[d20 Modern] Let the gnashing of teeth begin!

[Acmite]

a) I kinda like the class scheme. The idea in Spycraft of coming from a certain "department" seems ultimately less flexible.

Departments are essentially "Races". There are still classes like Faceman, Pointman, the poorly designed Fixer, Wheelman, etc.

 

[Desdichado]

Originally posted by Psion:
This is probably true. However, I consider that unfortunate given the nature of design decisions I have seen to date.

Further, just because lots of people are doing it is no reason to be a lemming. To me, the ultimate issue is what works best. And from what I have seen so far, that appears to be Spycraft.

Yeah, but as I said, you can fairly easily adopt WP/VP into d20 Modern. A lot of folks are [apparently] already doing so for the D&D games. The classes are generic enough. Anything done for Spycraft can be easily implemented into d20 Modern (while, in theory, the reverse is also probably true.)

I guess what's really unfortunate is that both of them were released at the same time. Spycraft may very well be the better game, but d20 Modern will almost certainly have the better user-base.

 

[johnnype]

Speaking for the minority (on this thread at least) I'd like to say that I will be supporting D20M and not Spycraft. To each their own I suppose.

As far as product support is concerned, although Spycraft might have 4 or 5 supplements out, at least two (The Archer Foundation & Shadowforce Archer)are of little use to those not interested in playing in a non-SFA game. That's not really support.

In addition, the GC screen/character sheets are grossly overpriced and of very poor quality. The Modern Arms Guide is only good for use with Spycraft rules because of of the whole WP/VP damage scheme (that problem rears it's ugly head where you least expect it).

D20M and Ultramodern Firearms (written by Charles Ryan no less) is perfect as far as I'm concerned.

Looking forward to D20 Future, if it ever comes out.

 

[Davelozzi]

Looking forward to D20 Future, if it ever comes out.

Me too. I wish they had done that before Modern, or even combined the two as they did with Alternity.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Looking forward to D20 Future, if it ever comes out.

Why would there be a D20 Future book?

All you would need is a book of high-technology and some other supplements for D20 modern. It is Gurps d20 after all. heh.

FD

 

[Desdichado]

Me too. I wish they had done that before Modern, or even combined the two as they did with Alternity.

What would be the point? You just take d20 Modern and add some new source material to it.

 

[Corinth]

No Spycraft for me; it's D20 Modern all the way.

 

[Davelozzi]

What would be the point? You just take d20 Modern and add some new source material to it.
[/color]

Right. Hence my comment about combining the two.

 

[johnnype]

What would be the point? You just take d20 Modern and add some new source material to it.

I don't think so at all. Not only do you have more powerful weapons but also more powerful tools like computers and vehicles. You have space combat, alien environments, cybernetics, genetic augmentation etc, etc.

I suppose it depends what kind of game you are trying to model but even Charles Ryan (one of the D20M developers) has admitted that D20M is not designed for futuristic campaigns.

Try to model Transhuman Space or Blue Planet with D20M and you will know what I mean.

Of course I'm not the type to write rules myself. I prefer to buy the end product and avoid the fuss. Others might like to create stuff themselves.

 

[Desdichado]

Right. Hence my comment about combining the two.

Right. Oh.

Well, I think a smaller setting book for futuristic d20 would work well on top of d20 Modern. Or in a pinch, I'll just steal from my Dragonstar book.