d20 Modern and Spycraft

[Cergorach]

SpyCraft has one fatal flaw - it is not SRD, and there is no license for it. To me, this makes it no better than Gurps (worse even, since it doesn't have the long history of GURPS). I want a product that has at least the potential of long term support from many sources - SpyCraft by definition cannot have that. d20M already has some of it, and will likely have a lot more if sales are decent. To me, that means ultimately d20M will win out even in the espionage genre, eventually.

Don't you mean OGL?

Spycraft Core Rules, p. 3 :
Vitality points, wounds, Defense and other rules from the Star Wars Roleplaying game and items not covered by the Open Gaming Liscence used with permission of Wizards of the Coast.

With the opening of D20 Modern we have access to Defense. Only Vitality points and wounds are left as closed content. Most of the rest of the Spycraft rules are OGL (p. 286).

I'm already looking around for some rules to cover that hole that are OGL.

As for D20Modern vs. Spycraft, i prefer Spycraft, mostly because it gives a certain feel. It's not the Spy feel perse (i feel inspired to use the rules for a cyberpunk game), it's either how they are presented or how they feel. D20Modern is so sterile, maybe a bit to generic. When i talked about D20Modern to my regular D&D3e players one of them literaly said "Sounds like D&D with guns, sorry not interested.". These guys have played Vampire and Shadowrun as well so they do know that there's more to dice than D&D and frankly i share their opinion. D20Modern is usefull because it uses familiar rules for a different type of setting, but the rules are a bit to bland and really just gives the impression of D&D with guns. But as my players said, that's not what we are looking for...

 

[Mistwell]

Don't you mean OGL?



With the opening of D20 Modern we have access to Defense. Only Vitality points and wounds are left as closed content. Most of the rest of the Spycraft rules are OGL (p. 286).

I'm already looking around for some rules to cover that hole that are OGL.

As for D20Modern vs. Spycraft, i prefer Spycraft, mostly because it gives a certain feel. It's not the Spy feel perse (i feel inspired to use the rules for a cyberpunk game), it's either how they are presented or how they feel. D20Modern is so sterile, maybe a bit to generic. When i talked about D20Modern to my regular D&D3e players one of them literaly said "Sounds like D&D with guns, sorry not interested.". These guys have played Vampire and Shadowrun as well so they do know that there's more to dice than D&D and frankly i share their opinion. D20Modern is usefull because it uses familiar rules for a different type of setting, but the rules are a bit to bland and really just gives the impression of D&D with guns. But as my players said, that's not what we are looking for...

I think you are missing the point on OGL and SpyCraft. Sure, many rules are open. But the name is not. No third party can ever come out with a game that says "used with the SpyCraft rules" or anything similar. That dooms it. No third party gaming company is going to produce products for SpyCraft if they think they might run into legal trouble. Instead they will just make a product for d20M and hope people use it with both systems. Eventually, this will collapse the SpyCraft system, since sales for the SpyCraft core rules and products will not hold based on that small companies expansions for their own product. This is the same problem that countless non-gaming products have run into over the years, and Alderac is just going to have to learn the lesson the hard way it seems.

 

[Unseelie]

I think you are missing the point on OGL and SpyCraft. Sure, many rules are open. But the name is not. No third party can ever come out with a game that says "used with the SpyCraft rules" or anything similar.

Sure they can... all they need do is secure the permission of AEG. I don't see a problem with that.

 

[Davelozzi]

This is the same problem that countless non-gaming products have run into over the years, and Alderac is just going to have to learn the lesson the hard way it seems..

Sure they can... all they need do is secure the permission of AEG. I don't see a problem with that.

Right, which has already happened - Paradigm Press will be releasing some Spycraft adventures.

Plus, IMO, AEG is doing quite well supporting the system on their own. Already they have the Modern Arms Guide and Soldier/Wheelman Class Guide. Other class guides are in the works, not to mention the various Shadowforce Archer chamber & threat books. An season book (mega-adventure as I understand it) is due out this month.

I can't really see how anyone would be lacking for materials to use in their Spycraft campaign, even if they are unwilling to convert products designed for d20 Modern.

 

[Cergorach]

I think you are missing the point on OGL and SpyCraft. Sure, many rules are open. But the name is not. No third party can ever come out with a game that says "used with the SpyCraft rules" or anything similar. That dooms it. No third party gaming company is going to produce products for SpyCraft if they think they might run into legal trouble. Instead they will just make a product for d20M and hope people use it with both systems. Eventually, this will collapse the SpyCraft system, since sales for the SpyCraft core rules and products will not hold based on that small companies expansions for their own product. This is the same problem that countless non-gaming products have run into over the years, and Alderac is just going to have to learn the lesson the hard way it seems.

Erm... What are you talking about? I was talking about the rules being 'better' than SRD D20Modern. Not about the supposed validity of prolonged support, with which Alderac has a pretty good track record when you look at the RPG department. WotC on the other hand...

Because of the Defense system that is used in Spycraft, people who want to use that, already have to use the D20Modern SRD reference, from there it's a small step to a D20Modern product, just because the rules aren't 100% compatible doesn't mean you can't use the D20Modern name (you would be crazy not to use it).

I think that publishers will see that the D20Modern market is shared between the Spycraft rules system and the D20Modern SRD and will act accordingly. Thus making a product for one system, but have a table in the back for use with the other system. Green Ronin will do that with the Modern Firearm book, i suspect that many others will follow (can't have enough sales)...

 

[Ranger REG]

The d20 Modern book is very pretty, but I'm honestly a little confused by some of the design choices. If a gun is doing 2d6 or 2d8 damage (for example) and I have the burst fire feat, which adds another 2d6 or 2d8 to the damage inflicted, I'm guessing the massive damage save is going to be comming up an awful lot in combat...? Average damage from 4d6 (~14) is going to force most people to start checking for instant incapacitation (-1 hp), and 4d8 (~18) is going to put just about everyone at risk of keeling over on the first shot. That doesn't sound very practical to me for a setting like Agent's of Psi or some other setting in which a 10th level character has an expectation of being somewhat cinematic in scope.

Well, the same could be said of Traveller and its damage-health system.

While it is less grittier than Call of Cthulhu version, d20M makes it lethal when it comes to firearms. Would this makes it less cinematic? Guess not, but it would not hamper the game-play, IMHO. If the d20M GM wants a more cinematic style, he can always increase Massive Damage Threshold back to original d20/D&D value or somewhere in between.

I'm sure people who have both will find things about each that they want to combine for their home games. That's sort of the point with d20 systems .

Ditto! I will use the d20M grid-based vehicle combat rules for a static battlefield, but will fall back to the Spycraft chase rule for a fluid, abstract vehicle combat situation.

 

[Morgenstern]

Spycraft has one fatal flaw - it is not SRD, and there is no license for it.

Given the speed with which d20 Modern was gutted like a fish and put up for free distribution, I'm not surprised that AEG hasn't provided a complete electronic copy of Spycraft to the public. That doesn't change the fact that virtually all of its mechanical content is Open Content, nor has it prevented AEG from providing such files to folks interested in producing liscenced Spycraft products .

To me, this makes it no better than Gurps (worse even, since it doesn't have the long history of GURPS). I want a product that has at least the potential of long term support from many sources - Spycraft by definition cannot have that.

*chuckle* We're doing seven books a year in house for Spycraft, with more lines and supporting companies on the way. How many books is WotC developing in support of their product?

Near as I can tell, the only significant diference between the two games in terms of liscensing is that folks who want to do Spycraft products actually have to stop and talk to AEG about it, and meet a more uniform standard of quality in both design and presentation. This might discourage the complete novice to the industry, but plenty of dedicated new designers and established pros have expressed an interest .

Spycraft isn't going away .

 

[Unseelie]

I have to admit that I like some of what was done with Spycraft. It's sitting right next to d20M on my shelf. Mind you some of that is because one of my gaming companions wrote some of it, but even so, I like it.

You want to do Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D., this is the system for you.

I like the background, although I don't think I'd run it as is. Specifically, I'd probably start the chambers with the assumption that they were formed by Doc Savage's five companions (plus Pat perhaps) after something happened to him, post war.

And yes, Sunlight is still out there...

 

[Mistwell]

*chuckle* We're doing seven books a year in house for Spycraft, with more lines and supporting companies on the way. How many books is WotC developing in support of their product?

Yeah, see, that IS the point. It's AEG doing the products, with VERY few third party folks working on it (and little incentive for more to join in).

Within a year of d20M release you will have more products out supporting d20M than the 2 years SpyCraft will have had (or is it 3 years?). And that difference will likely grow exponentially.

WOTC has huge name recognition. That alone is sufficient to pursuade third party publishers to make products for that game. Why add in the extra challenge of having to go through the legal department of AEG to get your product approved? When you are a game author sitting down to decide what system you want to use to create your game, why would you want to do anything that might tip the balance towards your competitor? Particularly given the issues about shelf space in game stores, and the need to hit a critical mass of products to continue interest in game stores ordering you products, why would AEG not open the game up (and not the rules, I mean the words "Playable with the AEG SpyCraft Rules") to third parties without the burden of having to go through an approval process?

Yes, opening the game up will result in some shoddy products, just as it did for D&D. It will also result in great products, while the shoddy ones don't make it and go out of business. But the benefit from both will go to AEG, in name recognition and perceived longevity for their product line.

Really, your arguments sound just like Atari, Commodore, BetaMax, and the hundreds of other companies that didn't make it because they refused to allow for open distribution of their products, when facing competition from open systems.

 

[MinscFan]

I have managed to grab every SpyCraft product to hit shelves thus far -- but it took the release of d20 Modern for me to pick up the books and take a serious second look at SpyCraft.

They each have their advantages, and weaknesses.

D20 Modern is extremely flexible. You could consider it a "port" for the D&D 3E system to a modern setting -- like porting a software application from Windows to Linux. It is an easy jump from one to the other, particulary for those who never played 1st or 2nd edition D&D, and cut their teeth on d20 D&D. At first I thought it was a bit generic -- but then after going through the book I realized it was trying to be flexible at the core class level, allowing for specificity with advanced classes.

And technically, if you choose any of the "magic" settings, you have a wealth of existing d20 material to use in the D&D books -- spells, monsters, magic items, etc.

SpyCraft is also very flexible. I was a big fan of Top Secret, and to me SpyCraft has that flavor. But, with the release of the Shadowforce Archer setting, the Archer Foundation sourcebook and the recent Hand of Glory, they have incorporated some awesome depth into the game. They have also included a unique, flavorful "magic" system for those who want to use it. I love the idea of having to have people "bound" in order to have the power needed to use rites and rituals.

I'm glad to read that AEG has other companies producing materials under "supervision". That will help add variety and source material.

Without choosing sides I will say this: I plan to integrate the two systems freely in my games. Others have posted some of the things that seem to work better in each system -- I'll take advantage of that. Heck, that's what d20 is all about, isn't it?