, which is why I played a half-elf all three times. I would have *liked* the extra feat from human, at least once, but I wouldn't have gotten to use it because I would've been asleep the entire time.) Oh yes, and I thought that (a) all DnD adventures had to be off-the-shelf deals, and that they were designed to be played like Diablo II quests. (Whack things, get treasure, do exaclty what is required, move on to next adventure.)Still, I had fun. A lot of fun.

We eventually scrapped that campaign, said goodbye to the two most annoying players, and played a couple of months straight on a single campaign. Around the end of that campaign, we were still working on the off-the-rack adventure, the DM was getting tired, I had discovered that DnD was not intended to be played in a linear fashion, I was becoming interested in DMing, and d20 Modern came out. I checked it out at my local gaming store, was treated to a full explanation of it's virtues, limitations, and capabilities by the guy behind the counter, and bought it.

I've always been a world-building GM. I love coming up with my own game setting, I don't like being forced to work within someone else's world, and I don't need a fleshed out setting to start a campaign. I saw this book, and my thought immediately was "forget the fantasy, I can run a sci-fi futuristic setting with this".

And that's what I did. I suggested the idea to my group, they seemed interested, and we made characters over the course of an entire five hour session. The setting was a post-apocalyptic future of a space colony planet that I had created a long time ago as a setting for my science fiction stories. Looking back on this, it was probably not the best of ideas to run that particular setting on those rules. It was (and is, as the campaign is still going) a lot of fun.

We made several modifications to the rules. One, we used the 3rd edition rules for subdual damage. We figured that wouldn't hurt the game balance, and it didn't, partially because we never needed subdual damage rules. Two, we scrapped the wealth bonus deal, because the planet the characters we were on didn't have money, you just stole or scavenged stuff. My gun-happy friend also worked out a much better (in his opinion) set of rules for autofire and the like, which we never used much because it involved rolling for each bullet. This was very time consuming.

At the present, I am finishing up the first chapter of that campaign, where they get to get off the planet, with the idea that they will be able to go roving around in space for a while. After they get off the planet, we're going to take a break for a few months and do something else: either Vampires: The Masquerade, Axis and Allies meets Diplomacy (please oh please no), another (short) game of 3E, a series of high-level one-shots (whee! running around blowing stuff up with a level 20 character I made two minutes ago!) or possibly a game of GURPS. Then we are planning on converting their characters to GURPS if they want to keep them and making new ones if they don't, and doing the running around in spaceships thing with GURPS.

I have a few things to say about 3E and the d20 system. Yes, it's fun, it's easy, it's good for thwacking things video game style. It's fine for roleplaying, but it sometimes takes some work for the GM to get players to do it, because the game doesn't have built in rewards.

d20 is all about balance. Every element in the game is carefully balanced with all the others, and the GM must work to make sure it stays that way. This makes the game difficult to play outside of it's specific genre, because if you don't have tables and charts for everything, things get tricky.

Pete says:
"In D20: Want to bring your Jedi into D&D? Go ahead.
Want to do a "Resident Evil" campaign? Go ahead.
Want to have D&D style Dwarfs in your "Star Wars" campaign? Go ahead."

Now, you may be able to do this, but I can't. To bring a character from one genre to another requires a significant amount of effort put into making sure it's balanced with the other characters. When doing 3E to d20 conversions, this particularily applies to equipment. "Hmm. My gunslinger kicks butt on my fighter. He just runs around shooting the poor guy. Gee, I wonder why that could be." Also, magic is difficult to calibrate for. "Hmm. My wizard that I just moved from 3E to d20 is seriously trashing the place because he's zapping fireballs left and right and there's NOTHING ANYONE CAN DO TO STOP HIM. How could that happen? I thought you could mix the genres." Or "Huh. The side my cleric is on always seems to win, somehow, even though the other side has more fire power. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that my team can heal some/most damage instantly, and the other team can't. Hmm . . ." Maybe it works for Star Wars because thats fantasy anyway.

d20 is just hard to add stuff on to. I can't really talk for GURPS right now, but since it was designed to be flexible, I'll bet it's a lot easier to stick different components togethor for a coherent game, and not have to worry about wrecking the balance.

Anywho . . .
that's my opinion.

Natalie:

Welcome and thanks for posting.

As far as genre miscibility goes, I think what Pete was trying to say is this: because the rules are essentially the same for all d20 genres, you *can* mix the genres just to see what happens. Doing so may unbalance play briefly, as you pointed out, but it doesn't have to: it's up to the GM to make sure that things don't get out of hand.

GURPS allows the same thing to happen: crossover campaigns are possible because of the shared ruleset. But it has no edge on d20 in terms of automatic balance.

So, if you want to run a crossover campaign, what do you do? Here are some suggestions:

--Is your gunslinger running amok in a fantasy world with his "strange crossbow"? Well, he'll do that...until he runs out of bullets. Moreover, in d20, he won't be able to walk over high-level characters because even a gun won't accomplish a one-shot kill. And a Protection from Normal Missiles spell would work wonders. Mind you, in GURPS, his weapon will be a lot more lethal, but the right wizard will still be able to shut him down...or better yet, reflect his bullets *back* at him!

--Is your mage running amok in a modern setting? Well, there's no reason that no one can do anything about it. Who says that a secret society of wizards doesn't exist? I like to run a modern setting with a group of mages dedicated to a) controlling the use of magic and b) keeping the existence of magic a secret. They're powerful, they're wealthy, they dress in suits, and they would be *extremely* unhappy with an interloper from another world shooting fireballs around like he owned the place.

--In either instance, there's nothing preventing the GM from menacing the character in question with a nemesis from her own world setting. If one person can cross over, so can another. What if your gunslinger is cast into a fantasy world, only to discover that his old enemy Dead-Eye Dick has come over as well? What if your mage finds that her steps through NYC are being dogged by Natalie the Necromancer and her horde of undead minons? See what I mean?

I'm glad that you're giving GURPS a try. I and other GURPS enthusiasts believe that it has logical rules and one of the best damn character creation systems ever made. I am also a big fan of the magic system...check it out and I think you'll see why.

Forgot to mention--if you want to shut down your mage rampaging through a modern setting, sic a SWAT team on her. It's hard to fireball the sniper you can't see, and whose scoped, high-powered rifle could kill you from well out of fireball range even if you could!

Ok, a lot of various opinions have shot back and forth regarding d20 Modern and other games. I'd like to chime in with my opinion, if I may.

I bought D20 Modern and the Urban Arcana Campaign Setting knowing what t was. It was my way to get my group of players out of WoD games and Rifts. Between myself and another GM, we had been swapping back and forth between Rifts, Vampire, Werewolf, and Mage. We even created a Matrix game using Mage rules (not too diffcult). The problem was that we always ended up bored with each game after only 2 or 3 sessions. The WoD games are just too depressing most of the time and while Rifts has a great deal of material, too much of it concetrates on world building and major events rather than making settings where low level characters can have fun.

I grabbed D20 Modern, having already played both D20 Star Wars and 3E DnD. I quickly solidified several ideas for 'Magic Meets Technology' games into a series of adventures forming an entire campaign. It was easy. I had years of background to work with, since all of my players were utterly familiar with your typical DnD monsters and abilities. They jumped right in and began fumbling around rather quickly as well.

This has resulted in a game that has now lasted longer than any of our previous attempts. It was the best outcome for our group, since most of the players were unwilling to delve into the extensive rules for GURPS (I'm the only one of us that knows that system) and they didn't want to go back to DnD.

D20 Modern has its flaws, but I usually house rule them and go on. I don't seem to have any problem with the fact that the settings aren't detailed. I built my own fictional city with my own fictional companies and personalities and then tossed in a few fictional villians and went to town. It takes a good GM to build a campaign for any RPG. And it takes a lot more than just a bunch of 'worldbooks' or details on various clans/tribes/etc that a pc is a part of to give color to a campaign.

Basically, I'm treating D20 Modern as a limited (for now) version of GURPS with more familiar, less complicated (and a whole lot less realistic) rules for my players to deal with. It works quite well and doesn't send us home from each game session wondering if we actually accomplished anything.

Blah, I've rambled on long enough...

I like d20 Modern and the sourcebooks that go with it...except for weapons locker. Too much info for me, but I can see how someone could put it to use in their campaign if they are extremely detail oriented or gun fans.

For all you wieners complaining about dnd's character generation. download a generator!!! i make 3.5ed characters in like 5 min!! I have never played d20 modern but i think im going to buy it because i love how the new d20 system works! 2ed wasn't to great but 3rd is really smooth! i acomplish more in a dnd session than any other game.

For what it's worth I think d20 Modern is a well done adaptation of the rules set. It's smooth and well thought out as well as generic enough to do anything you want with it. At first browse the game looked like total shit, especially for the cover price. Later I downloaded it in .pdf format and really read it and my mind was changed. The game suffers from poor marketing but oither than that it's really well done. It's not the modern D&D taht I first thought it was.

I've been a gamer for a long, long time (over 20 years now) and if I've learned one thing in that time its this...systems don't make or break games. The settings, players and GM do. It doesn't matter if its d20, GURPs, Unisystem, Hero or the WOD (or any of the myriad other systems out there), its the non-mechanics part of any game that makes it worth playing.

Its rarely a system that makes you go "wow, that's so cool". Its the game world presented, because if you're a good GM you've already altered your favorite system to what you consider a "better" version (which is highly subjective). I've known people to use GURPS books for D&D games because they liked the world presented. I've known people who use Shadowrun books with Cyberpunk 2020 (because they think the shadowrun system sucks for combat). In the end it comes down to the people playing and the world presented to them, mechanics simply aren't that important.

For the record my preferred games of choice are All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Paranoia, Cyberpunk 2020 and d20. I find Gurps too bogged down in details that I can't be bothered to sift through (same with Rolemaster).

ya know for some of us it's not the systems that area a problem. Myself I own many , many gaming systems , heh many that never even took off(a la alternity) but the point I want toi make is all the games and all the systems have their upside and downside , but why hack one when they all have problems. Just let people play what the like and move on. I for one enjoy the d20 system as it has a simple set of rules that transfer to many systems. Whitewolf has a similar system making all of their games practically interchangeable as well. so what's the problem ??

The problem with the balance issue you speak of isn't a D20 problem, which is inherently balanced with itself even when moving from system to system. The problem is the change of environment and lack of all sides being equal. In many sci-fi/post-apoc stories, medical technology is almost instantaneous in how it works on an individual. Having combat medics with hypo-sprays is a good way to balance them with the power of a cleric's healing powers. As far as mages are concerned, not even they have the same raw destructive power that modern missles and nuclear warheads do, so they would gawk at the pure destructive power. A couple well placed grenade launchers balances their evocation capabilities quickly. Fighters are supposed to be well adapted to using weapons, but would have the most problems adjusting to the new environment, but they already have the feats and stats to fire modern weapons, they just need to buy a new feat (or some such appropriate adjustment) in order to use modern firearms or mechaninized suits or whatever is appropriate.

It's just a matter of using your imagination in combination with technology or setting up a campaign that makes it easy for the crossover.

Remember this as far as that poor fighter is concerned too... The fighter/barbarian, after dropping their armor, is likely much faster than your gunbunny toting around an assortment of destructive weaponry and ammunition for it.

Gurps. Sourcebooks are excellent, but for my taste the rules are just too complicated. D20? In a way, I think it did save gaming. It provided the industry with a chance to thrive.

White Wolf, as far as I know, almost went under recently. The only thing saving it is the work they do for d20.

I am not a fan of angst, dark is okay, but only if I can ventilate it with a shotgun.

Modern is not bad, not bad at all. And I will play it. My RPG compadrés all play d20, so the rules will not require translation.

As far as my experience, over 20 years, and I have owned and gm'd many systems.

Personal taste, all of it.

your forgetting the first rule of dnd rule 0 whitch is change what needes to be changed for the campaine to work.