Dear Paizo: Please "Pathfinderize" D20 Modern


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 300 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

I was looking at this and, while nice, I'm still hoping that Paizo does their own d20M version. Nothing againt BFP, and I wish them the best of luck, but I enjoy the Paizo products and would like to put my money behind them :) So, whattya say Paizo? Pathfinder Modern for the win?!! ;)

Caladors wrote:

Congrats to everyone who added there voice here.

It is confirmed your getting your book.

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/products/licensees/modernRolePlayingForThePathfinderRPG


*Bump*


1) I am interested in a "Modern" Pathfinder RPG because:

B) I am excited by the idea of a "Pathfinder" Modern RPG, regardless of mechanics.

Personally, I would love to see more sci-fi/modern (more sci-fi than modern) RPG options on the table with only a modicum of rules changes so that transference between the PFRPG (fantasy) and the PFRPG (sci-fi/modern) would be a snap.

I think we often see barriers in translating a group to a new genre is solely based on having to learn new rules. I have M&M and GURPS and some other sci-fi oriented campaign rulesets, but because of the rules changes, noone wants to bother to learn them.

EDIT: I probably should have mentioned that if it requires a rules change to make it right, do it. If the mechanics change a little, but the overall system is basically the same, it works for me. Thus my choice of B over A.

Bridge the gap Erik, and I think we have a winner.


I'm all for this, and I'd buy either version of a pathfinder modern game. But I'd like to humbly propose a smaller project first. Publish a modern module that can be run with the pathfider rules. The big problem with modern stuff has always been the lack of adventures, which is because there are so may possibilities. I think the success of things like deadlands and shadowrun is that they limit those possibilities to a single world.


Hear, hear!!!

Please, oh might Paizo staffers, hear our entreaty and grant our fondest wish!


As long as you do not use the horrible d20 modern rules I would take a look see


I prefer "A" for backward compatibility (and I don't think the system needs much more than minor tweaking anyway). Honestly, though, I am most interested in SF/future, so modern would need to have the stuff included that Alternity did (not as an add-on as with d20 Modern).

Liberty's Edge

Hal Maclean wrote:
"Explorer", good name! I had the notion of "Pathfinder: Past, Present, and Future" but Explorer is better.

Yep, and we can have Paizo Trailblazer: Roleplaying in the Wild West, Paizo Durango: Roleplaying in Meso America, and Paizo Landrover: Roleplaying in Sub-Saharan Africa!

Man, we can have all kinds of SUV Roleplaying games!

;)

Contributor

As someone who wrote a decent amount of D20 Modern material for WotC, I'll weigh in here with my opinion.

First of all, the class structure (fast, smart, etc.) made for well designed and interesting characters, but the system made it a real pain in the butt to do NPCs. In fact, after I was done writing my chunk of D20 Apocalypse, I couldn't bring myself to stat out another D20 Modern NPC. It was just too much work. Instead, I fudged them entirely in game and avoided any further design work in the Modern line. Honestly, I find designing NPCs for Modern20 to induce far fewer headaches than D20 Modern did. True20 is also headache free.

Another concern is that D20 Modern was designed to be a toolbox from which you could build any modern or futuristic game. That's a good place to start, in my opinion. There was an issue of what sort of game to support once you have the basic set of rules. In my case, what I want is the ability to run the following:

1. X-Files/Call of Cthulhu/Fringe/Darkmatter. In other words, games that are about agents in the modern world uncovering dark secrets.
2. Lost. Characters cut off from society who must find some way to survive while unraveling the secrets of their new surroundings.
3. Star Trek/Star Wars/Battlestar Galactica/Babylon 5. I loves me some good space opera.
4. Mad Max/Waterworld/Jericho. A game about surviving after the fall of modern society. Mutants for nukes!
5. James Bond/MacGyver. Something having to do with spies and international intrigue.

I suspect that a good number of people who want modern rules are looking for something along these lines, but WotC decided to put its emphasis behind Urban Arcana early on and it wasn't until the end of the product cycle that they got around to D20 Apocalypse, and d20 Darkmatter.

I feel that the best way to do Pathfinder Modern is to start with the core D20 rules and build from there rather than trying to simply finesse D20 Modern. For instance, I would not create 10 level base classes with the expectation that characters will multiclass. Instead, I'd go back to 20-level classes that focus on specific things, such as investigative agent, soldier, scientist, diplomat, etc. Not every class will work in every game without modification. For example, how exactly will an agent function in a post-apocalyptic setting? What good is a cultist in an espionage game? Another option is to follow the classless True20 model.

Second, I'd change the core assumptions of magic. In a Modern toolbox type book, what I want are options. I want different rules for standard D&D magic than for the Cthulhu style magic that requires mind bending rituals and slowly drives you insane. I also want the option for mental powers. I feel that these should all be weighted equally and not use the same spellcasting system. Maybe this would be a good supplemental book, or books, or maybe they could all fit into the core book. In either case, the designers shouldn't assume that the players will want to include magic in their games. The game should be mechanically interesting without magic. It should be purely optional for people who want to run a Buffy game, or Shadowrun with the serial numbers filed of.

Third, art. Please do not follow WotC's lead. I like the muddy realistic art from the original Dark Matter. I like the nice shiny realistic look of the Alternity core books. I really don't care for the simplistic comic book inspired art from the D20 Modern book. I feel that WotC probably lost D20 Modern sales simply due to presentation.

Finally, if you're going to pull the trigger on this, give us a minimum level of commitment to the brand and stick to it, even if its only one or two books a year.


I'll be honest, the biggest reason I want a modern set of Pathfinder (Explorer?) rules, is because I know alot of people who favor modern settings, and I would WAY rather be running Paizo material than being stuck with Spycraft.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Darrin Drader wrote:
Lots of great stuff that describe exactly my thoughts on what I'd want in a Pathfinder Modern game

The one thing I'd add is that I do want one of the options to be magic that doesn't warp your brain like Cthulhu, etc. I want the ability to also use the game to play a Dresden Files or Urban Arcana game as well, or for that matter a true Pathfinder Modern game set in Golarion (or similar campaign world) that's advanced a few thousand years and has most of the assumptions that a technological modern world has, except via magic (similar to the Alternity setting Magitech, or the Harry Turtledove book Case of the Toxic Spelldump.)

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8

Darrin Drader wrote:
I feel that the best way to do Pathfinder Modern is to start with the core D20 rules and build from there rather than trying to simply finesse D20 Modern. For instance, I would not create 10 level base classes with the expectation that characters will multiclass. Instead, I'd go back to 20-level classes that focus on specific things, such as investigative agent, soldier, scientist, diplomat, etc. Not every class will work in every game without modification. For example, how exactly will an agent function in a post-apocalyptic setting? What good is a cultist in an espionage game? Another option is to follow the classless True20 model.

The blandness of 'smart-hero,' 'fast-hero,' etc. is the one thing that turns me off most about d20 Modern. It also gives it the most flexibility as a common set of rules for a wider variety of setting specific d20 ModernS. I'd like to see the core class creation rules given a slight overhaul but remain basically the same but I would be interested in paying for them again (unless I had to). I would buy the products that Paizo built off of these with the much more specific classes (soldier, sailor, tinker, tailor).

So, unless I had to buy the core book to play the more interesting setting specific books, I wouldn't. That probably makes it difficult to overhaul d20 Modern unless you are going to go all in.

Darrin Drader wrote:
Second, I'd change the core assumptions of magic. In a Modern toolbox type book, what I want are options. I want different rules for standard D&D magic than for the Cthulhu style magic that requires mind bending rituals and slowly drives you insane. I also want the option for mental powers. I feel that these should all be weighted equally and not use the same spellcasting system. Maybe this would be a good supplemental book, or books, or maybe they could all fit into the core book. In either case, the designers shouldn't assume that the players will want to include magic in their games. The game should be mechanically interesting without magic. It should be purely optional for people who want to run a Buffy game, or Shadowrun with the serial numbers filed of.

Again, describing tech and magic levels is something that belongs in a core book that provides options for the specific setting books.

Darrin Drader wrote:
Third, art. Please do not follow WotC's lead. I like the muddy realistic art from the original Dark Matter. I like the nice shiny realistic look of the Alternity core books. I really don't care for the simplistic comic book inspired art from the D20 Modern book. I feel that WotC probably lost D20 Modern sales simply due to presentation.

The art for a core book would have to be somewhat generic. The types of art you describe were perfect for those books.

Darrin Drader wrote:

Finally, if you're going to pull the trigger on this, give us a minimum level of commitment to the brand and stick to it, even if its only one or two books a year.

Agreed.

Would people want a Pathfinder Modern that gave the core mechanics an overhaul or Pathfinder ModernS that gave us exciting worlds and options?

I guess I don't really want Pathfinder Modern. I want Paizo to give us a variety of other settings and that may be asking too much.


I would be happy with at least one book... that breathed new life into D20 Modern by "upgrading" the rules to something mirroring what the pathfinder rule-set did for 3.5 D&D. The more compatible it is, the more use I could get out of all the D20 Modern books I already own. Even if doing just one book is not feasible, a series of smaller conversion guides would certainly help.

However, I have faith that Paizo could do the series justice and would be happy with any effort they made.

Considering the fact that Golarion already has areas of "high-technology", having the D20 Modern rule-set upgraded would allow for some easy mixing of the two styles of play in the same game world with little worry for rules compatibility.

Ultimately... THAT is what I'd love to see. A PF Modern that could mesh well with Pathfinder with little to no difference in the rule-set.

It'd allow for all kinds of interesting game or genre mixing and matching.


Lokie wrote:

I have faith that Paizo could do the series justice and would be happy with any effort they made.

Considering the fact that Golarion already has areas of "high-technology", having the D20 Modern rule-set upgraded would allow for some easy mixing of the two styles of play in the same game world with little worry for rules compatibility.

Ultimately... THAT is what I'd love to see. A PF Modern that could mesh well with Pathfinder with little to no difference in the rule-set.

It'd allow for all kinds of interesting game or genre mixing and matching.

+1


Heh... and with the upgrade, it'd be allot easier to add lasers to pathfinder or "Conan fighting robots" for that matter as James Jacobs posted HERE .


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Lokie wrote:

I have faith that Paizo could do the series justice and would be happy with any effort they made.

Considering the fact that Golarion already has areas of "high-technology", having the D20 Modern rule-set upgraded would allow for some easy mixing of the two styles of play in the same game world with little worry for rules compatibility.

Ultimately... THAT is what I'd love to see. A PF Modern that could mesh well with Pathfinder with little to no difference in the rule-set.

It'd allow for all kinds of interesting game or genre mixing and matching.

+1

I would also love a ruleset that allowed play to flow from one genre into the other. It would help me run a game I never could with d20, one based on the Dark Tower Series by Stephen King. I love those books, and I feel that world and those stories are a treasure trove of ideas for role playing games, but you have a mix of magic and mideval weapons, along side western style gunslingers, modern weapons (grenades, automatic weapons) and futuristic weapons like the sneeches, and energy weapons.

In terms of characters you have everything from the John Wayne cowboy types, to psychics, to robots, to vampires, to well whatever the heck else king could cram in there. I have never seen a game system that could adequately handle all of that. And there is just something special in my mind of a western cowboy along side a new york street punk and a little kid psychic, and a catholic priest taking on a vampire and a bunch of robots.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

I'm curious.

Please choose one of the following. I'd appreciate it if you could elaborate a little bit on your thoughts on the following question, if you would.

1) I am interested in a "Modern" Pathfinder RPG because:

A) I specifically prefer the rules conceits of d20 Modern (Fast Hero, Smart Hero, etc., talent trees, other mechanics stuff).

B) I am excited by the idea of a "Pathfinder" Modern RPG, regardless of mechanics.

I like a lot of the d20 rules. I think the skills system could be improved Pathfinder style, but there's a lot to be said for the current rule set.

I like the way there are basic classes and advanced classes. I like talent trees on basic classes as an easy way to extend a system for different flavors of play, whether you're looking to create characters for different time periods or different flavor game worlds.

I like slower spell and psionic power growth - I could play a Harry Dresden game, Pirates of the Carribean flavored story, or X-Files games all with up to 5th level spells and psionics - where Raise Dead is the epitome of magic.

I created rules for a Stargate SG-1 game on top of d20 Modern (I didn't like what I saw in the Stargate game that was published) with little difficulty - and my players really enjoyed it. We played a Firefly type game with a little psionics mixed in for a very fun campaign - we mixed up some d20 Modern and d20 Future. I could see it as a great system to use for Cthulhu flavored stories as well. It's pretty well done, in my opinion.


A lot of A, a little of B.
I love how elegant D20 Modern is, especially how class doesn't equal occupation, per se. When a character has to define itself instead of being defined by role, it makes the ROLE-playing part of the RPG come forth.
However, I do trust Paizo, and if the need is to deviate away from D20 Modern for a better Pathfinder product, I'd understand.
Just make sure it can do super-heroes.

Dark Archive

I think that eventual Pathfinder Modern should be inspired partially by the Monte Cook's World of Darkness. Alpha Omega game has proved very interesting, but I can't find the time to learn new character creation rules, new combat rules, and whatnot. Modern version of PRPG should be similar enough to the fantasy version that players and masters can get used to it in single afternoon.

Liberty's Edge

>>I am interested in a "Modern" Pathfinder RPG because:
>>I specifically prefer the rules conceits of d20 Modern (Fast Hero, Smart Hero, etc., talent trees, other mechanics stuff).

Yup, that's me. As I said earlier there are some Pathfinder-izing like skills and CMB/CMD that could be ported in. But, overall the times my groups use d20 Modern/Future the beauty is its ultimate flexibility and ability to create anything with just a few tweaks.


DM Jeff wrote:

>>I am interested in a "Modern" Pathfinder RPG because:

>>I specifically prefer the rules conceits of d20 Modern (Fast Hero, Smart Hero, etc., talent trees, other mechanics stuff).

Yup, that's me. As I said earlier there are some Pathfinder-izing like skills and CMB/CMD that could be ported in. But, overall the times my groups use d20 Modern/Future the beauty is its ultimate flexibility and ability to create anything with just a few tweaks.

The funny thing about that is you can do the same with 3.5/Pathfinder. Granted the classes come with fluff attachments but those are easily broken away.

(No I'm not looking to fire that debate up on this thread, just pointing it out to the guy who I hadn't seen in any of the threads that contained said debate, offering some helpful advice.)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Not a big thing for me. I love my fantasy stories, modern style doesn't interest me that much.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Not a big thing for me. I love my fantasy stories, modern style doesn't interest me that much.

Read any of the Dresden Files?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

No, I have been sadly remiss in my readings. I used to read a book a week, now I barely read one a month. Last one I did was L.E. Modesitt's Imager. Next up is Chuck Paluniuk's Rant.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
No, I have been sadly remiss in my readings. I used to read a book a week, now I barely read one a month. Last one I did was L.E. Modesitt's Imager. Next up is Chuck Paluniuk's Rant.

Jim Butcher's Dresden Files is kinda Modern Fantasy. A Wizard in the present day.

There is this interesting vulneribility to Harry Dresden (the main character) that reminds me allot of Indiana Jones. He gives as good as he gets... but at the end of the story he is pretty well beat up.

He isn't a super hero... but is pretty darn cool anyway. :)

It'd be cool to be able to mix fantasy D&D wizards with present day society. Deflect "arrows" vs. machine-gun fire for example.


Lokie wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
No, I have been sadly remiss in my readings. I used to read a book a week, now I barely read one a month. Last one I did was L.E. Modesitt's Imager. Next up is Chuck Paluniuk's Rant.

Jim Butcher's Dresden Files is kinda Modern Fantasy. A Wizard in the present day.

There is this interesting vulneribility to Harry Dresden (the main character) that reminds me allot of Indiana Jones. He gives as good as he gets... but at the end of the story he is pretty well beat up.

He isn't a super hero... but is pretty darn cool anyway. :)

It'd be cool to be able to mix fantasy D&D wizards with present day society. Deflect "arrows" vs. machine-gun fire for example.

Evil Hat Productions is still (it is taking a while) working on an official Dresden Files RPG using the FATE System (itself derived from FUDGE). It is the same version they used for Spirit of the Century which is honestly one of the best pulp games out there and a damned good game period. It should work extremely well for the Dresden universe.

Sovereign Court

nightflier wrote:
I think that eventual Pathfinder Modern should be inspired partially by the Monte Cook's World of Darkness. Alpha Omega game has proved very interesting, but I can't find the time to learn new character creation rules, new combat rules, and whatnot. Modern version of PRPG should be similar enough to the fantasy version that players and masters can get used to it in single afternoon.

+10

Liberty's Edge

I forgot Paizo Navigator: Roleplaying on the high seas!

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lokie wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
No, I have been sadly remiss in my readings. I used to read a book a week, now I barely read one a month. Last one I did was L.E. Modesitt's Imager. Next up is Chuck Paluniuk's Rant.

Jim Butcher's Dresden Files is kinda Modern Fantasy. A Wizard in the present day.

There is this interesting vulneribility to Harry Dresden (the main character) that reminds me allot of Indiana Jones. He gives as good as he gets... but at the end of the story he is pretty well beat up.

He isn't a super hero... but is pretty darn cool anyway. :)

It'd be cool to be able to mix fantasy D&D wizards with present day society. Deflect "arrows" vs. machine-gun fire for example.

A wizard with levels in sorcerer.


Saurstalk wrote:
Lokie wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
No, I have been sadly remiss in my readings. I used to read a book a week, now I barely read one a month. Last one I did was L.E. Modesitt's Imager. Next up is Chuck Paluniuk's Rant.

Jim Butcher's Dresden Files is kinda Modern Fantasy. A Wizard in the present day.

There is this interesting vulneribility to Harry Dresden (the main character) that reminds me allot of Indiana Jones. He gives as good as he gets... but at the end of the story he is pretty well beat up.

He isn't a super hero... but is pretty darn cool anyway. :)

It'd be cool to be able to mix fantasy D&D wizards with present day society. Deflect "arrows" vs. machine-gun fire for example.

A wizard with levels in sorcerer.

What is the name of that PrC... ah yes... Ultimate Magus.

In the books he does tend to have to prepare as much ahead of time as he can. So... any Sorcerer levels are rather minor.

Of course... he could just be leaving spell slots open.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Whatever you do, if it's "Pathfinder Modern", I'd like the classes to be balanced with Pathfinder somewhat. If, for example, you just Pathfinderize D20 Modern and use the same base classes, I'd like a Fast3/Gunslinger2 and a Ranger5 to be a decent fight to watch if they had it out. Or if you had some weird Time Hopping game maybe some of the party are Pathfinder classes and some are Modern, and some end up multiclassing into some of each, who knows.

I always liked the backstory Urban Arcana had, and how the book attempted to explain how you could convert a d&d party into a d20 modern party if they were transported into your urban arcana game. I know the whole 'low magic' threw a wrench into the plan, as mages came out worse casters than they were in d&d, but it would just be nice if the classes/monsters could be used interchangably because both systems were balanced to the same baseline.

Also, the wealth system was kinda dumb.


Rizzen wrote:

Whatever you do, if it's "Pathfinder Modern", I'd like the classes to be balanced with Pathfinder somewhat. If, for example, you just Pathfinderize D20 Modern and use the same base classes, I'd like a Fast3/Gunslinger2 and a Ranger5 to be a decent fight to watch if they had it out. Or if you had some weird Time Hopping game maybe some of the party are Pathfinder classes and some are Modern, and some end up multiclassing into some of each, who knows.

I always liked the backstory Urban Arcana had, and how the book attempted to explain how you could convert a d&d party into a d20 modern party if they were transported into your urban arcana game. I know the whole 'low magic' threw a wrench into the plan, as mages came out worse casters than they were in d&d, but it would just be nice if the classes/monsters could be used interchangably because both systems were balanced to the same baseline.

Yes... this is also what I'd like. :)


Erik Mona wrote:


1) I am interested in a "Modern" Pathfinder RPG because:

A) I specifically prefer the rules conceits of d20 Modern (Fast Hero, Smart Hero, etc., talent trees, other mechanics stuff).

I like some of the mechanics of d20 Modern. Particularly the Talent trees, and to some extent Occupations (which I usually use as a replacement for the Profession skill). I like the idea of generic classes, but not the implementation of them being based on a single stat.

I like the generic crafting skills, which allow a character to be good at building things, without having to dedicate a majority of skill points to craft skills.

I did not like how Urban Arcana failed to mesh well with D&D, particularly on the magic/FX system.

I do frequently import items and some rules from d20 Modern/Future for use in my Magitech/Steam-punk setting. (Vehicles, Guns, Mastercraft, and Gadgets, in particular.)

I like almost all the rules from d20 Future, except the Mecha rules. (I use the rules from the d20 Mecha SRD instead.)


BPorter wrote:

I know it's been touched on before. I know you all have a lot of irons in the fire. However, after seeing the Pathfinder RPG in all its glory, I'm begging you to do a Pathfinder-treatment of D20 Modern.

I have total faith that you could do the same improvements and treatments for the modern, pulp, and sci-fi genres.

I know there is a lot of 3rd-party stuff out there and that their are alternatives like True20 (which I like but I still like D20 Modern more) and Modern20 (which I cherry-pick for rules but it changed too much IMO), but there's something about D20 Modern that just clicks for me.

Even though fantasy RPGing is my genre of choice, I find myself evaluating characters in fiction, video games, TV, and movies through the lens of D20 Modern base classes. (She's a Fast/Charismatic, he's a Strong/Fast, he's a Dedicated/Tough, etc.)

I realize it'd be smaller print runs and serves a smaller audience than fantasy, but damn I'd love to have it.

Paizo fans, tell me you wouldn't want the following (apologies for poorly-riffing the Pathfinder meme):

"Explorer: The Role-playing game of Modern adventure" (Pulp, Modern)
-- Genre sourcebooks include:
Sci-fi. C'mon sci-fi treatments from Paizo? Do I even need to say more? Especially with Planet Stories inspriation?
Pulp. You already tap this source of gaming goodness with Pathfinder, so you're capabilities are already proven here. You could even do a pulp-era version of the Pathfinder Society.
Horror You sprinkle this in to great effect now. Logue & Pett unleashed?!? Failed sanity checks abound!

I realize you've probably already kicked this around and have an idea or two or perhaps that door's already closed. However, a Pathfinder fan can dream and after seeing the great job done with the Pathfinder RPG, I know the D20 Modern/Future OGL torch would be in good hands with Paizo as well.


When Pathfinder first released I was in complete support of this idea. Pathfinder is my go-to game system for fantasy gaming and I liked the idea of being able to use it in a modern setting as well, particularly since I've been kicking around a modern campaign idea for nearly 10 years now and I really want to run it.

However, that all changed this week when I acquired a copy of the Savage Worlds Explorer Edition. Pathfinder remains my choice for fantasy gaming, but I've now found the rule set that will be used for my modern campaigns.


Diamond B wrote:

When Pathfinder first released I was in complete support of this idea. Pathfinder is my go-to game system for fantasy gaming and I liked the idea of being able to use it in a modern setting as well, particularly since I've been kicking around a modern campaign idea for nearly 10 years now and I really want to run it.

However, that all changed this week when I acquired a copy of the Savage Worlds Explorer Edition. Pathfinder remains my choice for fantasy gaming, but I've now found the rule set that will be used for my modern campaigns.

In the same boat wih you, Diamond. I originally thought "yeah, Modern Pathfinder.", but i doubt i or anyone in my group would actually use it. We default to Unisystem usually for modern games (especially using the various All Flesh supplements and the Ghosts of Albion game) or Cortex.

We took a hard look at Savage Worlds but it didnt fit our style of play really.

-Weylin

Paizo Employee Creative Director

If and when we do something like this, I can pretty much guarantee that we will NOT be keeping the "Fast Hero, Strong Hero, etc." setup. It's a lot more fun to have character classes whose names actually mean something, like "Wizard" or "Rogue."

Also... the wealth system has to go.

I'm relatively certain that if we do a modern or sci-fi game that it'll be closer to Pathfinder's rules than d20 Modern's was to D&D, in other words. Or if not, it'll be something COMPLETELY different.

But yeah... Fast Heroes are boring.


James Jacobs wrote:

If and when we do something like this, I can pretty much guarantee that we will NOT be keeping the "Fast Hero, Strong Hero, etc." setup. It's a lot more fun to have character classes whose names actually mean something, like "Wizard" or "Rogue."

Also... the wealth system has to go.

I'm relatively certain that if we do a modern or sci-fi game that it'll be closer to Pathfinder's rules than d20 Modern's was to D&D, in other words. Or if not, it'll be something COMPLETELY different.

But yeah... Fast Heroes are boring.

James,

Any chance of classses in a modern system just going away entirely?

-Weylin


James Jacobs wrote:

If and when we do something like this, I can pretty much guarantee that we will NOT be keeping the "Fast Hero, Strong Hero, etc." setup. It's a lot more fun to have character classes whose names actually mean something, like "Wizard" or "Rogue."

Also... the wealth system has to go.

I'm relatively certain that if we do a modern or sci-fi game that it'll be closer to Pathfinder's rules than d20 Modern's was to D&D, in other words. Or if not, it'll be something COMPLETELY different.

But yeah... Fast Heroes are boring.

Respectfully, not when I don't want to wait for the Apocalypse sourcebook to run my Post-Apoc game. Especially if the wait is years long or never.

With the sheer volume of genres at one's disposal, the D20 Modern classes allowed one to run any type of modern/future game pretty much at the start. When I first read D20 Modern, the class names turned me off also. Once I started using them, however, I couldn't believe how unbelievably easy it was to watch a TV show, movie, or take a novel or say "He's a Fast/Smart, she's a Tough/Charismatic".

Now if the goal is to make a specific setting/genre game like Pathfinder/Golarion, then, yes the tailor-made classes are the way to go. However, as an example, that would be more equivalent to doing a Pathfinder-style treatment for Spycraft than for D20 Modern.


Weylin wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

If and when we do something like this, I can pretty much guarantee that we will NOT be keeping the "Fast Hero, Strong Hero, etc." setup. It's a lot more fun to have character classes whose names actually mean something, like "Wizard" or "Rogue."

Also... the wealth system has to go.

I'm relatively certain that if we do a modern or sci-fi game that it'll be closer to Pathfinder's rules than d20 Modern's was to D&D, in other words. Or if not, it'll be something COMPLETELY different.

But yeah... Fast Heroes are boring.

James,

Any chance of classses in a modern system just going away entirely?

-Weylin

Please, no. There are already class-less systems on the market for modern & sci-fi gaming. I'm a fan of many of them.

Ultimately, however, I've concluded that every group of run finds it easier to get a character up & running using a class system.

My personal preferences aside, a classless modern game isn't really doing a Pathfinder treatment of anything. It's a completely different animal.


Also, the appeal of a Pathfinder treatment of D20 Modern would be to preserve the same type of backwards-compatability that Pathfinder has with 3.x.

Without that backwards compatability, you've got a completely different game.

Which, depending on the genre selected, might not be a bad thing and I'd probably buy it anyway.

But if Paizo says, "You'll have a new & improved modern engine that doesn't obsolete your WotC & 3rd-party D20 Modern library" I'm pre-ordering it today!


BPorter wrote:
Weylin wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

If and when we do something like this, I can pretty much guarantee that we will NOT be keeping the "Fast Hero, Strong Hero, etc." setup. It's a lot more fun to have character classes whose names actually mean something, like "Wizard" or "Rogue."

Also... the wealth system has to go.

I'm relatively certain that if we do a modern or sci-fi game that it'll be closer to Pathfinder's rules than d20 Modern's was to D&D, in other words. Or if not, it'll be something COMPLETELY different.

But yeah... Fast Heroes are boring.

James,

Any chance of classses in a modern system just going away entirely?

-Weylin

Please, no. There are already class-less systems on the market for modern & sci-fi gaming. I'm a fan of many of them.

Ultimately, however, I've concluded that every group of run finds it easier to get a character up & running using a class system.

My personal preferences aside, a classes modern game isn't really doing a Pathfinder treatment of anything. It's a completely different animal.

Could keep the level system and convert class abilities to a group of abilities you choose from....take everything the charismatic hero gets and throw it out there...since it would have charisma requirements for much of it it would only be really appealing to player's whose characters have high charisma. But if your soldier was both good and his job and had a reputation for being a smooth talker you can do both...without having to multi-class because there are no classes.

The problem with classes in modern settings is what do you make a class? There are so many options out there. How do you delineate between the classes? is a soldier and a mafia hitman the same class? Is a computer programmer and a car mechanic the same class? We have infinitely more professions now than the medieval era.

I never liked the Ability Class names really myself. The naming was clunky for starters.

-Weylin


Last rumination for a while on this topic but here we go.

If Paizo were to develop a Pathfinderish modern game, what modern or future genre would fans want?

This, to me, is the biggest risk and strongest argument for updating D20 Modern. Modern & Sci-Fi tastes range widely. Much more so than swords-n-sorcery pulp & Tolkein-inspired fantasy.

Some people HATE the idea of magic in their sci-fi (I'm one). Psionics MIGHT be tolerated if done well. Others look at Star Wars (Science Fantasy) and consider it sci-fi and don't bat an eye at the "magic" of the Force.

Do you want hard sci-fi? Do you want space opera? Do you want mixed genres (ala Firefly)? Do you want gritty sci-fi?

If we look at the modern era: Superspies, technothriller, action adventure, gritty crime drama, modern fantasy, modern horror, etc.?

For me, that was one of the largest appeals D20 Modern had: it gave a framework for a variety of genres.

If Paizo can preserve that and make their own game, I'm there yesterday! If not, I'm VERY interested on what genre & setting conceits they're leaning towards...


Just as the Pathfinder RPG is primarily setting free with a few exceptions, I think a Modern Pathfinder should be as setting and genre neutral a possible.

Psionics, Magic and Superpowers are often lengthy subjects to do well. As such, I think they should be done as smaller book supplements. Devote the core book to the nuances of modern combat, skills, equipment and such. Have a player's section and a game master's section.

Leaving such powers as magic, psionic, supernatural beings/powers, superpowers out of the main book would cut down on the price.

Consider how much of the Pathfinder RPG is dedicated to the magic subsystem, spells, magic items. Leaving those out reduces the price of the core book considerably.

Picking up the supplement for the more specific genre or setting would not hurt the pocket book that much when the core book was already cheaper. And you would not have information you dont need for your modern campaign...which can be much more diverse in what they deal with than fantasy. We are talking about a system to be used for modern psychics in one campaign, in supernatrual beings in another, magicians in a third, cybernetic commando teams in another, pulp heroes in another, superheroes in another and then also being a basis for posisbly post-apocalyptic (which can include any of the previous mentioned) and science fiction (hard science fiction, general science fiction and space opera).

This would let you pick up only the powers you and your group needed for your particular campaign.

We paid $50 for the Pathfinder RPG (gladly in my case). It would not be a sting to pay $30 for the Pathfinder Modern RPG and the Modern Companion: Magic (for example).

Including all of that in one book would be massive and prohibitvely expensive.

That was one of the tactics I actually welcomed from White Wolf for their new World of Darkness line..."here is the rulebook. all the games will use this. The rules will not be reprinted in setting books." If they had done it like the original world of darkness, the various lines main book would have been much more expensive.

-Weylin

Paizo Employee Creative Director

One of the problems with d20 Modern is that it doesn't know what kind of game it wants to be. Is it a modern-day spy game? An apocalyptic game? A space opera game? With Pathfinder and D&D, there's an implied world and setting behind the rules, and that allows the game itself more focus and more detail.

I'm pretty sure that if we do a modern or sci-fi game, we'll not take the "generic" approach. We won't try to build a game that could be rules for ANY setting... the SRD already does that, actually. It'd be best if a sci-fi/modern game picks its world and presents rules for that specific world, I think.


James Jacobs wrote:

One of the problems with d20 Modern is that it doesn't know what kind of game it wants to be. Is it a modern-day spy game? An apocalyptic game? A space opera game? With Pathfinder and D&D, there's an implied world and setting behind the rules, and that allows the game itself more focus and more detail.

I'm pretty sure that if we do a modern or sci-fi game, we'll not take the "generic" approach. We won't try to build a game that could be rules for ANY setting... the SRD already does that, actually. It'd be best if a sci-fi/modern game picks its world and presents rules for that specific world, I think.

if you're not going to go generalist, then yeah, picking a setting and sticking to it sounds like the best idea.

Especially when it comes to any sort of metaphysics (Psionics, magic, etc). Always like when the mechanics behinds those match the cosmology of the setting. Plugging Babylon 5 style psionics into a world with a strong magical angle tends to fall apart on one or the other without some interesting work on the cosmology.

THe sae is true with classes i think if those are part of the system.

While I would like a general system with plug-ins. In the end I would rather have Paizo pick a setting and make the best game they could. I wont like all of it, but then I dont like all of any of my favorite settings or systems.

-Weylin

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I can definitely see the appeal of wanting to focus D20 Modern rules on a particular genre. However, I don't want to see a return to the pre-D20 days where every game company came out with their own slightly different mechanics for things like armour class/resistance, energy weapons, powers and abilities etc which weren't really compatible with each other's games without a fair amount of effort.

Eg, if I have a cool idea for adding horror to a sci-fi genre, or mixing Pathfinder with Sci-fi elements TORG-style, I should be able to mix and match creatures, races, classes, weapons, spells, etc with little effort, because they're all built using 3.5 OGL D20 Pathfinder.

That Paizo are currently thinking away from the Fast Hero etc, I think is good. Classes have a lot more flavour and identity, and are more compatible with Pathfinder core rules. That Paizo are currently thinking any possible Pathfinder Modern may be closer to Pathfinder Fantasy than D20 Modern was to D&D suggests closer integration and easier plug-and-play compatibility between genres. The only thing that hints of concern is focusing on a genre, which may introduce it's own corner rules for things like armour resistance, weapon damage, etc which may not play 100% compatible with Pathfinder Fantasy in the same game.

I've been waiting 20 years to play a D20 version of TORG. With D&D, D20 Modern, D20 Future all "seemingly" built from the same core rules, you wouldn't think this would be a difficult thing to achieve? But alas, it has proven elusive due to different sub-systems.

As for D&D-like Sci-Fi, Star Frontiers was the game that really captured that feel for me. I realise it doesn't have the gritty realism of modern-day sci-fi genres, but it certainly had the funky feel of D&D running strong. I loved the races and sense of exploration/adventure, particularly.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

ALSO! Before anyone gets their hopes up... we do NOT have any plans at this point to jump ship from Pathfinder and build an entirely new game right away. Building Pathfinder was extraordinarily difficult and a hideous drain on our resources and a critical hit to the schedules for every other product we produce. We're not keen on repeating that process any time soon.

At least, I hope we're not! :-O

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

If you want to do a "classless" modern type game based on d20 rules, you're better off with Green Ronin's <i>Mutants and Masterminds</i> (d20 based ruleset, but all point buy, and very flexible).

Personally, part of what I liked about d20 Modern is that you could use the rules, and use them well, for anything from noir to "action movie" to "supernatural hunters" to sci-fi (I admit I almost entirely ignored the Arcana bits). I don't think it was, as James Jacobs put it, that d20 Modern "didn't know what it wanted to be." It knew exactly what it wanted to be: a broad-spectrum game, usable for a number of different kinds of games that still used similar technologies and structures. Not all RPG rulesets have to come with immovable settings. GURPS and Savage Worlds are great examples of that. The nice thing about d20 Modern is that it's just a tad less generic than those systems, but still broad enough for a savvy GM to use it for whatever he needs in a contemporary or future based action game.

I'm sure if Paizo makes some specifically genred modern or sci-fi themed game, I'll check it out, but from the sounds of it, it won't be at all what I want out of a "Pathfinderized" d20 Modern. Of course what I want is entirely UNimportant to the rest of you, I realize. Just sayin'. I'll just get to my homebrewing if I feel the need for a "P20" Modern.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:

ALSO! Before anyone gets their hopes up... we do NOT have any plans at this point to jump ship from Pathfinder and build an entirely new game right away. Building Pathfinder was extraordinarily difficult and a hideous drain on our resources and a critical hit to the schedules for every other product we produce. We're not keen on repeating that process any time soon.

At least, I hope we're not! :-O

Mr. Jacobs, question then: As DeathQuaker has already mentioned, Do you feel that Green Ronin (via their True20 line) has already done this? :)

101 to 150 of 300 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Dear Paizo: Please "Pathfinderize" D20 Modern All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.