what WAS right with D20 future? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

what WAS right with D20 future?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
trappedslider
Mar 23, 2009 22:43:14 After discussing with some one about how much was wrong..it came to them there there had to have been something right with it,so i'm going iwth this...

The Jump gate system and the dimensional travel stuff...
#2
MechaPilot
Mar 23, 2009 22:49:02 Gadgets to modify weapons.

I'll admit the ones that upped the damage needed to have a level restrictor on them (or something), but i like options like a folding stock, or a high-tech plastic, or a selector for mission-specific ammo.
#3
narukagami
Mar 23, 2009 23:23:35
Gadgets to modify weapons.

HAHA, no.

Honestly? The only thing d20 Future did right was do everything wrong. :P
#4
backstabbist
Mar 23, 2009 23:27:58 The concept of Gadgets was intresting, and might have worked ok,
but a whole bunch of the gadgets were just horribly broken.

Kinda like the concept of having Fighter Wing rules.
The idea has such potential, but the actual text rules were less than fair

The way Ship Armor (hardness) is non-ablative works pretty good.
Makes more sense than trying to imagine a laser taking 7mm armor evenly off every surface of the ship so the next shot will make the whole ship armor thinner still, till the last shot completely removes all armor from the entire hull.
Future did it right, Punch a small hole in the armor and no follow up shots can aim well at the Target Size Fine same spot
#5
penchant
Mar 24, 2009 0:01:39 There were many good ideas and still alot to use in Future so long as the DM was willing to appropriatly filter it. Future, like Modern, was a tool kit and not a finished product. Just like a DM has to decide to allow FX powers and classes and what mix of those is appropriate, you cannot simply allow everything from the Future book as well.

Things I like:

Good Starting Occupations

I like the PL system to give a frame of reference, though It serves more as a checklist than a hard rule

Some good Advanced classes (though not all)

Great campaign ideas. I like the Dimension X setting, though I haven't run one.

The Gadget system: but again these are rules for the DM, not players and the pricing is a suggestion, not a rule.
#6
Wolfen_Fenrison
Mar 24, 2009 2:51:45 I personally loved the mutation rules, and was giddy as a school girl to them expanded in d20 apocalypse and future player's guide.

I also liked the cybernetics rules and the variants from cyberscape and future player's guide help make playing cyborgs more viable.

To be honest if it wasn't for d20 future I wouldn't have gotten into d20 modern, being raised by sci-fi geeks and being one myself I couldn't help but get the book and I got d20 modern when I reilized that I need it to use future, now I own all the WotC and Green Ronin/The Game Mechanics material produced for the system and have yet to find a more flexible, user friendly, generic d20 rules system. If d20 future did anything right its that.
#7
rhialto
Mar 24, 2009 3:25:53 I really like the "new" alien races they ported in from Star Frontier.
#8
Waylan_Wolf
Mar 24, 2009 8:35:56 Things Future Got right

Progress Levels (although some of the equipment should probably be re-arranged: PL6 portable environment generator I'm looking at you!)
Starting Occupations (except for Heir)
Advanced classes
Campaigns
Some of the Gear
Some of the Gadgets
Traveler Science
Starships (as long as you never want to mix starship combat with any other form of combat)
Mecha (as long as you never want to mix mecha combat with any other form of combat)
Robots (as long as you didn't ask why robots and mecha were built completely differently... the only difference is one has a pilot and one has a computer to control it.)
Cybernetics
Mutations
Aliens

So pretty much I think it got everything right... until you try to mix and match... and then it all falls apart.
But as a tool box its awesome... lots of ideas for GMs and with a bit of work, the in-compatibilities can be over-come.
#9
backstabbist
Mar 24, 2009 9:18:53 Sorry Waylan,
but I gotta say the Starships general has too much wrong with it,
maybe parts are ok, but as a whole the weapon scaling thing alone ruined it (150HD per laser... sheesh)
#10
narukagami
Mar 24, 2009 10:20:51
Things Future Got right

Progress Levels (although some of the equipment should probably be re-arranged: PL6 portable environment generator I'm looking at you!)

Eh, I didn't like when GURPS shoehorned all technology into set levels of progress, I didn't like it in d20 Future either.
Starting Occupations (except for Heir)

Ok, I'll give you that.
Advanced classes

*cough*TRACER*cough*
Campaigns

Generic.
Some of the Gear

Emphasis on some.
Some of the Gadgets

Like one or two.
Traveler Science

This actually wasn't bad.
Starships (as long as you never want to mix starship combat with any other form of combat)

Completely disagree, the starship rules are garbage.
Mecha (as long as you never want to mix mecha combat with any other form of combat)

Again, completely disagree, these are just as bad as the starship rules. If not, worse. Mecha vs Mecha combat doesn't even work half the time as weapons don't scale but armor does.
Robots (as long as you didn't ask why robots and mecha were built completely differently... the only difference is one has a pilot and one has a computer to control it.)

The robot rules aren't bad but could use some improvements.
Cybernetics

Easily exploitable.
Mutations

Easier to exploit than Pun Pun.
Aliens

Eh, I found them pretty bland.

So pretty much I think it got everything right... until you try to mix and match... and then it all falls apart.
But as a tool box its awesome... lots of ideas for GMs and with a bit of work, the in-compatibilities can be over-come.

I know you have a soft spot for the book because you wrote an article about it on the site, but its not that great. The main reason it inspires GMs to create anything is because they look at it and go "WTF is this garbage?" and make their own rules. In that sense it is good for ideas, but thats not a positive one. The compatibility issues are just part of the problem, as not only are a lot of the rules incompatible with each other, they're incompatible with themselves.
#11
backstabbist
Mar 24, 2009 11:01:30 Advanced classes
*cough*TRACER*cough*

We need a +1 MeToo button for this

#12
nclanceman
Mar 24, 2009 11:04:41 Well... if it wasn't for Future, I wouldn't have looked into Alternity. Does that count?
#13
Waylan_Wolf
Mar 24, 2009 11:09:50 Just because I like it doesn't mean I'm gonna jump up and down shouting "You're wrong!!!!!!111!!!" at people who don't...

There's a ton of things I DON'T like about Future, but I'm not posting them here because that's not what the thread is about...
Before they got rid of the Future specific board, I had probably dozens of posts listing every flaw I could find in the rules.

I found ways to overcome them for my games... but then again, I LIKE tinkering with game mechanics... I haven't found a single system that I didn't eventually house rule the crap out of. So I guess my soft spot for Future was that there was so much to work with.;) :P :D
#14
backstabbist
Mar 24, 2009 11:34:29
but then again, I LIKE tinkering with game mechanics

thats what I was saying about FighterWings
I like they put the concept in the game, I just had to fix the text and numbers some

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 trappedslider Mar 23, 2009 22:43:14	After discussing with some one about how much was wrong..it came to them there there had to have been something right with it,so i'm going iwth this... The Jump gate system and the dimensional travel stuff...
#2 MechaPilot Mar 23, 2009 22:49:02	Gadgets to modify weapons. I'll admit the ones that upped the damage needed to have a level restrictor on them (or something), but i like options like a folding stock, or a high-tech plastic, or a selector for mission-specific ammo.
#3 narukagami Mar 23, 2009 23:23:35	Gadgets to modify weapons. HAHA, no. Honestly? The only thing d20 Future did right was do everything wrong. :P
#4 backstabbist Mar 23, 2009 23:27:58	The concept of Gadgets was intresting, and might have worked ok, but a whole bunch of the gadgets were just horribly broken. Kinda like the concept of having Fighter Wing rules. The idea has such potential, but the actual text rules were less than fair The way Ship Armor (hardness) is non-ablative works pretty good. Makes more sense than trying to imagine a laser taking 7mm armor evenly off every surface of the ship so the next shot will make the whole ship armor thinner still, till the last shot completely removes all armor from the entire hull. Future did it right, Punch a small hole in the armor and no follow up shots can aim well at the Target Size Fine same spot
#5 penchant Mar 24, 2009 0:01:39	There were many good ideas and still alot to use in Future so long as the DM was willing to appropriatly filter it. Future, like Modern, was a tool kit and not a finished product. Just like a DM has to decide to allow FX powers and classes and what mix of those is appropriate, you cannot simply allow everything from the Future book as well. Things I like: Good Starting Occupations I like the PL system to give a frame of reference, though It serves more as a checklist than a hard rule Some good Advanced classes (though not all) Great campaign ideas. I like the Dimension X setting, though I haven't run one. The Gadget system: but again these are rules for the DM, not players and the pricing is a suggestion, not a rule.
#6 Wolfen_Fenrison Mar 24, 2009 2:51:45	I personally loved the mutation rules, and was giddy as a school girl to them expanded in d20 apocalypse and future player's guide. I also liked the cybernetics rules and the variants from cyberscape and future player's guide help make playing cyborgs more viable. To be honest if it wasn't for d20 future I wouldn't have gotten into d20 modern, being raised by sci-fi geeks and being one myself I couldn't help but get the book and I got d20 modern when I reilized that I need it to use future, now I own all the WotC and Green Ronin/The Game Mechanics material produced for the system and have yet to find a more flexible, user friendly, generic d20 rules system. If d20 future did anything right its that.
#7 rhialto Mar 24, 2009 3:25:53	I really like the "new" alien races they ported in from Star Frontier.
#8 Waylan_Wolf Mar 24, 2009 8:35:56	Things Future Got right Progress Levels (although some of the equipment should probably be re-arranged: PL6 portable environment generator I'm looking at you!) Starting Occupations (except for Heir) Advanced classes Campaigns Some of the Gear Some of the Gadgets Traveler Science Starships (as long as you never want to mix starship combat with any other form of combat) Mecha (as long as you never want to mix mecha combat with any other form of combat) Robots (as long as you didn't ask why robots and mecha were built completely differently... the only difference is one has a pilot and one has a computer to control it.) Cybernetics Mutations Aliens So pretty much I think it got everything right... until you try to mix and match... and then it all falls apart. But as a tool box its awesome... lots of ideas for GMs and with a bit of work, the in-compatibilities can be over-come.
#9 backstabbist Mar 24, 2009 9:18:53	Sorry Waylan, but I gotta say the Starships general has too much wrong with it, maybe parts are ok, but as a whole the weapon scaling thing alone ruined it (150HD per laser... sheesh)
#10 narukagami Mar 24, 2009 10:20:51	Things Future Got right Progress Levels (although some of the equipment should probably be re-arranged: PL6 portable environment generator I'm looking at you!) Eh, I didn't like when GURPS shoehorned all technology into set levels of progress, I didn't like it in d20 Future either. Starting Occupations (except for Heir) Ok, I'll give you that. Advanced classes coughTRACERcough Campaigns Generic. Some of the Gear Emphasis on some. Some of the Gadgets Like one or two. Traveler Science This actually wasn't bad. Starships (as long as you never want to mix starship combat with any other form of combat) Completely disagree, the starship rules are garbage. Mecha (as long as you never want to mix mecha combat with any other form of combat) Again, completely disagree, these are just as bad as the starship rules. If not, worse. Mecha vs Mecha combat doesn't even work half the time as weapons don't scale but armor does. Robots (as long as you didn't ask why robots and mecha were built completely differently... the only difference is one has a pilot and one has a computer to control it.) The robot rules aren't bad but could use some improvements. Cybernetics Easily exploitable. Mutations Easier to exploit than Pun Pun. Aliens Eh, I found them pretty bland. So pretty much I think it got everything right... until you try to mix and match... and then it all falls apart. But as a tool box its awesome... lots of ideas for GMs and with a bit of work, the in-compatibilities can be over-come. I know you have a soft spot for the book because you wrote an article about it on the site, but its not that great. The main reason it inspires GMs to create anything is because they look at it and go "WTF is this garbage?" and make their own rules. In that sense it is good for ideas, but thats not a positive one. The compatibility issues are just part of the problem, as not only are a lot of the rules incompatible with each other, they're incompatible with themselves.
#11 backstabbist Mar 24, 2009 11:01:30	Advanced classes coughTRACERcough We need a +1 MeToo button for this
#12 nclanceman Mar 24, 2009 11:04:41	Well... if it wasn't for Future, I wouldn't have looked into Alternity. Does that count?
#13 Waylan_Wolf Mar 24, 2009 11:09:50	Just because I like it doesn't mean I'm gonna jump up and down shouting "You're wrong!!!!!!111!!!" at people who don't... There's a ton of things I DON'T like about Future, but I'm not posting them here because that's not what the thread is about... Before they got rid of the Future specific board, I had probably dozens of posts listing every flaw I could find in the rules. I found ways to overcome them for my games... but then again, I LIKE tinkering with game mechanics... I haven't found a single system that I didn't eventually house rule the crap out of. So I guess my soft spot for Future was that there was so much to work with.;) :P :D
#14 backstabbist Mar 24, 2009 11:34:29	but then again, I LIKE tinkering with game mechanics thats what I was saying about FighterWings I like they put the concept in the game, I just had to fix the text and numbers some