If you’re just joining us, take a look at the Kickoff and Core Design Elements before proceeding.
Here’s some actual crunch: the core classes. Just as in d20 Modern, there’s one base class for each ability score. This setup is intuitive, and also allows for the different kind of teams you see in so many shows and movies. (I’ve been really enjoying Leverage recently for inspiration.)
So that was the easy first step: put the names of those classes down. I stole a few things from the way 4e classes are setup: class determines some bonuses to defense, hit points (mostly, as you’ll see), healing surges, trained skills, core class features, and multiple builds per class. We don’t need a role (they sort of overlap), and we definitely don’t need power sources.
The first thing I added was the bonuses to defense: they formed immediate symmetry. HP followed close behind, which was based on story of each of the classes, as did healing surges and trained skills. Core class features and builds were last, and the most in flux. I tried to make 2 builds for each class that represented a different enough concept within that class (with room for more, of course.)
So here’s what I have. Comments plenty welcome.
Strong Hero
- +1 Fortitude
- +1 Reflex
- HP: Con Score + 1 per level
- HS: 1 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in Athletics, plus 3 others.
Class ability
For the purposes of carrying capacity and lifting, your strength is treated as 4 points higher. You also gain the extreme effort power:
Extreme Effort
Per Session
Minor Action
The next strength-based check you make is at a +5 bonus.Choose one talent:
Talent: Proficiency in Melee Weapons
You gain proficiency in all military melee weapons.Talent: Brawler
You are considered proficient in unarmed attacks and improvised weapons. Attempts to escape from your grab take a penalty equal to your strength modifier.
Tough Hero
- +2 Fortitude
- HP: Con Score + 2 per level
- HS: 2 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in Endurance, plus 4 others
Class ability
If an effect would make you unconscious, you may make a saving throw to avoid dropping unconscious. This includes if you drop to below 0 HP, in which case the save must be made at the end of every round, and once failed, you do not receive any more saves.
Choose one talent:
Talent: Protector
Targets that you are engaged with receive a penalty to all skills and attacks equal to your Con modifier when they do not target you.Talent: Hardcore
While you are bloodied, you gain a bonus to your attack rolls equal to your Con modifier.
Fast Hero
- +2 Reflex
- HP: Con Score + 1 per level
- HS: 1 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in Acrobatics, plus 4 others
Class ability
You gain the Burst of Speed power.
Burst of Speed
Per Scene
Free Action
This turn, you may convert Minor actions into Move actions.Choose one talent:
Talent: Marksman
You gain proficiency with archaic and modern ranged weapons, as well as thrown weapons.Talent: Rogue
You gain a bonus to any skill used against a target that you have combat advantage against equal to your Dex modifier.
Smart Hero
- +1 Will
- +1 Reflex
- HP: Con Score+ 1 per 2 levels
- HS: 1 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in 7 skills
Class ability
You gain the “Flash of Inspiration” power.
Flash of Inspiration
Per Scene
No Action
Trigger: You roll a d20 for a check and dislike the result.
Effect: You add your Int mod to the triggering roll.Choose one talent:
Talent: Specialist
Choose one Intelligence based skill. You gain a class bonus to that skill equal to your level.Talent: Planner
You can use the “Aid Another” action on any ally within sight, and the bonus granted equals your Int mod.
Dedicated Hero
- +2 Will
- HP: Con Score + 1 per level
- HS: 1 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in Insight (or Perception?) plus 5 others
Class ability
Your character has sworn an oath (maybe not a literal one) to a cause. This can be anything from the Hippocratic Oath to Animal Rights Activism. You receive a +5 bonus to all defenses against any effect that would cause you to betray your oath. You also gain the “Dedicated to the Goal” power.
Dedicated to the Goal
Immediate Reaction
Per Scene
Roll a Saving Throw versus one condition you just received with a bonus equal to your Wisdom modifier.Choose a talent:
Talent: Healer
Gain the “Healing Touch” powerHealing Touch
Minor Action
Per Scene
Target an ally next to you. That ally can spend a healing surge and regain that many hit points + 1d6.Talent: Gain the “Dedicated to Cause” power
Dedicated to Cause
Per Scene
Target an enemy in sight. Until the end of the scene, when attacking the target or using a skill that is opposed by the target (either actively or passively), you roll twice and pick the better result.
Charismatic Hero
- +1 Fortitude
- +1 Will
- HP: Con Score + 1 per level
- HS: 1 + Con Modifier
- Skills: Trained in Diplomacy plus 5 others
Class ability
Savoir Faire
Per Scene
No Action
Trigger: You use a Charisma based check, skill, or power against another creature, and dislike the result.
Effect: Reroll the check, skill, or power, and add your Cha to the result.Choose a talent:
Talent: Gain the “Inspiring Speech” power
Inspiring Speech
Per Scene
Minor Action
Target an ally within sight. That alley spends a healing surge and gains temporary HP equal to its value.Talent: Gain the “Unerring Confidence” power
Unerring Confidence
Per Scene
Immediate Interrupt
Trigger: You are hit by something that targets one of your defenses.
Effect: Increase that defense by your Cha modifier.
Issues? Questions? Lay them on me, and I’ll modify as necessary. Since these are just first draft powers, I’m not as worried that X power is balanced or poorly worded or such… play testing will show most of that. The bigger question is: do they adequately represent the archetypes they need to? Are the important archetypes there? Those are the big questions.
Next week, we’ll start into the at-wills that should give you some idea of how I envision them, as well as some of the basics on multiclassing. The week after, if all goes well, Per Scene and Per Session powers… which gets us pretty close to having a set of rules that can be playtested.
Looks good! So is everyone proficient with simple weapons from the get-go? Proficiencies seem to be mentioned only in the case of military+ so I figured…
.-= Wyatt´s last blog ..Second Spirits of Eden encounter goes well! =-.
Good question… yeah, only proficiency in simple weapons (like anyone can use a knife and club) and no armor proficiencies.
The classes look to capture the flavour fairly well. As for whether the main archetypes are there…
Well, the main d20 Modern archetypes were never single classes. The heavyweight boxer is Strong/Tough, the lightweight is Strong/Fast. James Bond is Smart/Charismatic, MacGyver is Smart/Dedicated, etc.
So, unfortunately, with a 4e-based system, it will take some work to satisfy me on archetypes. That said, you had mentioned some possible changes to the power system that might do the trick.
And I know you didn’t ask for it, but it’s what I do, so here are my quick initial comments on the classes themselves.
Strong Hero
– Extreme Effort, I assume, isn’t for attack rolls. As such, you should change the wording to “Strength checks and Strength-based skill checks” to exclude them.
– Brawler – Gaining “proficiency” in unarmed attacks or improvised weapons, under standard 4e rules, gives no benefit. They don’t have a proficiency bonus, and all proficiency does is lets you add that proficiency bonus. Perhaps a +2 to hit with improvised weapons would be in order?
Tough Hero
– Protector – I assume you’ll be definine “engaged with” somewhere. Maybe a better wording would be “adjacent to” or “enemies you have targetted since your last turn”.
Fast Hero/Strong Hero
– Are you using the Archaic/Modern descriptor for weapons (as in the Fast talent) or 4e’s Military/Simple (as in the Strong)? Or some combination of both?
Smart Hero
– Specialist – +Level? That will get quite high, quite fast, meaning there will soon be absolutely nothing that could challenge that character in that skill. I’d drop it to 1/2 level, but even a flat +3 to +5 is very useful at all levels.
Dedicated Hero
– +5 to defenses is good, but only helpful if the effect attacks you. Most will, this is true, but there will probably be some that don’t. As such, you might want to consider removing this bonus, and giving instead “You recieve an immediate saving throw against any effect that would cause you to betray your oath.” Just a thought.
Charismatic Hero
– Only comment is that it may actually be putting too much emphasis on the Cha stat, with the abilities geared towards doubling up on your Cha bonus (for Cha skills and Will defense). It may push players of that class away from diversifying.
.-= Graham´s last blog ..CriticalAnkleBites and ChattyDM pretend to be journalists =-.
Looks pretty good.
For the record, though, and I mean this as totally constructive, I never liked the “Strong/Tough/Fast etc.” Hero from d20 Modern. It lacked flavor. I much preferred the more definitive classes of Spycraft, and even something like the new Leverage opener (Hitter, Grifter, etc.) would be more welcome than more generic classes.
I also think it would help to give the characters more of an instant hook to hang on, rather than just their ability score. More fluff to blend with the crunch.
Liking it so far, and looking forward to seeing how to translate the d20 Modern multi-classing rules into 4e terms.
.-= greywulf´s last blog ..Late for God =-.
I wonder if the different builds might be well-served by picking a secondary stat that each one leans towards, as Graham suggested. So the builds for a Strong hero would be Strong/fast and Strong/tough, the builds for a Wise hero would be Wise/smart and Wise/charismatic, etc. You could mix things up a little and have the builds for Tough be Tough/wise and Tough/strong, for instance, going with the most common archetypes instead of just matching up physical and mental stats.
Minor comment, but I’m assuming for the Fast Hero’s Burst of Speed that you mean you can do a move action as if it were a minor action, and then still take your normal move action?
If so, then I suggest editing it to say, “convert move actions into minor actions,” instead of “convert minor actions into move actions.”
Looking forward to seeing more crunch.
@KenkakuKnight –
Actually, “convert minor actions into move actions” is correct, as every character already has the ability to convert move actions into minor actions.
As an analogy, if an alchemist converts lead into gold, he is left with gold. If you convert a minor action into a move action, you are left with a move action.
(Note that we’re talking about the action itself, and not what you do with the action, such as moving. By doing this, you don’t make an action that is normally a move action take a minor action instead; you change the actions you get in a round from standard/move/minor to standard/move/move.)
.-= Graham´s last blog ..CriticalAnkleBites and ChattyDM pretend to be journalists =-.
As you noted, you may not need roles or power sources, but since this is something like d20 Modern, professions may play a greater role than they would in, say, regular D&D. If you’re planning on a mostly non-fantastical sort of game, the archetypes might be more useful as ‘races’ where professions or something similar could substitute in for classes. I could always be very wrong, though, and commenting this early in the process is like commenting on the quality of food before it’s been cooked.. 🙂 I look forward to more along these lines.
.-= Jamie Smith´s last blog ..My Life With MMOs =-.
I notice that some classes have an “always on” ability coupled with a power, but others just offer a power. It would seem to me, both in the case of symmetry and in the case of balance, that each class should get both.
And a nit-pick: Savoir Faire vs. Flash of Inspiration. The first lets you re-roll and add your Cha. The other only lets you add your Int. Is this because Savoir Faire is only good for Cha-based rolls and Flash of Inspiration can be used for anything? My concern here is this: SF will be used frequently on the virtue that it provides a chance to turn any failed Cha roll into a success, where FoI will be used much more rarely as you have to only be failing by your Int mod, which is a much smaller window of opportunity. Then again, maybe the volume of rolls that FoI can be applied to will make up for this. I guess it is something to keep on eye on during playtest.
.-= DeadGod´s last blog ..Zombie Metrics =-.
I think you begin explaining from the end. Yes, we have Core Design Elements, but we need actual rules. Well, not all of them, since it is blend of familiar 4e and d20 Modern, but at least feel of abstract combat, non-combat activities, list of skills, that kind of staff.
For example, do I care about being bloodied (Tough Hero Talent: Hardcore), if I die from two hits (HP = Con + 1, so around 13—14, and if pistol does 2d6, i.e. 7 points), or not. If there only 6 skills what I gonna do with 7 from Smart hero. Etc.
I see much balance and symmetry here and a lot of rules I’m eager to get clarified. I’d like to echo the comments about never really liking generic class systems like d20 modern in general. They work, but it’s always sort of tough to get into the fluff of it all. Definitely a personal opinion, not a knock at how effective you’ve been at creating these classes.
Perhaps if you take a deep look at the 4e hybrid class rules and ensure the core classes are all easily compatible with hybridization it might make it a lot easier to take hybrids and create good setting-specific classes as a template.
Keep up the good work.
Graham: Appreciated on the look. Some of them definitely have to be changed along the lines that you’re suggested: Specialist for Smart Hero is probably top of that list to get changed. Proficiency is something that will have to be more defined, but with AC probably being dropped as a defense, I may have to go back to there being a penalty for non-proficiency instead of a bonus for proficiency.
Randy & Hawke: Yeah, I debated doing it more “Spycraft” style for classes but ultimately like the customization of d20 Modern style. But here’s my question for you guys: would it help at all to name the builds after the sort of thing you’re suggesting? So the Charismatic Hero is actually either “The Leader” or “The Grifter”?
greywulf & Swordgleam: Multiclassing might have to do a lot of lifting here, and I’m hoping it addresses the lack of varied stats in a class.
KenkakuKnight: It might just be easier to make it a power that takes a Minor action and gives you an extra Move action this turn.
Jamie: I’m currently going the d20 Modern route and just building in human bonuses to everything to accommodate for Race. Current plan was to grab the 4e background rules and apply them to professions, but I’d welcome other ideas.
DeadGod: Yeah, I tried for symmetry, and then just couldn’t come up with enough iconic, interesting always-on/powers for each class. I’ll keep thinking about it. And I share your concern about Flash of Inspiration (which is one of my favorite class powers that I came up with) vs. Savoir Faire.
Andrew: The thing to keep in mind is that I’m building the game as I go, with only the conceptual elements being built out more in advance. My current goal is to build out enough of the classes to be able to run a playest so I can test the concept from there and see how much needs to be tweaked/changed/invented to get to a complete game from the 4e rules. It may not be the best way to explain a complete game, but this is more about the development process that presenting a final ruleset (so far.)
I don’t say you wrong, it’s just we can’t help you much… but will be trying anyway 🙂
First, there can’t be much fluff in generic modern game, so Strong/Fast/etc. heroes is good enough. At least, it’s familiar from d20 Modern.
Second, one thing I really like about 4e, it’s no matter what class you are playing, you still reasonably good at anything, so you not only don’t drag party down, but can at least help. Just thing to keep in mind: every class must have something to do in every activity, be it combat or something else.
And at last, but don’t at least, power’s format is really good. Action, Attack vs. Defense, Hit, Effect, Damage and so on is simple and understandable: you hit and then this happened. So I think it must be used to describe most of things in game, not only actual attacks, but driving, hacking, communicating… And anything what you can do to a character (player or non-player, and even cars, computers and other staff with defenses — for simplicity, I think, they all must be treated like monsters, rules wise) must follow this format. Trip? Dexterity vs. Reflex. Push? Strength vs. Toughness. Haggle? Deception (skill) vs. Will. Etc. D&D and SWSE do that, but there and here some bits are hanging, like skill vs. skill. With all that comes one problem, though — you need to balance ability attacks (½ lvl + mod) and skill attacks (½ lvl + mod + training + focus), and, of course, defenses.
I really like Jamie’s idea of using Profession to substitute for Race, Background is also important but should be separated.
Background can remain analogous to the 4e Background and Backgrounds could range from ethnicity/nationality (American, African-American, African, British Commonwealth, Western European, Eastern European etc) level of education (Home schooled, High School, GED, Bachelors, Masters, PHD, Technical School, Bar or Medical License etc) as well as other descriptors for location or socio-economic status(Urban, Rural, Suburban, Affluent, Poverty etc). These backgrounds just like the Backgrounds in 4e combine to describe where the character comes from, and should give the option of a bonus to skill like 4e does.
Profession on the other hand seems more analogous to what the character is trained in, and I think should therefore be used in place of Race. The Human bonus Feats and Skills are all well and good, but I find to often possibly the most significant Human bonus goes un-used, the additional At-Will. By using Profession instead of Race, or in combination with some of the Human Racial Bonuses characters can use it to customize their Character towards their archetypes. A character whose Profession is, to use the Leverage term, a Hitter would get +2 to Strength and Con and and Encounter Power that fits, like a Burst 1 move that Disarms enemies for example. Maybe a character whose Profession was Soldier would get the same bonuses to Stats, but a different Encounter Power more in line with the Ranged weapons that character is likely to be using.
In short my suggestion is that Backgrounds remain largely the same and describe the origins of the character where Profession replaces some of the features of Race and determines the type of training, physical and mental, that the character had previous to becoming a Hero.
Sorry for the double post, bad form I know, but a couple other things have come to mind since.
1. What happens to Armor? You mentioned that you might drop AC, will Armor provide Damage Reduction in the case? What about Shields which provided AC and Reflex in 4e?
2. What determines Weapon and Armor proficiency? I suggest that this be one of the things provided by Profession. The broad-stroke proficiency in 4e might not be suitable, maybe proficiency should be narrower. Rather than giving the Hitter Simple Melee, Simple Ranged and Military Melee (which would likely include Bolt-Action and Semi- Auto Rifles) it might be more appropriate to give him proficiency defined by Weapon Groups (Bows, Light Blades, Axes etc from 4e). In this case the Hitter would get Simple Handguns but not Simple Longarms or any Military Firearms, and would get Simple Military and maybe even Archaic Melee.
3. What is the level spilt? Are there going to be Advanced Classes at level 4 like in d20? Or will customization rely on feats and Multi-Class (And Profession?) until choosing a Paragon (Professional) Path at Level 11?
4. Skills are obviously going to be much more important in 4th Power, what skills are being added and are any being dropped? The dozens of skills in d20 were too much, in keeping with the 4e method of combining skills I suggest: Engineering, Bio-Medical, IT, & Tactical. What is under Heal in 4e would fall under Bio-Medical along with Surgery, Chemistry and Pharmaceuticals. IT would include not only what was Computer Use, but also Audio/Visual equipment and editing, Phone tech and really anything thats based on electronics. Engineering would cover mechanical and structural as well as basic tinkering and even Weapons repair and modification. Tatical is my least defined new skill, but I think its still important. Maybe it could be combines into a Leadership skill which would overlap with things like being a Executive. Arcana and Dungeoneering could stay or go based on the setting.
5. Rituals? Are they staying? I would strongly argue that they need to be kept around. The system for Hacking in d20 was insane and could easily be replaced by IT Rituals, no hacker is going to know every technique, but by using rituals it is clearly defined what he can and can’t do and what sort of knowledge he possesses. Inserting a Key-Logger, looking through a Database, opening electronic doors (in person or by remote) would all be separate rituals. The same can go for Engineering which will have a number of vehical repair or modification rituals that are different from the structural or weapons related rituals. So forth and so on for the various facets of Bio-Medical and Tactical/Leadership as well as the existing Knowledges that don;t already have rituals, like Nature, History or Streetwise.
Thats not all entirely on the topic of Class Features, but I think they’re things, especially the skills, that need to be addressed sooner rather than later.
CharlesWK: I’m personally less interested in seeing the level of detail that the D&D backgrounds provide when pulled into a modern setting and would instead like to see the rules be more abstract and leave details like specific race and socio-economic upbringing to the player.
Andrew & CharlesWK: I haven’t talked to Dave much yet about how he’s thinking about doing weapons (and specifically) firearms, but I believe he’s not that interested in seeing super detailed rules for a wide range of weapons, instead preferring to have rules for “pistols” and “machine guns” in the same way that the different types of Longbows or Longswords aren’t really differentiated in D&D. That said, weapons and the damage they deal in the system is one of the big things I’m interested in working with and helping out, so we’ll see if Dave’s up for that. 🙂
CharlesWK: I’m not yet on an equivalent of Race that wouldn’t just be backgrounds… it doesn’t seem conceptually that I’d want to make new powers. Though I could certainly see backgrounds giving an attribute bonus on top of skills, but that’s as far as I’d want to take the concept. And on to your other questions…
1. Armor as DR makes the most sense to me. Shields aren’t a big part of Modern games but could easily have bonuses built in to the item description.
2. Consider that idea stolen, at least for part of it 🙂
3. 1-10 for Amateur, 11-20 picks up a Professional Path, 21+ picks up some equivalent to Epic Destinies (though is unlikely to see any work for a while.)
4. Skills coming in a few weeks as I devote time to them, but I agree that consolidation will happen, and they will also be more important than before.
5. Hacking is probably the #1 way to keep Rituals (name to be changed) in the game, but I think I prefer making them skill challenges for anything like that. That will require some thought for sure.
Interesting idea. It would make playing D20 modern a lot easier for first time players, which is the reason we haven’t played D20 modern in quite some time.
The Game: You’re probably right that Hacking should be a Challenge and not a Ritual, but things like giving a car a tune up or an engine swap, making a bomb or chemical compound or putting a silencer or scope (which is more complicated than simply bolting it onto the weapon) still seem like they would fall under rituals to me.
Bartoneus: For Backgrounds I wasn’t thinking of the kind of detailed Backgrounds that exist for Scales of War, Eberron or Forgotten Realms, but the more generic backgrounds that are under General in the Character Builder. Personally I don’t like the one that commit you to a specific past or having been from some group, but I think the ability to choose as many, or as few backgrounds, as you want from a list of descriptors can help crystallize a character.
I think you read a little to deeply into what I was saying about Weapon Groups and using them to define proficiencies. Just like there is no different between one Longbow and another there is no difference between one Colt .45 and another (even less thanks to Mass-Production). However there are clear differences between a 9mm Berreta and said Colt, but both would fall under the Weapon Group “Handguns” like the Longbow, Shortbow and Greatbow are all Bows.
If one were to simply classify weapons for 4th Power by the 4e system of Simple/Military/Superior and Melee/Ranged then any Firearm that was Single-Shot or Semi-Automatic would fall under Simple Ranged and anything that can be Fully-Automatic under Military Ranged. In that case if you give your Hitter Simple Ranged, and why wouldnt you? Its hard to imagine your muscle being totally unfamiliar with guns, then hes also getting proficiency with a M1 Garand, an M14 and even a whole smattering of Sniper Rifles. By classifying weapons into Groups; like Handguns, Assault Rifles, Shotguns, Sniper Rifles, Civilian (Hunting) Rifles and Machineguns we can more appropriately dole out proficiencies. A Police Officer is going to be proficient in Handguns, Shotguns and Civilian Rifles, a Soldier will have Assault Rifles and Machineguns on top of that. A Professional Assasin will probably have Handguns and Sniper Rifles.
Within each Weapon Group you can have as many or a few weapons as you are willing to build, and I think that the 4e system of Weapon Attibutes can add a mechanical significance to having multiple weapons, just like the Longsword, Scimitar, Broadsword and Khopesh are mechanically different. A Berreta 92 is very accurate, it gets a +3 Proficiency Bonus. A .357 Magnum is very powerful, it gets Brutal 1. A Colt .45 does decent damage but has a high potential to stop people in their tracks, it gets High Crit. So there are still reasons, both for flavor and mechanics to have multiple weapons from each group, but the point of Grouping them in such a way is to facilitate determining who is proficient in what.
On second thought, maybe you didn’t read to far into it. I felt the need to clarify and expand anyway.
I agree with your initial premise, you don’t want to simply play 4th edition with different names. The way I imagine a 4th edition Modern character working is like this:
Level 1: Origin (instead of Race), Job (instead of Class), Profession (instead of Build, optional)
Level 11: Career Path (instead of Paragon Path)
Level 21: Legacy (instead of Epic Destiny)
ORIGINS: These would provide bonuses similar to Races, a couple of skill bonuses, maybe a defense bonus, some ability score bonuses, and perhaps a power of some sort. Your Origin represents your formative years, experiences that will have an impact on the rest of your life. Examples would be: Jock (+2 STR, +2 Athletics and Endurance, +1 Fort, etc), Nerd (+2 INT, +2 Technology and History, +1 Will, etc), Outcast (+2 WIS, +2 Perception and Insight, +1 Will, etc). More off the top of my head: Street Urchin, Army Brat, Gang Member. The point is that it gives you a starting point, and might lean you towards a specific Job, but doesn’t limit you.
JOBS: I have always been against the tough, strong, etc. names for classes and even the word class, they just don’t truly fit a modern setting. I have never heard anyone call James Bond a smart/charismatic hero or a fast/charismatic hero, he’s a Secret Agent (which is a higher-level specialization, at the core he is an Operative, the guy who physically gets jobs done). MacGuyver is an Engineer. Daniel Jackson (from Stargate SG-1) is a Doctor. Kojak is a Detective. Grism (from CSI) is a Scientist.
These types of labels are broad enough to allow for specializations (called Professions instead of Builds), but are still far more descriptive than Tough, Strong, etc. Example Jobs (and Professions): Operative (Brawny, Sneaky), Detective (Investigator, Reporter), Engineer (Inventor, Fixer), Scientist (Lab Rat, Field Agent), Doctor (Medic, Professor). These just sound better, and give a much better idea of what your character is when you tell someone that you are playing an Operative or a Nerdy Lab Rat Scientist than if you just said Strong or Smart hero.
I also think that roles are appropriate for modern games, with some slight tweaks. Leader is good, but I would drop Defender and Controller, add Grifter and Hacker, and change Striker to Hitter. This means you need someone to lead the team and give them bonuses, someone to act as the face of the party and talk their way out of things, someone to handle any technological hurdles, and someone who can use their fists (or guns or whatever) when things go south.
CAREER PATHS: The Paragon Path rules work really well here. An Operative might become a Secret Agent or Field Officer, a Detective might become a Private Investigator or a Journalist, an Engineer might become a Robotics Expert or Demolition Man, a Scientist might become a Chemist or Physicist, and a Doctor might become a Surgeon or an Archeologist.
I believe these are all important rules that can be left in the game. The main differences between this and 4th edition will come from powers, like you said, and more abstract combat. The biggest difference, though, will come simply from the way people run their games. The type of challenges and pacing and such will do much more to make it feel like a modern setting game than anything the rules will do.
Just my $0.02
@CharlesWK: Yea I most likely read too much into the weapons comments, sorry!
I have always been bothered by D&D’s (and other systems’) assumption that being fast = being agile = being dexterous = being good with ranged weapons. Unlike the strength/constitution distinction, which is logical in some ways as strong and tough are can be seen as two sides of the same coin, “Dexterity” is a catch-all that encompasses all physical abilities other than being strong or tough. It includes how fast you are, how quiet or stealthy you are, how well you can control your body, how fast you react, how good your balance is, how good your hand-eye-coordination is, and other things. Dexterity is much broader than strength or constitution, which I think is problematic in a game that bases its classes off of a single stat.
It seems like you could differentiate the various aspects of Dexterity into at least 2 different stats, each with its own further sub-divisions/builds. I realize that this would either create 7 stats, or force you to combine two other stats (perhaps strength and constitution?), but I think it is something worth considering. For instance, you could break Dexterity into 2 distinct stats:
1. Speed: how fast you run, how well you dodge, how fast you react (i.e. initiative), how fast you attack (i.e. for special feats/powers that let you make multiple attacks)
2. Body Control: how well you can balance, how well you can squeeze or stretch, how well you can sneak, how well you can aim
“Speed” seems to incorporate elements of strength (how fast you run) and instincts (reaction / dodging). In this way it would be appropriate for a character that was an athlete, fighter/wrestler/boxer, or soldier, etc. Builds: Instincts (initiative bonus or dodge bonus), Sprinter (extra move actions or speed bonus).
“Body Control” seems to be more in line with the actual definition of dexterity, which most dictionaries define as ‘skill or grace in physical movement, especially the hands’. It would be appropriate for a character that was an acrobat, a gymnast, a thief, or a soldier (most soldiers have training in all of those aspects that I listed above). Builds: Dexterous (bonus to manipulation of objects with hands, or aim), Kinesthetics (bonus to balance / stretching / squeezing, or sneaking).
It seems like strong and tough could easily be combined into one stat. I mean, how many people are trained in the ability to dish out punishment with their hands, but somehow lacking the ability to take punishment from someone else’s punches? Typically strong and tough go together, and there’s no reason you simply can’t make one stat to cover them both. I understand that some character archetypes are ‘gritty’ or tough without being strong, but it rarely works the other way around. It seems like if you wanted to be tough but not strong then some form of multiclass would take care of you.
Of course, consider my comments as part constructive criticism and part thinking out loud. But just to emphasize my point a bit, when I read the description of the “Fast” character, I couldn’t help but ask myself “what does being proficient with ranged weapons have to do with being fast?”. The answer: nothing.
To add on to my previous comment, I think that splitting up Dexterity into 2 separate stats and consolidating strength and con into 1 would give players more options for building their character, at least in a game that takes place in a modern setting (which places less emphasis on bashing monsters with swords and absorbing orc axes to the chest).
Think about it this way. In the traditional system, if you want to 1) hit stuff with a melee weapon/fist, 2) lift stuff, or 3) jump or climb, you pump strength. If you want to 1) absorb hits, or 2) resist disease/debilitating conditions, you pump con. If you want to do ANYTHING ELSE with your body, you pump Dex. It seems like in a modern game setting, a lot of players would be pumping Dex. If Dex becomes 2 stats (e.g. Speed and Body Control), then the players have to think a bit harder about what kind of character they want to make, and invest their stat points more strategically.
I’m a little concerned about the Tough Hero’s Hardcore ability. Can you raise two stats, like in 4e? If so, I can see a lot of people who might ordinarily be Fast Heroes pumping Dex and Con and staying bloodied at all times, hoping to win initiative and using cover to avoid being hurt more.
I think you’re being too stingy on the hit points. The difference between a tough hero and a smart one is going to get pretty ridiculous at higher levels. You might want the base health bonus per level to be +2, +3, or +4. +3 should be the average, +2 for the really vulnerable classes and +4 for your Tough Hero. And consider throwing in an extra healing surge here and there for some of these classes. Seeing 1+constitution modifier for all of the classes is kind of boring.
Still, mad props on all of this! I think the comments section is full of great ideas, like calling classes Secret Agent, Doctor, Hacker, etc. You can really spin this into something that’s far better than just a translation of d20 into 4th Edition.
RocketLlama: I would say that these values only hold true for levels 1-10. And the 1 + Con Mod HS was on purpose to just give the Tough hero an extra kicker above the other classes. In a game that’s not combat focused, I don’t think a lot of healing surges is the way to go. At low levels, I really want people avoiding damage as much as possible.