Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Tensen, the thing is, that it's a race dedicated to a specific part of the timeline.
They don't exist before or after Fo2.
Another reason to why monsters aren't main-races, is that they are usually more powerful than the others, and generally harder to advance and play.
Imagine playing as a deathclaw, not being able to get into towns, use weapons, talk to NPC's and so on. You'd have to be an advanced player to pull it off, as well as not minding the not-being-able-to-use-gear-and-weapons bit.
Those are the reasons to why it shouldn't be a main-race. But I'm all for a "Deathclaw as characters" paragraph under a monster entry; "Deathclaw"/"Intelligent Deathclaw"
Keeping open options is a fine idea.
EDIT; (Ausir's damn quick)
Ausir wrote:And anyway, I'd bet more players want to play a dual-wielding drow than a halfling or a gnome. And adding deathclaws will also mean adding deathclaw feats and deathclaw classes, as they are very different than regular races. That's probably also why WotC doesn't include non-humanoid races in their main books - because they require lots of additional rules.
One of the other reasons they didn't add it, would be that they could use it as a supplementary for the setting Forgotten Realms. WoTC are interested in selling as many different books as possible..
(BTW; Drow are pretty humanoid ;P)
We agree.
And it's a perfect example of having a non-main race, which can still be played.
There is a thing though, because the PnP version would allow a DC to have some kinds of weapons, seeing as they could be crafted or altered.
Maybe not firearms, but enhanced melee weapons perhaps?
On second thought, firearms could be grafted.. but it would be something like a suit or exo-part.
Anyway, my point is, that to make DC's a bit more playable or interesting would be items specifically made for them, but how would you implement it if DC's were an off-race?
An extra paragraph, with advice on how to make these items perhaps, + examples?
Well, I'd say that optional rules for playing DC's in the bestiary entry are fine, just don't add them to the list of main races, and I don't too much space devoted to special rules for deathclaws - I'd say that'd be better suited for an expansion book.
Ausir wrote:Let's keep the deathclaws in the bestiary, a creative GM will be able to convert it to a race anyway.
Hear, hear!
A lot of games have suffered over the years from people wanting to play monsters, and while GMs will undoubtedly modify rules/settings to their liking -- games are after all there for enjoyment, not the mindless interpretation of rules -- people should look at what their choice of character will do to the game, before they go charging headlong into the realm of monstrous player characters. Characters like Gorris are better suited to NPCs due to their limitations within the setting.
GMs are obviously going to do what they want, but I think allowing Talking DCs as anything but NPCs in a FO campaign taking place contemporarily with FO2 is as much a can of worms as allowing Drow Elf PCs in a non-Underdark AD&D campaign. The character is simply to limited to make up for the few nifty special abilities they have.
OTB
"On the bounce, you apes! Do you wanna live forever?!"
I realized, after I logged off last night, that options in the bestiary would work just fine, since it'll be included in the Players book.
And as for Dethclaw classes, not in a d20 modern based game. They'd still just be a fast, strong or other hero with an occupation, no different.
And most racial feats in d20 can be taken by anyone if they so chose... they hafta have the feat slots open and any prereqs.
And why would you need special item... they want a knife, they have a knife, doesn't hafta have any special stats, you just assume it's different.
And characters playing Deathclaws would be no more limited than they make themselves. Your race doesn't limit your options, your playing style does. And players themselves are a can of worms, trust me on this.
Still, even if they use the default d20 Modern classes (and they might still change it), the other races will have prestige classes that the deathclaws lack - they'd probably need some kind of "alpha male" or "matriarch" classes.
Tensen, is it almost sure that the modern character-development will be implemented..?
aka strong, fast, tough etc.?
While this is something that players would be able to relate to, it is a fairly weak development system.
While there is a difference between a fast and charismatic character, it is somewhat thin..
In my opinion, classes would be more character defining, and even better, a very short and very specific guide to create a class, would make some creative choices.
But what about later on? Prestige classes?
in Modern, you couldn't really compare the general "Strong" class with a Prestige, since the latter was much more defining and interesting.
Anyway, what I'd *REALLY* like to see implemented in the d20 game, would be a list of Pro's and Con's which you could add to your character. example; butt-ugly, scarred, talented, tactical etc.
Tensen wrote:Your race doesn't limit your options, your playing style does.
That's not entirely true. It's very difficult for a super mutant to have stuff to do when they're wandering around - but I'd like to think I'm a pretty good GM, and I've ran scenarios like that with mutants, and while I played up the stigma and racism part, there was still plenty for the super mutant to do. But I'd have a lot of difficulty accomodating more extreme characters, like deathclaws. The wasteland is a xenophobic place, and that's not even considering really isolationist places like Vault City. If I didn't have a good amount of my NPCs attacking a deathclaw character on sight (or running the hell away), I'd feel like I wasn't doing justice to the setting. Furthermore, gameplay would be pretty lame if it was just the deathclaw killing everybody who reacted so harshly to them. Ultimately, when playing a deatclaw in Fallout, your options would REALLY get cut down. Ultimately, I think extreme races should require the GM's permission to be played, because it would require a lot of planning beforehand in order to accomodate the deathclaw into the story and gameplay.
Not to say that I disagree with you wholeheartedly, of course. I just think a big disclaimer is required.
Oh, it would also be oh-so-cool if the book was a mock 'survival guide' or something, a la the Fallout 1 manual. With survival tips and recipes and what-have-you included for the immersion factor. Now that would be respectable (I'd buy it just for that).
suppose you're thinking about a plate of shrimp. suddenly somebody will say like 'plate' or 'shrimp' or 'plate of shrimp', out of the blue, no explanation.
Anyway, what I'd *REALLY* like to see implemented in the d20 game, would be a list of Pro's and Con's which you could add to your character. example; butt-ugly, scarred, talented, tactical etc.
I agree with you pretty much, the key to character customization isn't raw stats and class abilities and what not as much as pros and cons (perhaps through traits, or a more GURPS-like point buy system, or first level feats which give you both a large advantage and a slightly lesser penalty, or whatever) in addition to more 'specialized' things such as your skills.
edito: post 5000
suppose you're thinking about a plate of shrimp. suddenly somebody will say like 'plate' or 'shrimp' or 'plate of shrimp', out of the blue, no explanation.
Yes, Modern does have prestige classes, and so most likely will Fallout d20.
And yes, having the book be a Vault-Tec survival guide, or Desert Ranger survival guide, or NCR intelligence report, or all of them at once in different parts of the book would be awesome, like the Vault-Tec survival guide in FO1 and Vault Dweller's memoirs in FO2.
Well, some d20/Modern games use only one d20 basic "class" for all characters, and make them choose their "class" skills, proficiencies and such - that would be more fallouty IMHO, with an equivalent of the tag skills. There probably would still be prestige classes, though.
You could have a table that said which skills/how many you could have compared to your base attack/base save and then bonus/feats or special abilities, for balance.
There are probably some out there somewhere.
Ausir, you could still tag skills with classes.
Allow players to choose his first tags when the game begins.
A tag is equal to getting a skill that is normally cross-class, as class skill, or an already class skill as a 1.5 value, or maybe even 2, for each point you spend on it (Not limited by level +3 rule).
The idea in this, is that you are allowed to be a medic/doctor and still be able to set explosives.
Or to be some sort of gunslinger and be very good at bartering.
The reason to why I don't think a gun-specific character should have easy access to skills he normally wouldn't, it that roles need to be filled when you have a party, and nobody likes another player to tread on his territory or skill.
But that's my fave kind of group play, I know, and I'll be the first to admit that having a party of 3 mages is the most fun I've ever had, so roles don't *always* have to be filled..
The d20 Modern class system is quite flawed. All of the classes center around combat and there is not much variation between them, and all members of a given class are essentially identical. The prestige classes are far more interesting, but are extremely weak compared to D&D prestige classes.
I think the best solution would be a handful of base classes, and a wide array of prestige classes accessible at the standard D&D level (6th at earliest). A sample of this:
Machinist - average attack skills, physical skills, trade skills, ability to build or repair normal technology, bonus feats to doing such
Militant - good attack skills, soldier/military skills, abilities to work in a unit (even larger bonuses when working with other Soldiers), bonus combat feats
Leader - average attack skills, leadership/charisma skills, abilities to convince others to do things, bonus feats in aiding or directing others
Researcher - poor attack skills, intellectual skills, abilities to learn or repair strange technology, bonus feats to gain access to Energy Weapons/Power Armor/etc.
Scrapper - average attack skills, urban life/stealth skills, luck abilities, bonus feats related to reflexes/perception
Survivalist - good attack skills, outdoorsman skills, ability to shrug off attacks, bonus feats to survive better (Toughness, Radiation Resistance, etc.).
Mechanics and tinkerers would be Mechanists. Soldiers and very organized militia would be Militants. Politicians would be Leaders. Medics, scientists, and some Vaultdwellers would be Researchers. Gang members or street urchins would be Scrappers. Many people in the wastelands would be Survivalists, from militia to tribals.
Crossclassing is possible, of course. A military officer might be a Leader/Militant, a Survivalist might also be a Scrapper if he can really survive anywhere, a Mechanist might be a Scientist if he wants to be able to work on anything, etc.
Afterwards there would be prestige classes. If you have high Science skills, you could multiclass into a class that gives bonuses with energy weapons; having mutations might give you access to a Mutant PrC, etc.
As for racial classes: I'd suggest giving Mutant, Ghoul, etc. prestige classes so that if a player wants to rely on his race's innate abilities he can improve them. It would be the difference between a ghoul who trains to be a soldier and a ghoul who takes advantage of his radiation resistance and gets himself irradiated to become a walking blight. Or a Super Mutant who is a mechanic, vs. a Super Mutant who is even bigger and bulkier than a normal Super Mutant and uses dual miniguns.
Racial HD is, of course, different from these prestige classes. Ghouls, humans, and smaller mutants would have 1 racial HD and therefore take a class level. Super Mutants are probably 4 to 6 racial HD, deathclaws 3 to 8 depending on size. Their LA would depend on what abilities they were given - probably fairly low, as both are not particularly 'special' other than being big and strong - and after all of that, they could choose to take either a prestige class in their race or normal levels in other classes.
I personally prefer the Modern class system to the standard, and it seems MORE like Fallout than standard classes... And last I checked, a LOT of Fallout revolved around combat.
But anyways, I'm done with this convo, it's not going anywhere.
One thing I'd like to see is the chapters introduced by appropriate Pip Boys.
Tensen01 wrote:One thing I'd like to see is the chapters introduced by appropriate Pip Boys.
Actually, the blonde character in blue and yellow jumpsuit is Vaultboy/Falloutboy and is the mascot of Vault-Tec. PIPBoy was made by RobCo and the PIPBoy interface features a similar, but different character - he has red hair, pointy ears and red and yellow jumpsuit. They are often mixed up by people, including the Tactics developers.
And Toxic, once again, apply for the freaking job of Vaultboy artist .
. Drows are just an example of a widely played race that's not in the main book.
