D20 Modern or Spycraft II?

[RangerWickett]

Oh, I want to clear up that I think WP/VP should work differently from how it does in Spycraft and Star Wars.

In my system, you have an HP buffer, and WP as your actual body. You never take WP damage unless you're helpless or you're out of HP. If three guys hold your hand down and a Yakuza member chops it off, you'd take WP damage, but crits would just deal extra damage, not bypass your HP.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Oh, I want to clear up that I think WP/VP should work differently from how it does in Spycraft and Star Wars.

In my system, you have an HP buffer, and WP as your actual body. You never take WP damage unless you're helpless or you're out of HP. If three guys hold your hand down and a Yakuza member chops it off, you'd take WP damage, but crits would just deal extra damage, not bypass your HP.

I like this better than either d20 Modern or Spycraft's damage system.

 

[Morgenstern]

I think Spycraft is a bit deadlier when it comes to crits, but it also usually gives you more wp.

I should point out crits in Spycraft aren't purely random. Rolling a threat creates an opportunity for a crit. But instead fo it being a second roll to determine if one happens, you spend an action die to confirm the crit. This reduces the "wasting" of great rolls on shlubs, and puts the control in the player or gamemaster's hands on "is this the attack that really counts?" From the gamemaster's perspective, the fight is as deadly as you want to make it . Some later feats and class abilities let you crit with the weapons you are good with without spending an action die.

Armor in Spycraft often gives DR.

Because you wear a bullet proof vests to get hurt less, not to not be hit at all .

Modern PCs are less likely to actually take damage (higher Defense).

I'm not sure Modern characters have higher defense, but maybe.

Because the damage values for Spycraft weapons (at least in 1.0) don't really make sense, it's nearly impossible to do a "damage per round" or "time to death" calculation comparison.

Huh? As the weapon's real world muzzle energy goes up, it gets a damage roll with a higher average. I'm always much more puzzled by lumping every firearm in the universe into 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, 2d10, or 2d12 for damage. The Modern designers' stated position that damage is THE primary determinant of a firearm's value always struck me as a little simplistic. In the real world we see lower damage weapons remain highly popular, often because they are easier to handle. Further, most times range increments come up, Spycraft's are considered to map to real world experience much better. Oh yeah, and first level spycraft characters choose which weapon proficiencies they have, so you won't be using up feats just to know how to point and shoot. And you don't need feats to even try to burst or auto-fire with a weapon that has selectors for that right there on the side .

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Huh? As the weapon's real world muzzle energy goes up, it gets a damage roll with a higher average. I'm always much more puzzled by lumping every firearm in the universe into 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, 2d10, or 2d12 for damage. The Modern designers' stated position that damage is THE primary determinant of a firearm's value always struck me as a little simplistic. In the real world we see lower damage weapons remain highly popular, often because they are easier to handle. Further, most times range increments come up, Spycraft's are considered to map to real world experience much better. Oh yeah, and first level spycraft characters choose which weapon proficiencies they have, so you won't be using up feats just to know how to point and shoot. And you don't need feats to even try to burst or auto-fire with a weapon that has selectors for that right there on the side .

There are lots of threads on the Modern boards about how realistic guns should be (based on muzzle energy, etc), and they usually turn into flame-fests. I'll choose game balance and/or simplicity over realism anyday. I just don't see why guns need more complicated rules than Martial Weapon Proficiency in DnD. (It's pretty easy to tell if a DnD or Modern weapon is balanced or unbalanced. Even if Weapon Locker puts out some unbalanced weapon like the Five-Seven, it's pretty easy to discuss exactly why you think it's unbalanced, rather than a vague "it's too much damage!")

(I'd like to point out that Spycraft I insulated itself to some degree from this problem by grouping weapons into broad categories. All assault rifles had the same stats, for instance, in the core rules, so people weren't choosing the M16 over (say) the AK47 just because of stats. My issue concerns the wide gulfs between things like SMGs vs pistols. I don't know why the SMG does 4d4 or 5d4 damage and the pistol does 1d10 damage.)

What do you mean by "choose proficiencies"? I only have SC 1 so far. Do you choose proficiencies in SC II, or are they given to you as part of the class package?

 

[trancejeremy]

Weapons in Spycraft do roughly the same amount of damage as a similar weapon in d20 Modern, but it's more granular. For instance, in d20 Modern, pretty much every pistol does 2d6 damage, except the .44 Magnum and the.50 Desert Eagle, which do 2d8. In SC, a 9mm does 1d10+1, a 10mm does 2d6, a .357 does 3d4+1, etc. (in both games, SMGs do the same as their same caliber pistol counterparts).

Similarly, in d20 Modern an M16 does 2d6, an AKM does 2d8, and a G3 does 2d10. While in SC they do 4d4, 3d6, and 4d4+2.

I don't think either way is objectively better. It's certainly easier in d20 Modern, but you lose a lot of detail. But pretty much the same (and you can drop the Spycraft weapon system into d20 Modern very easily, just by buying the gun book for the original game)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Spycraft 2.0 is the better game. It's got some really innovate (for d20, and occasionally for RPGs in general) concepts and once you get used to the MASSIVE FREAKIN BOOK FULL O STUFF (not quite HERO 5r, but unless you're looking at ballistic armor, what is ), it plays well, too.

d20 Modern is easier, faster until you're fully used to both systems, steps outside the archtype box, and is much, much more flexible. Also, the small arms/melee rules are closer to both action movies and reality: Guns are easier to use and have range. Melee weapons require more skill (read, feats) to use well and do more damage.

Spycraft
+ Excellent use of the d20 rules
+ Models the major non-SF spy/action genres
+ Action dice are better than action points
+ Many innovative and useful subsystems
+ NPC generator
+ Expanded skills
- Harder to learn
- Slower until fully mastered, and maybe even then
- WP/VP
- Pointlessly complex initiative system
- Almost no 3rd party support
- About as compatible with other d20 as True20, maybe less

d20 Modern
+ Flexible base classes
+ Compatible with almost every d20 book you ever bought
+ By far the best 3rd party support around
+ Melee/small arms models most movies and real life better
+ Keeps 3.0 cover rules
+ Easy to learn
- Lacks innovative and useful subsystems
- 1st-party support tends to be magic-oriented
- Vehicles and heavy weapons are poorly handled

I disagree with a few (not all) of your points, in particular :

+ Melee/small arms models most movies and real life better - I would say that in this regard they are about equal, just very different, in neither is the gun as dangerous against PCs as it is against people in real life. I prefer the way they are handled in SC, while admitting that SC is no more realistic. Against mooks (Standard NPCs in SC) Spycraft has the edge in realism/movie realism. So no + or - for ether one really.

- Almost no 3rd party support - In theory, once Spycraft finishes making its move to Crafty Games, there will be third party support. But for now that is true.

- Slower until fully mastered, and maybe even then - Mostly true, though combats seem to fly by in my games (taking longer, but with the players only looking at the clock after it is done and going 'how did it get that late?').

And one point that I forgot to mention previously, while learning to play Spycraft may be more challenging than learning to play D20 Modern (as I said, I don't disagree with all your points) it is a heck of a lot faster and easier to stat up NPCs and organizations for Spycraft. An adventure that took a couple of days to stat up for OGL Steampunk takes a few hours (if that) for Spycraft. It is bloody easy to run games for.

- Pointlessly complex initiative system - The initiative system in Spycraft is one of those things (like the Gear system) that seems very complicated for a while, then something goes *click!* and you don't know why you had a problem with it in the first place. It is just very fluid, with some actions changing the initiative order. I have been working on initiative cards for my SP/SC game, since moving a card up or down in a deck of cards seems to make things easier. So I wouldn't say 'pointlessly complex', though I would say 'complex' - it does have a point, if not a need... I would still give it a minus, but just not use the word 'pointlessly'.

- WP/VP - I happen to like VP/WP, they are much better than HP for my purposes. This is pretty much a matter of taste, some people like hit dice and others prefer VP/WP. So I would not call it either a plus or a minus for either system.

- About as compatible with other d20 as True20, maybe less - For compatability with standard D20 you are completely correct - D20 Modern is much easier to use with D&D material.

The Auld Grump, who admits that some of this is nitpicking...

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Weapons in Spycraft do roughly the same amount of damage as a similar weapon in d20 Modern, but it's more granular. For instance, in d20 Modern, pretty much every pistol does 2d6 damage, except the .44 Magnum and the.50 Desert Eagle, which do 2d8. In SC, a 9mm does 1d10+1, a 10mm does 2d6, a .357 does 3d4+1, etc. (in both games, SMGs do the same as their same caliber pistol counterparts).

Similarly, in d20 Modern an M16 does 2d6, an AKM does 2d8, and a G3 does 2d10. While in SC they do 4d4, 3d6, and 4d4+2.

Well actually it's 2d8, 2d8 and 2d10 for Modern (and the latter has 2/3rds the ammo capacity and uses up 5 bullets during Burst Fire). I don't know if that's enough to balance the G3, but at least I can discuss it without just saying "I feel it's too powerful".

As for pistols, both the .44 Magnum and Desert Eagle are not good choices for dual-wielding. (You can wield one with a smaller pistol, but wielding two gives bigger penalties.) Again, at least an attempt at balancing it, and the reasons behind it make sense.

As for the Spycraft pistols, I don't see why I wouldn't use a .357. There's .357 pistols with decent ammo capacity.

It's easier to memorize the Modern values, too. I guess I like the coarseness of the Modern damage system, and don't want the real-life detail. I don't think (as an example) that the longsword doing 1d8/19-20 and the short sword doing 1d6/19-20 are based on real-life measurements, but are instaed based on the general rules for martial weapons. It's pretty easy to see that the rapier is an outlier in the rules, too.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

+ Melee/small arms models most movies and real life better - I would say that in this regard they are about equal, just very different, in neither is the gun as dangerous against PCs as it is against people in real life. I prefer the way they are handled in SC, while admitting that SC is no more realistic. Against mooks (Standard NPCs in SC) Spycraft has the edge in realism/movie realism. So no + or - for ether one really.

I'm mostly talking about relative to melee weapons. SC, if memory serves, falls into the 'guns displaced melee weapons so the must be more damaging' trap. d20 Modern's weapons are more in the melee=damage, gun=range school.

- Almost no 3rd party support - In theory, once Spycraft finishes making its move to Crafty Games, there will be third party support. But for now that is true.

3rd Party Support is one thing. D&D has tons of 3rd Party Support. d20 Modern has, IMO, the best 3rd Party Support in the industry. This will be tough to compete with, but I'm looking forward to what Crafty Games can put together.

- Slower until fully mastered, and maybe even then - Mostly true, though combats seem to fly by in my games (taking longer, but with the players only looking at the clock after it is done and going 'how did it get that late?').

I can definitely see this. Spycraft 2.0 FEELS much faster than it is.

And one point that I forgot to mention previously, while learning to play Spycraft may be more challenging than learning to play D20 Modern (as I said, I don't disagree with all your points) it is a heck of a lot faster and easier to stat up NPCs and organizations for Spycraft. An adventure that took a couple of days to stat up for OGL Steampunk takes a few hours (if that) for Spycraft. It is bloody easy to run games for.

Agreed.

- Pointlessly complex initiative system - The initiative system in Spycraft is one of those things (like the Gear system) that seems very complicated for a while, then something goes *click!* and you don't know why you had a problem with it in the first place. It is just very fluid, with some actions changing the initiative order. I have been working on initiative cards for my SP/SC game, since moving a card up or down in a deck of cards seems to make things easier. So I wouldn't say 'pointlessly complex', though I would say 'complex' - it does have a point, if not a need... I would still give it a minus, but just not use the word 'pointlessly'.

It's not ATB. Initiative is close to pointless after the first round. I'd run it the same as I run D&D, d20 Modern, SilCore, and most any other non-HERO tabletop RPG: initiative order is determined by where you're sitting.

- WP/VP - I happen to like VP/WP, they are much better than HP for my purposes. This is pretty much a matter of taste, some people like hit dice and others prefer VP/WP. So I would not call it either a plus or a minus for either system.

Fair enough.

- About as compatible with other d20 as True20, maybe less - For compatability with standard D20 you are completely correct - D20 Modern is much easier to use with D&D material.

What is Spycraft compatible with, other than Spycraft? I like HERO and SilCore, but that doesn't make HERO compatible with SilCore. I like Spycraft and d20 Modern, but they aren't really compatible. d20 Modern is compatible with itself, all its supplements, D&D, Arcana Evolved, the Mongoose OGL games based on d20 Modern, Grim Tales... the list just goes on and on.

Mind you, I still like Spycraft a LOT and have mined it for idea on many occasions even when playing barely compatible games.

 

[Henry]

Has anyone read the "Rogue Warrior" book series by Richard Marcinko? I would like to be able to emulate those sorts of stories, if that helps give an idea about what I'm looking to achieve.

Great, pick a series I HAVEN'T read, why dont'cha?!?!

If it's in the same grain I'm thinking it is, sounds a little more gritty in feel, but still mixed with a bit of heroics. Is that a good descriptor? Where death is a strong possiblity, but there's lots of heroism too?

If that's accurate, two things suggest themselves:

1) Grim Tales is to me a better alternative than Modern, but it's close enough to where any Modern sources you want to use would be a cinch to slip in. Bad side of things: The players need to have a clear idea of their character concept, or they may get lost in the strong/fast/smart/dedicated/etc. business.

2) Spycraft would still work, and in some ways ( the "spec ops" classes I mentioned, plus the deluge of mercenary-style gear) be the BETTER choice. One thing not mentioned strongly (I think one person above did): Spycraft 2.0 had "Campaign Qualities" that allow you to dial the feel from gritty to wahoo in many different ways. That may be the thing you're looking for.

 

[scourger]

Pardon the stray shot, but if you're looking for a new system, then check out the free Test Drive 4.0 rules for Savage Worlds:

http://www.peginc.com/Games/Savage Worlds/Savage Worlds.htm#Savage Worlds Downloads

I'm almost sorry that Savage Worlds has nearly ruined me from d20 gaming. I never really "got" d20 Modern, even after I read most of it. I ran the first Spycraft lite version but never really got into it either. I think Savage Worlds would be great for the kind of "modern pulp" game you seek. I've had a blast with Tour of Darkness, their Viet Nam setting, introducing supernatural elements slowly over the past several months of weekly gaming. I think the revised core rule book could do just about any type game--easy for the GM but still engaging for the players.