5e "Modern": good idea or bad idea?

Old One Eye · January 08, 2016, 08:11:09 AM

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;871985Would a 5e-based ruleset for gaming in the modern era work? Why or why not?

What if it ditched classes for partial point buy (select new abilities every level)?

Does the benefit of using a ruleset that lots of players are likely to be familiar with outweigh whatever awkwardness would arise from the adaptation of a medieval vagabond simulator to a gunfights and white-collar jobs simulator?

I don't want a 5e-inspired modern game. I very much want a 5e DnD modern supplement.

DnD modern should use the standard PHB classes. All it needs is fleshing out some new tool proficiencies, backgrounds, and equipment.

I have no desire to play Papers and Paychecks. Modern DnD is still for action adventure. DnD combat worksjust as well for gunfire as it does for mwdieval combat, no probelms there.

RPGPundit · January 08, 2016, 07:36:19 PM

I'd rather see more modern and sci-fi stuff in D&D (for certain campaigns, etc.) than see a modified set of rules for a modern/sci-fi campaign.

Mordred Pendragon · January 09, 2016, 09:12:16 PM

I wouldn't mind a 5e version of D20 Modern, or a 5e anime supplement in the vein of BESM D20.

Omega · January 10, 2016, 05:04:40 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;872633I'd rather see more modern and sci-fi stuff in D&D (for certain campaigns, etc.) than see a modified set of rules for a modern/sci-fi campaign.

Same here. I'd like to see the Unearthed Arcana article on WOTC about Urban Arcana for 5e fleshed out more.

RPGPundit · January 12, 2016, 03:47:11 AM

I think the OSR has proven to be useful for this kind of stuff, rather than 5e.

trechriron · May 20, 2016, 05:07:14 PM

Rise old thread!! I have new things to say!

I just picked up Amethyst Quintessence, and I have changed my mind. Mostly. I think DD5e would work fine except I wouldn't want to see the "generic" classes. Instead, I would rather see a setting tuned to 5e with setting appropriate classes.

A little work ahead of time would make the game more fun to play and characters easier to make.

Shipyard Locked · May 20, 2016, 05:55:01 PM

Quote from: trechriron;899059I just picked up Amethyst Quintessence, and I have changed my mind.

What did they do 'right'? Where the problems discussed in this thread addressed or did they sidestep the issues?

Caesar Slaad · May 20, 2016, 08:55:32 PM

Quote from: trechriron;899059Rise old thread!! I have new things to say!

I just picked up Amethyst Quintessence, and I have changed my mind. Mostly. I think DD5e would work fine except I wouldn't want to see the "generic" classes. Instead, I would rather see a setting tuned to 5e with setting appropriate classes.

Honestly, I don't think the biggest problem with 5e for modern would be classes. It would be the damage/healing system. It seems bad for fantasy, worse for modern.

Classes, you could do it right or you could do it wrong. To me, a well designed class based system is designed around the challenges you expect the players to face. That was the central problem with d20 modern. The classes were flexible, but they really didn't get an advantage out of being structured like classes.

jeff37923 · May 20, 2016, 09:05:18 PM

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;871985Would a 5e-based ruleset for gaming in the modern era work? Why or why not?

Not only no, but fuck no. The d20 system has yet to successfully tackle the way that modern firearms cause damage that does not destroy the concept of hit points.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;871985What if it ditched classes for partial point buy (select new abilities every level)?

Still does not fix the combat problem.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;871985Does the benefit of using a ruleset that lots of players are likely to be familiar with outweigh whatever awkwardness would arise from the adaptation of a medieval vagabond simulator to a gunfights and white-collar jobs simulator?

Nope. I think that T20 Traveller came the closest, but the combat system was confusing to read even if it did work fairly well in practice.

Omega · May 20, 2016, 09:40:42 PM

What about using the Urban Arcanna 5e rules off the WOTC site as a starting point? Again shave off the fantasy.

Christopher Brady · May 20, 2016, 10:10:08 PM

I've found that a lot of people who are against D&D Modern have this argument that guns can't be portrayed accurately. Usually, the fact that guns kill 'instantly' comes up. But the problem is, like a knife, the gun being the ultimate killer is actually a Hollywood myth. A gun kills just as well, and as fast as a bow, sling and crossbow, in real life. So if a Bow/Crossbow does 1d6, then so should a pistol. Unfortunately, Hollywood has ingrained this belief that the Gun is the ultimate weapon, and it's hard to let that myth go.

Which is odd, because we make fun of the old Katana myth now.

Krimson · May 20, 2016, 10:16:16 PM

Quote from: trechriron;899059I just picked up Amethyst Quintessence, and I have changed my mind. Mostly. I think DD5e would work fine except I wouldn't want to see the "generic" classes. Instead, I would rather see a setting tuned to 5e with setting appropriate classes.

A little work ahead of time would make the game more fun to play and charact...

I picked it up while I am waiting for Ultramodern5. I've always loved Modern and even had my own hack of AD&D before 3e game out. I think the 5e rules handle it quite well.

Omega · May 20, 2016, 10:35:31 PM

Quote from: Christopher Brady;899126I've found that a lot of people who are against D&D Modern have this argument that guns can't be portrayed accurately. Usually, the fact that guns kill 'instantly' comes up. But the problem is, like a knife, the gun being the ultimate killer is actually a Hollywood myth. A gun kills just as well, and as fast as a bow, sling and crossbow, in real life. So if a Bow/Crossbow does 1d6, then so should a pistol. Unfortunately, Hollywood has ingrained this belief that the Gun is the ultimate weapon, and it's hard to let that myth go.

Which is odd, because we make fun of the old Katana myth now.

The Dragon 100 module City Beyond the Gate is still one of my favorites as it has all those rules for modern equipment, and the trouble of a fantasy character figuring out most of it. Pistols were 1d8/1d6. Rifle was 2d6/2d5, SMG was 2d4/2d4 and so on. Getting hit by a car was 1d4/10 mph speed.

Christopher Brady · May 20, 2016, 11:08:06 PM

Quote from: Omega;899132The Dragon 100 module City Beyond the Gate is still one of my favorites as it has all those rules for modern equipment, and the trouble of a fantasy character figuring out most of it. Pistols were 1d8/1d6. Rifle was 2d6/2d5, SMG was 2d4/2d4 and so on. Getting hit by a car was 1d4/10 mph speed.

It's a little high, for D&D. Then again, I used to be one of those kids who used to think that guns were too powerful for D&D, so what the fuck do I know?

Krimson · May 21, 2016, 12:10:02 AM

I like how 5e handles firearms. It's kind of nice, considering I grew up with AD&D and the DM's guide had firearms in there as well. Though the thing I like about how 5e handles it, is there is no rate of fire for guns the way there was in previous editions. Okay, yes there is a multifire rule for automatic weapons, but for the most part you don't have characters squeezing the trigger two or three times per action. Mechanically, firearms as defined in the DMG have no real advantage over bows and crossbows. I like that. It's simple and easy to use, and doesn't contradict stuff from previous editions too much. If I want ballistic porn I'll go play Phoenix Command.