Ravenloft Modern

Ryan Naylor · Post by **Ryan Naylor** » Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:36 pm

There seems to be a lot of opposition to the idea of converting RL to a d20 modern system. Why is that? Do some people like the idea of Masque modern but not RL modern? Any reasons? Thoughts? Bitter whining?

tec-goblin · Post by **tec-goblin** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:23 am

Well, as I've said in another thread, CL 1-6 domains are very difficult to be played in modern. Even Wizards with d20 Past considers anything before 1450 quite difficult to be handled by modern.
Personally, I like the free multiclassing, customized base classes and massive damage threshholds of modern. And I am looking forward of having d20 Past in my hands!
I also like the way Wizards handles modern: all rules, I mean ALL rules are in SRDs freely downloadable.

jamesravenwing · Post by **jamesravenwing** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:45 am

I would like to try Ravenloft in d20 Modern rules for one reason:

The class structure. In standard D&D a class suggests a life. For instance: A ranger is a outdoorsy type who hates a specific type of creature. To make him anything else takes vast amounts of effort and feels artificial anyway. this holds true for any class you can find.

In Modern however, classes provide you with a wide range of abilities and flavours, essentially allowing you to make any character you want, without having to resort to a prestige class.

So if you want a ranger type you take a little fast, a little dedicated, pick the rights feats and voila! a ranger type. By the same token, you can create a cleric type with dedicated and fast.

This results in a lot more roleplayig flexibility.

PS: If this makes no sense please forgive. All-nighter essay writing sucks!

Coan · Post by **Coan** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:59 am

To me modern (and masque to this extent) represents the allowance for a subtle intrigue campaign with conspiracy, darkness and secrets. It reminds us of today's world with a darker hue. But though Ravenloft is more subtle than most other worlds it still has a lot of vampires, ghouls and other assorted monsters running around. This isn't gothic to a modern tale.

Plus magic and its corruption takes a solid stand in Masque and to a lesser extent Ravenloft. Modern classes that allow magic and psionics require you be quite a few levels so it just seems that magic would go right over the head of most players. 'What? His passion for magic and his dead love has created a fire elemental? Bah lets just shoot it, it doesn't mean much to us.' i.e. magic and the corruption of the world in such a way does not strick the right 'reality cord'.

With Ravenloft and in some parts Masque you can have your fantasy and suspended disbelief. Modern, to me, calls for more 'realism' in the problems one faces. Thus I don't think Ravenloft and Modern works. Sure a darker world of corruption could work with Modern but not with the idiosyncricies I associate with Ravenloft.

Drinnik Shoehorn · Post by **Drinnik Shoehorn** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 12:29 pm

I have an idea forming for a D20 Modern Masque campaign, but Modern rules for Core Ravenloft I don't think would work. In fact I think the only other rules system that would work for Ravenloft is the Call of Cthulhu (Chaosium) system.

Gonzoron of the FoS · Post by **Gonzoron of the FoS** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:17 pm

I stick with D&D because it's what I know, it's what my players know and I see no reason to change. I haven't really studied modern, but I don't really like the idea of throwing out the flavorful classes. I know instantly what a Ranger is. It gives me a basis to build a character. It's a shortcut in a sense. I don't instantly know what a "Fast" hero is other than that he's fast. I understand that it gives more flexibility, but I think 3.x is flexible enough to handle most things, and when there's a character that doesn't fit any molds, we house rule something that fits, using the base classes as guidelines.

I'm not opposed to anyone who wants to switch to modern or CoC or Gurps. But I grew up with D&D, I like D&D, For the most part, I like 3.x edition, and I have no driving reason to change further.

Joël of the FoS · Post by **Joël of the FoS** » Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:23 pm

gonzoron wrote:I stick with D&D because it's what I know, it's what my players know and I see no reason to change. I haven't really studied modern, but I don't really like the idea of throwing out the flavorful classes. I know instantly what a Ranger is. It gives me a basis to build a character. It's a shortcut in a sense. I don't instantly know what a "Fast" hero is other than that he's fast. I understand that it gives more flexibility, but I think 3.x is flexible enough to handle most things, and when there's a character that doesn't fit any molds, we house rule something that fits, using the base classes as guidelines.

I'm not opposed to anyone who wants to switching to modern or CoC or Gurps. But I grew up with D&D, I like D&D, For the most part, I like 3.x edition, and I have no driving reason to change further.

That sums what I think on the matter: don't fix it if it's not broken

I also think the system is very flexible so it's easy to make any falvor change to it.

That said, I do not play MotRD, so my views are from a RL player, not a MotRD player.

Why the question ?

Joël

Ryan Naylor · Post by **Ryan Naylor** » Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:13 pm

Idle curiosity really. You don't have to worry about suddenly learning a new system so far as I know.

Rucht Lilavivat · Post by **Rucht Lilavivat** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:04 am

Personally, I like the d20 Modern system alot. I currently run a campaign using that system and it's turned out pretty well.

I do know that many people do not like it because it's essentially the D&D system watered-down. Why play with only a poor substitution, in their minds, when you can play with the real thing?

In my opinion, however, the d20 Modern system would work poorly for Ravenloft. What would Strahd be? A Dedicated 3 / Charismatic 4 / Arcane Mage 10?

Nah. It just doesn't feel right. It's far better for Strahd to be a straight up Necromancer with just a few levels of fighter. It's more appropriate that charging with a lance is does double damage. It better that the characters are somewhat heroic in scope with incredible abilities against incredible odds.

However, I think that d20 Modern with a d20 Past refit would be great for Masque of the Red Death. Heroes in MotRD are much more mundane and less heroic in scope.

Cole Deschain · Post by **Cole Deschain** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:21 am

Ye Bittre 2E Holdeoute Speaketh-

It seems to me that mixing the two has some potential...a bit of work, sure, but some possibilites exist there...

The Arcanist · Post by **The Arcanist** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:34 am

Im actually going to start a new campaign that you could say would be RL Modern.

d20 Modern rules for characters, fear/horror/madness, powers checks, etc...

Its going to be based on Silent Hill so i thought that would be the perfect combination, low to no magic from characters or their enviroment, most of the supernatural would come from the monsters themselves. No characters wielding flaming vorpal swords, throwing lightning at their enemies and what not...

Reginald de Curry · Post by **Reginald de Curry** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:13 pm

The Arcanist wrote:Im actually going to start a new campaign that you could say would be RL Modern.

d20 Modern rules for characters, fear/horror/madness, powers checks, etc...

Its going to be based on Silent Hill so i thought that would be the perfect combination, low to no magic from characters or their enviroment, most of the supernatural would come from the monsters themselves. No characters wielding flaming vorpal swords, throwing lightning at their enemies and what not...

Based on Silent Hill? Even I'm not that crazy.

The Arcanist · Post by **The Arcanist** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:20 pm

what could be so bad about Silent Hill?

The mists? the snow? the lake? the lovely nurses? the humanoid aberrations that look like someone burned them inside a straightjacket?

lol!

Reginald de Curry · Post by **Reginald de Curry** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:23 pm

What's so bad about it? Are you kidding? I'm afraid to play that game alone in bright daylight!

Though I'll admit SH2's plotline did give me a lot of ideas for a potential domain.

tec-goblin · Post by **tec-goblin** » Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:16 pm

The Arcanist wrote:Im actually going to start a new campaign that you could say would be RL Modern.

d20 Modern rules for characters, fear/horror/madness, powers checks, etc...

Its going to be based on Silent Hill so i thought that would be the perfect combination, low to no magic from characters or their enviroment, most of the supernatural would come from the monsters themselves. No characters wielding flaming vorpal swords, throwing lightning at their enemies and what not...

I am currently playing such a campaign. Well, it's not based on Silent Hill, but the characters are at level 13 and they have about 1 magic item each. The supernatural comes from strange cultures they meet(Hazlan), the fey and the syrneth (outsiders who gave sorcery to humanity). Almost anything supernatural can be traced back to these sources. Actually, PCs think almost all monsters are fey (actually, even fey and centaurs in my campaign are fey) or syrneth (and they have met only two syrneth in their lives). Rumours of angels, demons and deities exist, but evidences are almost contradicting.

Café de Nuit

Welcome, friends, to our establishment.

Ravenloft Modern

Ravenloft Modern