|
Bad planning, probably
Post originally by Manga Boogie Man at 2005-01-14 16:03:53
Converted from Phorums BB System
I don't know enough about d20 Future to say anything, but d20 Modern I have played.
This wouldn't be the first d20-type setting book that wasn't assigned to the proper book. I know some of the early, pre-d20 Modern stuff used D&D3E, since it was the only d20 system book out at the time, but once d20 Modern came out there was no excuse for staying with that idea. Sure, d20 Modern's classes are pretty badly assembled overall, but since these settings use their own classes most of the time, that usually doesn't matter. There's also the matter of updating the feat system, but it's not impossible to rewrite existing feats to better suit a game world (something a few publishers would probably benefit from learning. I mean, they already add new feats, so what's so different about rewriting a feat or two, or dropping a few as redundant?).
Note that I like D&D3E and 3.5 no better, but d20 Modern had a lot of promise that was partially wasted by shaky character class construction, among other things. Only one really capable combat character class when they needed at least two, with the rest stuck as second- and third-line combatants, and not enough skill points all around. Blizzards of the Cost should have gotten their minds out of the dungeon when writing this one. Oh, the days when d20 anything seemed to have limitless potential were grand. Then people began to realize that the new system still had a lot of the old system's limitations. A big step forward, but not big enough. And a heavy blow for a purchaser of more than one $25-40 book.
Sometimes the authors of a game state that they want a certain system for the game. This was the case for "The Red Star Campaign Setting," when the comic book producers stated that they specifically wanted to use d20 Modern. It's probably happened to other books, too.
|
Linear Mode
