Its a fun game, kinda sad to see it like this
Also, I'd like to hear some campaign, scenario and other ideas that players and GMs have encountered, things they liked, things they didn't and stuff like that. Would make for a nice community topic.
Casey
Just my two cents!
I highly recommend it for any Zombie-Themed campaign.
WWZ is awesome. Just finished reading it a month ago.
Yes, WWZ is an awesome piece of reading as is the Zombie Survival Guide!
Yes, WWZ is an awesome piece of reading as is the Zombie Survival Guide!
WWZ is the squel to ZSG,FYI theres a movie in the works based on WWZ and if some one isn't holding a copy of the ZSG during the movie on screen i'm gonna
No, probably not. Let's face it, if d20 Modern wasn't "dying", then we wouldn't be shunted down here like garbage in a bargain-bin. Let's face it: WotC seems to be under the delusion that d20 Modern is dead.
Well, they were the ones who pulled the trigger, so I can see how they think that.
Back on subject....
No, probably not. Let's face it, if d20 Modern wasn't "dying", then we wouldn't be shunted down here like garbage in a bargain-bin. Let's face it: WotC seems to be under the delusion that d20 Modern is dead.
Well, they were the ones who pulled the trigger, so I can see how they think that.
Then despite Star Wars Saga Edition, the entire d20 System project is a complete and total failure.
Yeah, I disagree with that statement.
If not WotC, then someone else, fans of d20 will take up the mantle. If WotC is not with us, then they can go jump off a cliff.
Anyway, not trying to start an edition fight, because i really don't care, just saying that I don't think the flavor of d20 modern can be replicated very well with 4e.
Angel Blade
Casey
d20 has a great potencial but it needs a lot of playtesting. They aren´t similar a war campaing as a investigation campaing. Some games are more action and other are more storytelling. A slasher or serial killer sometimes can kill some PCs and other times is dead with only a shot by a PCs. Some times a zombie dog (a doberman for example) is a serious thread and other ones you can destroy it knock it down with the car.
Anyway, not trying to start an edition fight, because i really don't care, just saying that I don't think the flavor of d20 modern can be replicated very well with 4e.
No more than with 3e, also.
Unfortunately, there is a growing voice among fan community -- and it has grown large -- that the next d20 Modern, or whatever it will be called -- resembles more closely to 4e than the existing ruleset is to 3e (which is a very wide gap).
Sighs. :rolleye2:
But, as stated above, if WotC goes 4e-style on d20 Modern, I will either spontaneously die of heart/ liver failure, off myself, or find an alternate dimension where 4e never happened.
I think WotC made a deliberate decision to quash support for 3.5E and d20, in order to attempt to funnel those gamers toward playing 4E.
Yeah. So?
As with their two RPG lines, d20 Modern WILL get an edition makeover, only the new content will be under a new GSL (which they have yet to convince me is a better successor).
I haven't fully read up on 4e, but if you consider Star Wars rules (sans Force) in the mix, then I like way they handle the new damage threshold rule.
You guys got to stop thinking that they're only going to use 4e as the sole template for d20 Modern. Look what they have done to the existing one. Same as 3e yet different from 3e.
Bingo.
But, as stated above, if WotC goes 4e-style on d20 Modern, I will either spontaneously die of heart/ liver failure, off myself, or find an alternate dimension where 4e never happened.
Except for the third and final option, I look forward to it. :evillaugh
4E is the exact opposite. You have to conform your concept to what is already there... and I don't know about you guys, but I don't want to see the next class set being Fist Fighter (a defender), Gunman (a striker), Tough Guy (a defender), Hacker (controller), Steadfast Leader (support), and Face Man (controller).
That isn't much of an option for those of us who don't enjoy the 4E system, which reduces multi-classing to just another set of feats which allow you to pick up alternate traits. Modern was all about multi-classing to create the character that most optimally represented your concept.
4E is the exact opposite. You have to conform your concept to what is already there... and I don't know about you guys, but I don't want to see the next class set being Fist Fighter (a defender), Gunman (a striker), Tough Guy (a defender), Hacker (controller), Steadfast Leader (support), and Face Man (controller).
The group I game with, we have decided to halt alll 4E games since it has released... and I personally like my level30 Warmage/Rogue and Wizard/Rogue, equally ranked characters that I developed over hours of gaming!
I personally like the Multi-classing in 3.5 D&D and D20! It gives us choices when we Multi-class for in the campaigns.
Faced with the options of buying a mixture of Saga and 4E, and sticking with 3rd party and fan material for Modern, I'd choose the latter. I like the freedom the D20 System gives you to create your own stuff. If they take that away, I won't be moving onto the next edition.
That may be, but neither Saga nor 4E are to my taste. I find both too simple, though I must admit I haven't looked as much at Saga as I have at 4E (I borrowed the former whereas I own a PHB for the latter), so I cannot remember if my favorite part of D20 (character creation) has been oversimplified in Saga or not.
You want complicated? Try Rolemaster.
But no 4E for me. At any time. I'm going to keep using the previous edition of d20 Modern and 3.5 of DnD, no matter how little support they'll have.
In other words, screw 4e, wotC.
You want complicated? Try Rolemaster.
Never said I wanted complicated. I just said I didn't want too simple. D20, to me, feels like just the perfect balance as far as character complexity to realism, to game intuitiveness. I might snatch Tru20's hit locations table, but that would only be for gritty games.
If I wanted what 4E has to offer, I'd buy Diablo and Diablo II off of ebay and have a field day.
You do most of the same things as in D20Modern, but you're shoehorned so badly that there isn't much in the way of customization. There are no backgrounds to broaden your character's horizons, feats are so weak they don't do a thing to define your character, all abilities are specifically for combat - nothing else, and the skill list is so compiled it only takes around ten seconds to a minute to pick what you need.
A final note about skills: they are extremely powerful at first, and then incredibly weak later on simply by the nature of the 4E skill system.
A more personal complaint of mine is that the system makes it virtually impossible for anyone to have an Achilles Heel. You're "super-special-awesome" all around from first level on.
It's a dream for one-shots, because character creation for 1st through 6th-level characters only takes about fifteen minutes, but I never play one-shots. I couldn't play 4E longterm either because everything in 4E feels the same to me. Your class is a straitjacket for your character, not a stepping stone on the way to creating a more complex character, and thus one fighter, no matter how devoted his designer is to making him different, will always be almost exactly the same as the next two-thousand fighters... which are only so different from Paladins, which are kinda like Clerics with more offensive powers, who are sort of like Wizards with healing and better powers, who closely resemble Warlocks without as many direct attacks, who are like Rangers, but with dark powers instead of arrows and short swords.
I think you get my point. :P
Yeah. So?
As with their two RPG lines, d20 Modern WILL get an edition makeover, only the new content will be under a new GSL (which they have yet to convince me is a better successor).
I haven't fully read up on 4e, but if you consider Star Wars rules (sans Force) in the mix, then I like way they handle the new damage threshold rule.
You guys got to stop thinking that they're only going to use 4e as the sole template for d20 Modern. Look what they have done to the existing one. Same as 3e yet different from 3e.
I stated my view that WotC made a marketing decision, a view which is reasonably backed up by the facts on the ground.. I didn't say anything about whether 4E is a better or worse system. Your response looks very confrontational in that light, and almost seems as if you are deliberating trolling for an argument. I'd like to think that isn't really the case.
While I do have my opinions about 4E, I'd rather not share them here, because airing such views on the WotC forum tends to cause the thread to degenerate.
I was thinking more of 4E's character creation, where you pick your stats, your species, class (which gives you only two-to-three styles of play per class, and even then you're only doing the same combat roll, just a slightly different focus), all but worthless feats, and choosing X number of skills to be trained.
i get your point,but the thing is you self-admitted that your thinking of D&D,when the modern is no where near D&D's this is oyur class this is who you are character creation,whne its more inline with SW's anyone can be anything charcter creation. And i have this to say
hey Solice,
You think there is anyway for you find out what the future of d20 modern holds,even if its a very very rough outline, like will the rules be a mix of Star wars SE and 4th or all 4th but tweaked for a modern sertting? I understand if you can't,but its currently the hot topic down in the D20M area...
I am not sure if I can get that answer for you, but I will check into it. I apologize in advance if there is no information available!
Never said I wanted complicated. I just said I didn't want too simple.
You want simple but not too simple?
I stated my view that WotC made a marketing decision, a view which is reasonably backed up by the facts on the ground...
What ground?
I didn't say anything about whether 4E is a better or worse system. Your response looks very confrontational in that light, and almost seems as if you are deliberating trolling for an argument. I'd like to think that isn't really the case.
For once, you think right.
All I'm saying, until the final product come out, let's not jump to any conclusion. Who knows? I may be wrong and I'll just stay with my current d20 Modern rules.
Maybe they'll embrace the mantra, "complex rules make for complex characters." :evillaugh
Well, they're certainly not going to release a new system that will contradict "their new" system that they have spent tons of money/time developing. To me, a new edition at this point will be a watered down version, figure out the bugs for yourself type of game...which sadly is kinda what we have now
Meh. At least it doesn't resemble too closely to 3e. Without damage threshold there is no added danger to the PC, they can keep acting like they do with a D&D character until the hit point reaches zero (0).
i get your point,but the thing is you self-admitted that your thinking of D&D,when the modern is no where near D&D's this is oyur class this is who you are character creation,whne its more inline with SW's anyone can be anything charcter creation. And i have this to say
Hey, if they do make something better than the D20Modern that exists now, I'll eat my words, but if it's going to be more like Saga or 4E than the current D20Modern I don't believe I'll be using it for any of my games.
Looking forward to any further information if it exists.
You want simple but not too simple?
Yes, actually. A balanced point where the game has enough depth to satisfy the side of me that enjoys fleshing out characters (in mechanics and story), as well as enough simplicity not to bog the game down. Novel concept, is it not?
You know, if you actually take my whole post into consideration, and don't immediately cast aside my argument as frivolous or unreasonable, you might actually be able to come up with a reply that isn't a flamebait. :D Now that's a truly novel concept, isn't it!
Edit: Maybe things don't work this way for you, but I'd rather be surprised than disappointed. Even though I have an Xbox 360, and really enjoyed the Halo trilogy, I refused to get involved in the hype over Halo 3. I did the same thing with the original Fable when it came out, and while other people were disappointed when their expectations were not met, I was pleasantly surprised to find each game was exceptional and certainly worth playing and owning.
I did the same for Saga and 4E, and those of course did not turn out the way I would have liked. Oh well, I still have my 3.X and Modern. No big deal. The new games are indeed fun, and one of the members of my gaming group prefers 4E to 3.X, but I personally prefer the older material.
I'm not saying that I wouldn't be in favor of a new edition of Modern. I AM saying that I would not be in favor of a new version of Modern that follows the recent trend in WOTC's RPGs.
You know, if you actually take my whole post into consideration, and don't immediately cast aside my argument as frivolous or unreasonable, you might actually be able to come up with a reply that isn't a flamebait. :D Now that's a truly novel concept, isn't it!
Or I could just ignore you. It's tempting.
If you believe that by oversimplifying, you sacrifice character depth, then I agree with you.
As for the next-gen d20 System -- that includes 4e and Star Wars Saga -- there are some good stuff and some bad stuff. I pray the new design team for d20 Modern will take the good stuff that are most appropriate for this genre, yet put some of the over-the-top stuff in the [optional] FX chapters.
Stop fighting and buy Spycraft 2.0.
Why? I already have Spycraft 1.0.
Want more fast paced action, go with Spycraft 2.0, most of the 'good' 4E changes were plagerized from it anyway.
The idea/concept or the text? Big difference between the two when it comes to copyright infringement (or not).