4th edition & Modern [Archive] - Wizards Community

4th edition & Modern [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tempus665
03-18-06, 02:02 AM I don't believe 4th edition is coming soon. That said, when it does come, will it bring change not only to D&D but also to Modern? What are your thoughts on this?
Ranger REG
03-18-06, 02:18 AM Personally, I wish some of the rules material are consistent, especially if you're passing off any one of WotC's core game books as a requirement for playing any d20-labeled games.

I know it sounds nitpicky, but I like continuity and consistency.

For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13.
superdeadsmurf
03-18-06, 03:07 PM For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13.

In D&D it's much easier to raise stats than general modern (not urban arcana/other magic/psionic/biotech based campaigns) therefore it's approximately equally as hard to get two weapon fighting in the two rule sets in my opinion.

What I'd like is a 3.5 updated version of Modern, it's quite jarring to see the old ruleset when you're used to playing 3.5, I mean intuit direction- it's always been a terrible skill. Plus the old Psionic System really was bad- and that's what they based the Modern Psionic system on.

When 4.0 comes out in say, 4/5 years (I believe full development will begin around 2 years from now) They will put out a new modern system to accompany it. Possibly using the recently regained Gamma World as it's Highlight Campaign Setting (Along with the fairly popular Urban Arcana)
lastcurse
03-18-06, 07:19 PM I don't know, but they had better get the class balancing right. Clerics and druids are just far and away so overpowered.
eclipticavatar
03-18-06, 07:29 PM Personally, I wish some of the rules material are consistent, especially if you're passing off any one of WotC's core game books as a requirement for playing any d20-labeled games.

I know it sounds nitpicky, but I like continuity and consistency.

For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13.

The only consistancy in d20 games is 1d20 + modifiers.
Ranger REG
03-19-06, 01:27 AM In D&D it's much easier to raise stats than general modern (not urban arcana/other magic/psionic/biotech based campaigns) therefore it's approximately equally as hard to get two weapon fighting in the two rule sets in my opinion.
Perhaps, but not every d20 Modern game is a no-FX game, and not every D&D game is a midlevel-magic or high-magic game. :smirk:

What I'd like is a 3.5 updated version of Modern, it's quite jarring to see the old ruleset when you're used to playing 3.5, I mean intuit direction- it's always been a terrible skill. Plus the old Psionic System really was bad- and that's what they based the Modern Psionic system on.
Personally, I don't really care about WotC's model for psionics. If anything, I'd like more support for a third-party supplement to both D&D/d20 and d20 Modern ruleset: an expanded Psychic's Handbook from Green Ronin.

But if WotC decided to finally use a skill-n-feat model (the way they have used for their version of the Star Wars), I'd be more likely to embrace it. But the hard reality is that I'm in the minority.
Dragonblade275
03-19-06, 09:13 PM But if WotC decided to finally use a skill-n-feat model (the way they have used for their version of the Star Wars), I'd be more likely to embrace it. But the hard reality is that I'm in the minority.There's at least two of us. I was lucky enough to find a copy of the Star Wars Revised Core Rulebook at a local Barnes & Noble last week. I only recently learned that new books for Star Wars weren't being printed and it took some work to find a copy.... Anyway, I really like how they handled the way the Force works in the game with the feat/skill system. It really seams like a beutiful system and I can only hope that one day there will be an expanded system for various styles/schools of magic in DnD style (perhaps, not HP-based but mana point based?).

The Star Wars Force system is very good from what I've read so far.
SOPI
03-19-06, 09:54 PM Just a thought, but since 1st and 2nd edition D&D were both similar, wouldn't that leave the idea of 4th edition being d20 system as well open?
StoneHead
03-19-06, 10:20 PM I hope 4th isnt released for a good 5 years at the least. I have so much 3.0 - 3.5 material its not even funny. I could build a bomb shelter with all my books... a bomb shelter that could protect me from the most devastating attacks you can imagine. Hell Fire missles, tornados , a gang attack, spear weilding kobolds... but 4th editon will shred my feeble fortress asunder, not to mention my wallet. :weep:
Dragonblade275
03-19-06, 10:51 PM I'll not buy 4th Edition unless it comes with a completely customizable computer program for making characters and monsters. I'll have to be able to add homebrewed versions of everything and the program better be able to handle it mathematically. Also, every supplement for 4th will have to come with an upgrade to this completely customizable computer program so that I don't have to type up anything in the supplement to use it for characters or monsters.
Lord Gwydion
03-20-06, 12:47 AM Well, if the rumors are true that 4th Edition is a couple years away and that WotC will be dropping the d20 License and not making 4th Edition OGL, then I have a feeling they may drop the Modern line. This is, of course, just speculation on my part.

My reasoning?

First, if it's true that they will do away with the d20 License, and not allow the core mechanics of 4th Edition to be used by other publishers, I can't see that they would continue to keep their "other SRD" system open, either.

Secondly, Modern doesn't sell as well as D&D. It does better than the other core games that are no longer being produced (Cthulhu, Wheel of Time, etc.) did when they were being published, but it's nowhere near as good of a seller as D&D. Without third party support, likely sales numbers for Modern would drop even further.

Thirdly, they can't "take back" the SRDs or already released OGC, meaning third party publishers will still be able to produce OGL material for both D&D and Modern. This means that there are likely to be a lot more holdover gamers who keep playing 3E D&D and Modern (or other OGL games based off of the d20 SRDs) than there were holdovers playing 2E or older editions of D&D when 3E came out. Third party publishers aren't likely to offer much in the way of support, but plenty of fans will still be able to, so free fan-produced material on websites are likely to keep the games going to some extent.

Fourthly, there's been a trend with WotC to trim the fat as much as possible. They got rid of lots of D&D settings and just stick to a barely developed Greyhawk (if you want it developed, you need older edition material), Forgotten Realms, and now Eberron. With d20 Modern, they made it setting non-specific so that GMs could incorporate old TSR non-fantasy games, such as Star Frontiers, Top Secret SI, Boot Hill, Gamma World, or whatever, as they please. I expect the suits at Hasbro would like Wizards to trim more fat, which would mean for RPGs, pretty much sticking only to D&D.

So, in my opinion, WotC would not update d20 Modern in the way they will eventually update D&D. I think this is a shame, because the Modern rules are a bit more elegant than the 3E D&D rules are.

I think the only way the d20 Modern system would be updated would be if 4E integrates some of the Modern concepts into D&D in an attempt to make a single core rules system that could be used for any type of game from the Stone Age to the Far Future, complete realism to absurdist fantasy/sci-fi, rather than the current approach which is to have a single game engine that can be used to make any rules system.

In other words, unless WotC tries to make 4E D&D into a new GURPS, I don't see Modern surviving as a "supported" game (although I can see it surviving as a played game thanks to the OGL).
Mortepierre
03-20-06, 04:51 PM Did anyone else catch this small statement about Matthew Sprange's GAMA trade show report on ENWorld?

Rumours of 4th edition D&D made the usual rounds, but this time they were coming from more reliable sources and there was a fair weight of analysis to back it up. I may be prepared to open a book on a Gen Con '07 release with no d20 licence...

It has gotten me worried..

1e: 1978
2e: 1989
3.0e: 2000
3.5e: 2003
4e: 2007?

Good god, you don't even have the time to get used to an edition that it's already obsolete these days :banghead:
Kresalak
03-20-06, 05:00 PM If it followed the pattern, 4e (there will be no 4.0, since that implies there will be a 4.5. They had better not do that.) will come out in 2011. However, there should be concerns with the d20 system and the OGL, since many companies may choose to stick with the 3.X system, which would impact the sales of 4e.
CriminalTruth
03-20-06, 05:19 PM The update from 1979 and 1989 were so compatable its not even funny. First off all they did was elimiate 1 class from the core books ( assassin ) and elmiated the " automatic death chart" IMMEDIATELY people went out to find the 1st ED core books in the 1990's for new classes.. they went out and found the fiend folio and unearth arcana as well to add barbarians and just about anything they could... basicly.... EVERYTHING was compatable...

ORIGINALLY all you needed to play D&D were the 3 core books.. accually when monster manual came out it was a compilation of ALL monster " apendix's" that TSR had put out. so it was HUGE. FR WAS well under develped chult was an island ( is it still isnt it connected or something? ) underdark was unmapped.. i mean.. DM's could do ANYTHING with a map...

skies were the limit with the except as follows

Bards owned all
Theifs were effective until 9th level at that point they were pretty much maxed on everything
Fighters/paladins/rangers were pretty much meat and potatoes
Wizards were amazing PVP. But in REAL high level games... their job were basicly 2 functions.
Teleport/make magic items cause they couldnt touch anything.. everything had " MAGIC resistance " which was a total crapola for wizards

clerics... LMFAO..>!!>>!!>!> they werent even PLAYABLE

3.0 was a HUGE over hall that was much needed...
3.5 made the game what it is today.. AWSOME...

4.0 is just going to make players hate wotc
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple
03-20-06, 05:21 PM When 4e comes, if WotC makes it OGL, then companies WILL still make 3.x material. How do I know? Because there are still groups that make and maintain AD&D material. When 4e comes around, then companies will still produce 3.x material so long as the OGL for 3.x stays valid and there's still groups playing it. Buuuut they'll also make 4e material as long as they're allowed to do so.
Seeker95
03-21-06, 07:26 AM Perhaps, but not every d20 Modern game is a no-FX game, and not every D&D game is a midlevel-magic or high-magic game.While this is a true statement, the "other" games implied by your statement are deviations from the core. Great and wonderful deviations, but deviations nonetheless.

The rules are made for core. When the DM chooses to move a game away from the core, it is up to him/her to take into account the differences. If you add magic to a Modern game, be prepared for things that were hard to become "too easy". If you take magic away from a D&D game, be prepared for things that are easy to become "too hard".
Seeker95
03-21-06, 07:28 AM To those whining about "if" and "when" 4e moaners:

Shut the hell up until you see what and when 4e *is* before you fill the air with your cries of protest. Folks did this when Tom Cruise was cast as Lestat and went on to love Interview with a Vampire. Folks did this when they heard there was going to be another Batman movie, and then absolutely loved it.

When WotC announces a 4e, then you can believe it is coming.
When WotC releases 4e, then you can comment with validity on the changes it actually contains.

Until then, you're a rumor-monger and a wolf-crier.
OravennasBrother
03-21-06, 06:44 PM PErhaps it would be useful if someone culd start a Sticky thread in Uncomnig releases that discusses the changes which are desirable for a 4th edition. Several changes in the DMG - particularly on community and world creation NEED complete overhauls - these are sections which remained unchanged between 3.0 and 3.5, though they may have been (at least partially) addressed by the PHB 2 and DMG 2 (I have neither of those books, so I can't tell).
Ranger REG
03-22-06, 12:56 AM While this is a true statement, the "other" games implied by your statement are deviations from the core. Great and wonderful deviations, but deviations nonetheless.
The core is basically d20 + modifier vs. DC. Anything else is extras. ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tempus665 03-18-06, 02:02 AM	I don't believe 4th edition is coming soon. That said, when it does come, will it bring change not only to D&D but also to Modern? What are your thoughts on this?
Ranger REG 03-18-06, 02:18 AM	Personally, I wish some of the rules material are consistent, especially if you're passing off any one of WotC's core game books as a requirement for playing any d20-labeled games. I know it sounds nitpicky, but I like continuity and consistency. For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13.
superdeadsmurf 03-18-06, 03:07 PM	For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13. In D&D it's much easier to raise stats than general modern (not urban arcana/other magic/psionic/biotech based campaigns) therefore it's approximately equally as hard to get two weapon fighting in the two rule sets in my opinion. What I'd like is a 3.5 updated version of Modern, it's quite jarring to see the old ruleset when you're used to playing 3.5, I mean intuit direction- it's always been a terrible skill. Plus the old Psionic System really was bad- and that's what they based the Modern Psionic system on. When 4.0 comes out in say, 4/5 years (I believe full development will begin around 2 years from now) They will put out a new modern system to accompany it. Possibly using the recently regained Gamma World as it's Highlight Campaign Setting (Along with the fairly popular Urban Arcana)
lastcurse 03-18-06, 07:19 PM	I don't know, but they had better get the class balancing right. Clerics and druids are just far and away so overpowered.
eclipticavatar 03-18-06, 07:29 PM	Personally, I wish some of the rules material are consistent, especially if you're passing off any one of WotC's core game books as a requirement for playing any d20-labeled games. I know it sounds nitpicky, but I like continuity and consistency. For example, 3.5e Two-Weapon Fighting feat's prereq is Dex 15, but d20 Modern feat's prereq is only Dex 13. The only consistancy in d20 games is 1d20 + modifiers.
Ranger REG 03-19-06, 01:27 AM	In D&D it's much easier to raise stats than general modern (not urban arcana/other magic/psionic/biotech based campaigns) therefore it's approximately equally as hard to get two weapon fighting in the two rule sets in my opinion. Perhaps, but not every d20 Modern game is a no-FX game, and not every D&D game is a midlevel-magic or high-magic game. :smirk: What I'd like is a 3.5 updated version of Modern, it's quite jarring to see the old ruleset when you're used to playing 3.5, I mean intuit direction- it's always been a terrible skill. Plus the old Psionic System really was bad- and that's what they based the Modern Psionic system on. Personally, I don't really care about WotC's model for psionics. If anything, I'd like more support for a third-party supplement to both D&D/d20 and d20 Modern ruleset: an expanded Psychic's Handbook from Green Ronin. But if WotC decided to finally use a skill-n-feat model (the way they have used for their version of the Star Wars), I'd be more likely to embrace it. But the hard reality is that I'm in the minority.
Dragonblade275 03-19-06, 09:13 PM	But if WotC decided to finally use a skill-n-feat model (the way they have used for their version of the Star Wars), I'd be more likely to embrace it. But the hard reality is that I'm in the minority.There's at least two of us. I was lucky enough to find a copy of the Star Wars Revised Core Rulebook at a local Barnes & Noble last week. I only recently learned that new books for Star Wars weren't being printed and it took some work to find a copy.... Anyway, I really like how they handled the way the Force works in the game with the feat/skill system. It really seams like a beutiful system and I can only hope that one day there will be an expanded system for various styles/schools of magic in DnD style (perhaps, not HP-based but mana point based?). The Star Wars Force system is very good from what I've read so far.
SOPI 03-19-06, 09:54 PM	Just a thought, but since 1st and 2nd edition D&D were both similar, wouldn't that leave the idea of 4th edition being d20 system as well open?
StoneHead 03-19-06, 10:20 PM	I hope 4th isnt released for a good 5 years at the least. I have so much 3.0 - 3.5 material its not even funny. I could build a bomb shelter with all my books... a bomb shelter that could protect me from the most devastating attacks you can imagine. Hell Fire missles, tornados , a gang attack, spear weilding kobolds... but 4th editon will shred my feeble fortress asunder, not to mention my wallet. :weep:
Dragonblade275 03-19-06, 10:51 PM	I'll not buy 4th Edition unless it comes with a completely customizable computer program for making characters and monsters. I'll have to be able to add homebrewed versions of everything and the program better be able to handle it mathematically. Also, every supplement for 4th will have to come with an upgrade to this completely customizable computer program so that I don't have to type up anything in the supplement to use it for characters or monsters.
Lord Gwydion 03-20-06, 12:47 AM	Well, if the rumors are true that 4th Edition is a couple years away and that WotC will be dropping the d20 License and not making 4th Edition OGL, then I have a feeling they may drop the Modern line. This is, of course, just speculation on my part. My reasoning? First, if it's true that they will do away with the d20 License, and not allow the core mechanics of 4th Edition to be used by other publishers, I can't see that they would continue to keep their "other SRD" system open, either. Secondly, Modern doesn't sell as well as D&D. It does better than the other core games that are no longer being produced (Cthulhu, Wheel of Time, etc.) did when they were being published, but it's nowhere near as good of a seller as D&D. Without third party support, likely sales numbers for Modern would drop even further. Thirdly, they can't "take back" the SRDs or already released OGC, meaning third party publishers will still be able to produce OGL material for both D&D and Modern. This means that there are likely to be a lot more holdover gamers who keep playing 3E D&D and Modern (or other OGL games based off of the d20 SRDs) than there were holdovers playing 2E or older editions of D&D when 3E came out. Third party publishers aren't likely to offer much in the way of support, but plenty of fans will still be able to, so free fan-produced material on websites are likely to keep the games going to some extent. Fourthly, there's been a trend with WotC to trim the fat as much as possible. They got rid of lots of D&D settings and just stick to a barely developed Greyhawk (if you want it developed, you need older edition material), Forgotten Realms, and now Eberron. With d20 Modern, they made it setting non-specific so that GMs could incorporate old TSR non-fantasy games, such as Star Frontiers, Top Secret SI, Boot Hill, Gamma World, or whatever, as they please. I expect the suits at Hasbro would like Wizards to trim more fat, which would mean for RPGs, pretty much sticking only to D&D. So, in my opinion, WotC would not update d20 Modern in the way they will eventually update D&D. I think this is a shame, because the Modern rules are a bit more elegant than the 3E D&D rules are. I think the only way the d20 Modern system would be updated would be if 4E integrates some of the Modern concepts into D&D in an attempt to make a single core rules system that could be used for any type of game from the Stone Age to the Far Future, complete realism to absurdist fantasy/sci-fi, rather than the current approach which is to have a single game engine that can be used to make any rules system. In other words, unless WotC tries to make 4E D&D into a new GURPS, I don't see Modern surviving as a "supported" game (although I can see it surviving as a played game thanks to the OGL).
Mortepierre 03-20-06, 04:51 PM	Did anyone else catch this small statement about Matthew Sprange's GAMA trade show report on ENWorld? Rumours of 4th edition D&D made the usual rounds, but this time they were coming from more reliable sources and there was a fair weight of analysis to back it up. I may be prepared to open a book on a Gen Con '07 release with no d20 licence... It has gotten me worried.. 1e: 1978 2e: 1989 3.0e: 2000 3.5e: 2003 4e: 2007? Good god, you don't even have the time to get used to an edition that it's already obsolete these days :banghead:
Kresalak 03-20-06, 05:00 PM	If it followed the pattern, 4e (there will be no 4.0, since that implies there will be a 4.5. They had better not do that.) will come out in 2011. However, there should be concerns with the d20 system and the OGL, since many companies may choose to stick with the 3.X system, which would impact the sales of 4e.
CriminalTruth 03-20-06, 05:19 PM	The update from 1979 and 1989 were so compatable its not even funny. First off all they did was elimiate 1 class from the core books ( assassin ) and elmiated the " automatic death chart" IMMEDIATELY people went out to find the 1st ED core books in the 1990's for new classes.. they went out and found the fiend folio and unearth arcana as well to add barbarians and just about anything they could... basicly.... EVERYTHING was compatable... ORIGINALLY all you needed to play D&D were the 3 core books.. accually when monster manual came out it was a compilation of ALL monster " apendix's" that TSR had put out. so it was HUGE. FR WAS well under develped chult was an island ( is it still isnt it connected or something? ) underdark was unmapped.. i mean.. DM's could do ANYTHING with a map... skies were the limit with the except as follows Bards owned all Theifs were effective until 9th level at that point they were pretty much maxed on everything Fighters/paladins/rangers were pretty much meat and potatoes Wizards were amazing PVP. But in REAL high level games... their job were basicly 2 functions. Teleport/make magic items cause they couldnt touch anything.. everything had " MAGIC resistance " which was a total crapola for wizards clerics... LMFAO..>!!>>!!>!> they werent even PLAYABLE 3.0 was a HUGE over hall that was much needed... 3.5 made the game what it is today.. AWSOME... 4.0 is just going to make players hate wotc
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple 03-20-06, 05:21 PM	When 4e comes, if WotC makes it OGL, then companies WILL still make 3.x material. How do I know? Because there are still groups that make and maintain AD&D material. When 4e comes around, then companies will still produce 3.x material so long as the OGL for 3.x stays valid and there's still groups playing it. Buuuut they'll also make 4e material as long as they're allowed to do so.
Seeker95 03-21-06, 07:26 AM	Perhaps, but not every d20 Modern game is a no-FX game, and not every D&D game is a midlevel-magic or high-magic game.While this is a true statement, the "other" games implied by your statement are deviations from the core. Great and wonderful deviations, but deviations nonetheless. The rules are made for core. When the DM chooses to move a game away from the core, it is up to him/her to take into account the differences. If you add magic to a Modern game, be prepared for things that were hard to become "too easy". If you take magic away from a D&D game, be prepared for things that are easy to become "too hard".
Seeker95 03-21-06, 07:28 AM	To those whining about "if" and "when" 4e moaners: Shut the hell up until you see what and when 4e is before you fill the air with your cries of protest. Folks did this when Tom Cruise was cast as Lestat and went on to love Interview with a Vampire. Folks did this when they heard there was going to be another Batman movie, and then absolutely loved it. When WotC announces a 4e, then you can believe it is coming. When WotC releases 4e, then you can comment with validity on the changes it actually contains. Until then, you're a rumor-monger and a wolf-crier.
OravennasBrother 03-21-06, 06:44 PM	PErhaps it would be useful if someone culd start a Sticky thread in Uncomnig releases that discusses the changes which are desirable for a 4th edition. Several changes in the DMG - particularly on community and world creation NEED complete overhauls - these are sections which remained unchanged between 3.0 and 3.5, though they may have been (at least partially) addressed by the PHB 2 and DMG 2 (I have neither of those books, so I can't tell).
Ranger REG 03-22-06, 12:56 AM	While this is a true statement, the "other" games implied by your statement are deviations from the core. Great and wonderful deviations, but deviations nonetheless. The core is basically d20 + modifier vs. DC. Anything else is extras. ;)