Thanks.
There are, however, literally hundreds of third-party add-ons to Modern that are great, and Wizards' products weren't reliable anyway (no disrespect to Wizards; I suspect that Modern just wasn't given the support it needed, internally as well as externally), so there's no real difference, to my mind, between sifting through Wizards' books to find good material or sifting through third-party books to find good material. For any genre or subtype of modern gaming you can think of, I guarantee you that someone (like me! Hi. See my sig) has created something to satisfy your needs. The only hard part is finding it. The one thing that's very hard to get your hands on is new adventure modules, but creating those yourself was always half the fun of GMing, for me, so I don't know what to tell you about that.
But again, the short answer is "no."
There's also plenty of old d20 material floating around and stuff from 3pps. If you want to stick with the 3e system, my favorite variant was the True20 system, which has rules for fantasy and modern games. I've heard good things about Spycraft d20 but never tried it.
Are you talking free stuff? I doubt it.
However I found a great clip on for d20 modern. This works really well for my group as we play as a SpecOps unit [1st SFOD-D], its called Blood and Guts 2. It focuses on the military side of things, its a pretty good package for the price.
If you have any questions let me know.
linkage
comics.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.p...
Now the current d20 system is for fantasy backround, isn´t for battles with modern wehicules and firearms.
My suggestion is the "template" Character. A "template" is extra help for PCs (item, vehicules and allies).
A paladin riding a pegasus is diferent a paladin who go on foot under caverns.. a pirate who fight with a sabre againts a kraken is diferent of a kraken what is knocked out by a ship, a dwarf with dozen guns isn´t equal when he has used all and he hasn´t munitions..
You need diferentes rules if your campaing is horror or mistery (PCs are powerless) or sci-fi or superheroes.
I supose d20 Modern 2.0. will use rules of D&D 5th Ed. (It isn´t so far now).
I think the answer is yes. Hasbro has deals with Disney/marvel now. A superheroes d20 rpg would be a gold mine if it had got the right rules. (And don´t forget bussines Hasbro/Electronic Arts. I would´t rule out a future mass efect rpg).
Now the current d20 system is for fantasy backround, isn´t for battles with modern wehicules and firearms.
My suggestion is the "template" Character. A "template" is extra help for PCs (item, vehicules and allies).
A paladin riding a pegasus is diferent a paladin who go on foot under caverns.. a pirate who fight with a sabre againts a kraken is diferent of a kraken what is knocked out by a ship, a dwarf with dozen guns isn´t equal when he has used all and he hasn´t munitions..
You need diferentes rules if your campaing is horror or mistery (PCs are powerless) or sci-fi or superheroes.
I supose d20 Modern 2.0. will use rules of D&D 5th Ed. (It isn´t so far now).
There is no reason why a Modern supers game couldn't use the 4e rules. I would venture to say that, out of all the modern and postmodern genres, a supers setting is probably the easiest fit for the 4e rules set.
As for your 5e comment, only time will tell.
A campaing of Second World War... PCs are a soldier squad... there is a moment where the target is a tank, a armoured combat chariot... if they have got a bazooka it will be easier that if they hasn´t..
Now the monster is a tiranosaurus rex... if your PC is a caverman with a primitive spear, or a mecha rider... the things are very diferents..
Do you rebember Memerist (advanced class) from d20 Past? It´s a weakest psionic class that psi-blade from core book. Do you undestand?
For a superheores rpg some PC can be a vigilante without superpowers... and other PC be a too powerful metahuman. (Batman and Superman, Punisher and Sentry..).
How can we find the right power balance?
Can I explain better? Let´s imagine a martial artist who fights a horde of zombies... and now do imagine a horde of zombies "who" are run over by a truck driven by other PC.
A campaing of Second World War... PCs are a soldier squad... there is a moment where the target is a tank, a armoured combat chariot... if they have got a bazooka it will be easier that if they hasn´t..
Now the monster is a tiranosaurus rex... if your PC is a caverman with a primitive spear, or a mecha rider... the things are very diferents..
Do you rebember Memerist (advanced class) from d20 Past? It´s a weakest psionic class that psi-blade from core book. Do you undestand?
For a superheores rpg some PC can be a vigilante without superpowers... and other PC be a too powerful metahuman. (Batman and Superman, Punisher and Sentry..).
How can we find the right power balance?
You're forgetting that batman can and has kicked superman's butt despite the lack of any superpowers.
A don´t forgert, some players would wish player PCs with superpowers ....and big guns too.
Let´s think about it... a official group o Avengers (marvel comic) has mighty Thor and black widow like member.
Mi opinion is (if it´s created rightly) a d20 superheroes rpg by WotC would be a great best-seller, but it isn´t easy a right balance of powers. How is "punisher-like level 20" PC versus "sentry-like level 1"? or Hawk Eye versus Machine Man...
* I don´t rule out future d20 adaptations of videogames like Mass Efect...(if Star Wars d20 is over..).
And Batman > Superman, easily.
Excuse me but I´m afraid I haven´t readen that issue. I know Superman can be hurt by magic and ..psionic too? He can die by asphysia... but how was Superman defeated by Batman?
Show
I believe Batman wore kyptonite gauntlets, but I've never read it myself. Also, he didn't kill superman, he just defeated him.
They are two very different things.
A diamond is much harder than gold. And Superman as a child was unkillable, Punisher in his prime is still just a man with guns.
How do you balance that?
thats how you balance it
If the "Superman" template is a +37LA, and the "batman" template is +2LA,
then you have two guys with 7 Heroic Class Levels each, but one is ECL44 while the other is ECL9
Same way you balance a pc Minotaur taking 2 levels of Rogue.... ECL makes it readily clear that the Minorogue obviously is not balanced to a human rogue even though they both have just 2 levels of Rogue class
Or as many of you may have more experience with: How do you balance a Vampire with some class levels against a player party? LA & ECL.
and in regard to equipment vs abilities,
why on earth would we assume a Vampiric SuperSquid
(Super'man' Template AL + Vamp Template AL + Illithid AL)
would for some reason choose to NOT have top of the line Punisher Equipment?
Wouldnt he just kill someone that has the Punnisher template and take the guns guns guns?
What, this gun?
Its my TC Contender chambered in 120Abrams... sure its a tankgun, but why have +45 Strength if you are not gonna carry a gun that requires a 50Str and 'Flight' to use?
What he was saying is that theres is a difference between Superman and the Punisher.
They are two very different things.
A diamond is much harder than gold. And Superman as a child was unkillable, Punisher in his prime is still just a man with guns.
How do you balance that?
Assuming the 4e system. . . you do it by balancing their races, and by balancing the powers that are available to their classes.
The 4e thing still wouldn't work. I don't see how it could.
I just can't see a Superman class not being OP compared to a Punisher class.
First, superhero teams in comics are routinely "imbalanced" in game terms. Green Arrow being on the same team as Green Lantern isn't about their power levels. It's about the popularity of the characters. The comics themselves aren't always the best guide to what's possible, or even desirable, in a superhero RPG any more than a Rambo movie is the best guide to a war/combat RPG. You have to recognise the difference between the two genres if you want to make an RPG work. For example, comics routinely team seasoned heroes up with wide-eyed newbs (e.g., Wolverine + Child Mutant of the Week). They're basically imbalanced by level, the equivalent of a party that has a 2nd-level character standing next to a 30th-level character. You have to disallow that comic-book cliché if you want to make a balanced RPG.
Second, speaking in game terms now, there's a big difference between powered and non-powered abilities. You can have one character who has DR 50 (nigh unkillable by mundane means) and another who has 40 feats (able to do a couple of dozen things that will keep her alive despite your best efforts), and they can function pretty well right next to each other if the players are willing to accept that they're good at different things. But that brings me to a more important point.
Third, there are fundamentally different kinds of abilities in RPGs, which we should all recognise. Combat abilities are one kind. Granted, they're a very important kind, and if you're playing a combat-heavy game, they're the most important kind, but the glory of d20M is that half the classes are non-coms. The Smart, Wise, and Charming heroes do have some combat abilities, but they're largely focused on other ways of resolving situations. The reason I point this out is that in most discussions of balance that I've seen, the first salvo in the argument is "How could X character beat Y character?" but that's a bit of a fallacy. Maybe Y character has useful abilities outside of combat? Batman isn't the best example because he slowly turned into Das Über-Bat during the 90s, but if we look at a less ridiculous version of that character we see someone who is extremely good at combat with other mundane humans, but who has a whole lot of other abilities that are extremely useful outside of combat. Sheer wealth, for example, might as well be a superpower. He can do stuff other than kick the crap out of people. That's valuable. Everyone "likes" the rich PC.
That Other Stuff that PCs can do should be taken into account when we consider "balance." You'll never be able to perfectly quantify the difference between having +40 to your Diplomacy roll and having a +40 to your attack roll because they're fundamentally different things, so instead, you should find a comfort zone, a sweet spot if you will, between different characters and the kinds of problems that those characters are built to solve. If you build a super-charmer, don't expect him to be a badass warrior. If you build the ultimate pugilist, don't expect her to be graceful at dinner. Perfect balance isn't possible, so we should instead ask a simple question; is everyone involved having fun? If you're all having fun, then you are, by definition, "doing it right," and an arbitrary notion of "balance" is only hampering your game.
That's why I think that "balance," as a concept, is itself a bit of a fallacy. Yes, we should persue it as best we can. Yes, we should make sure that one character can't blow up buildings with heat vision while another has himself a fine little stabby knife. But we should not become so obsessed with balance that we rewrite the game to create it at the loss of fun (btw, that is not a dig at 4e. I haven't even played 4e. I'm speaking in general terms, here). I'm okay with the fact that Phoenix isn't perfectly balanced. What we and my gang of lunatics has tried to do is create opportunities for players to live out their fantasies in as much variety as the superhero genre and the d20 system can contain. I love the idea of a superhero who just runs around using kung-fu moves to tap people on the forehead and heal them, or one who uses super-charisma to resolve hostage situations, or one who's stretching powers are perfect for search-and-rescue, but you can also build a super-fighter if you want. It's about creating many options so that people can play what they want to play and, therefore, care a little bit less about whether their kill count is as high as everyone else's.
[/soapbox]
I am not trying to be that little s*** troll on the forums, I am just trying to point out that if you want a superhero game don't try and include non-supers. It won't feel right and the rules will most likely weigh a metric ton (as opposed to the Imperial ton).
...almost everyone likes Superman, not to many people like Punisher (people being NPCs). So how are they equal?
I am not trying to be that little s*** troll on the forums, I am just trying to point out that if you want a superhero game don't try and include non-supers. It won't feel right and the rules will most likely weigh a metric ton (as opposed to the Imperial ton).
You don't automatically get the god-like PC you want in D&D, either. As long as the gamers you're playing with understand that there's a difference between gaming and comics/movies, then I don't think it's as big a problem as you're making it out to be.
As for balancing supers and non-supers, I still think that the strictly combat-oriented notion of "balance" is a fallacy, but if you're really curious, check out Phoenix. I have built some damned tough non-supers with that game. Check out Whip Lass and Chaingun Sally, for example. They have some super items, but they're basically mundanes.
All that being said, if you were to buy (or download for free! hintity hint-hint!) a supers system, you could just not play non-powered heroes at your games. RPGs are great that way. It's your game. Do with it as you will.
PS: I didn't think you were trying to troll. Seems like a pretty honest, friendly conversation to me.
Just purge that guy from your memory and then things begin to get more reasonable.
If the question is balance,
then the answer is point buy/assignment... Orion (Phoenix) had that right from day one.
All you need is a simple list of powers and how many points each is worth, and balance is no more than just making sure everyone has the same number of points.
What about non-combat vs combat abilities?
Some folks here will say that all noncombat ability should be free since it is worthless,
while others will say the noncombat stuff is just as valuable.
The particular balance is entirely dependent on the campaign and GM play style. We have read in other threads how some GMs run a game where the Charisma hero is just not allowed to do his thing because it is a combat focused group... well then the Super Noncombat abilities should be cheaper than combat abilities
... After all, we all know that Aquaman is an absolutely worthless guy to have on the team,
until we use the same abilities for Terraman:
Can breath Water as well as Air Air as well as water
Can summon water land creatures
Can control water Land creatures to do his bidding
(as many as a school of fish ant hill, as big as whales Elephants)
then those abilities dont look so weak, when we consider Human as a land creatures.
Telekenisis is a combat worthless ability,
but only in a world where grenades dont have pins, guns dont have magazine releases, and combat aircraft to have giant yellow RESCUE arrows and ejection loops... in a world that has those it is a far more valuable ability.
"Take xxx damage" is far less scary than "Save or die".
You can kill folks IN a fight with combat abilities,
but you kill folks without a fight using noncombat abilities.
Does your super character have enough Charisma skills to get folks to listen to their warnings (XXX bank is gonna get robbed, xxx catastrophy is about to happen, Come with me if you want to live)... sure its easy to say, but persuading folks is not a Strength check, nor will the Flight ability or Bulletproof help you with that charisma roll. So what if you find out the Stealinator is gonna rob an unknown bank in NewYork if you cant convince the mayor/chief to roll the cops.
But again, that is ALL just campaign / play style:
Some GMs just skip the diplomacy check for the Superdudes that didnt bother to take ANY charisma skills... and then say taking those skills is a waste.
Just keep in mind,
the leader of the Xmen is not Wolfie,
its Gimpy
Sometimes I habe thought about "template" class. My idea is some "helps" of PC (super magic weapon, natural companions of rangers and druid, special mounts of paladins, superpowers...) could be a second "class" and the player had to choose spend XPs for a class or the "help".
There is diferentes scales of powers in superheroes comics...
1 Option is a enemy could has got diferent stats if PCs is a martial art vigilante or cosmic power.. For example, a dread mutant leon would be af level 10 challenge for a Barbarian PC but only a level 1 for a scientist (d20) with a big, big ray gun who ride her steampunk mecha.
A zombie (or a necromorph from Dead Space) can be more or less dangerous if your PC is Blade or Buffy vampire slayers -like... or a Master Chief from HALO saga.
I have awared actions (tricks and strategies) from comics and media are differents of a rpg.. for example for "Blackest Night" of DC Superboy Prime was fighting againts some blacks laterns and he put a black-lartern on... Let´s imagine that situation if it was a rpg..what would Game Director
do?
* Other option is two (or more if you ride powerful vehicles like space ships or mechas) level table. One is for combat skills (like a miniature game) and other is story-telling skills (social interaction, craft, culture).
Like this if I play a Superman or Sentry-like character I would got PXs and spend for stroy-telling skills but not for combat table (my PC is too powerfull) but a "ordinary" like martial artist or soldier could get PXs to gain levels of combat table..