D20 Modern Vs. Spycraft

[Apok]

I can see why someone might think that. After all, if you take Con points of damage, in either system, you could be in dire straights: in d20 modern you are forced to make a fort save or start dying, while in Spycraft, if you have a threat triggered against you, you will have negative wounds and be dying as well.

But those two circumstances play out very differently. In the former case, triggering the massive damage roll is entirely random, and it doesn't much difference whether mook or megavillain is doing the damage. In the case of Spycraft, the GM has to specifically trigger the threat.

Yes, because the two systems have those support mechanisms that make them work in a similiar fashion. As you stated, Modern has their massive damage rule which could put you at -1 HP at any time. Spycraft's Vit/Wounds system is mitigated by the fact that you must spend an action die to activate a crit, so the choice ends up more in the hands of the DM. Both systems are, AFAIAC, equal on that level.

Of course, the person in question was making a blanket statement about the nature of HP and Vit/WP which is markedly untrue. The systems in question (Spycraft & d20 Modern) makes them essentialy the same with their respective mechanics.

To put it another way, if Modern didn't have it's Massive Damage rule and Spycraft didn't require you to spend an action die to activate a crit, the differences in the two damage-tracking systems (HP v. V/WP) would become much clearer.

As to which damage-tracking system (HP or V/WP) is better? Who cares. Use whichever one floats your boat. I just happen to prefer the V/WP system.

 

[Psion]

It's not anal at all, it's factual. They are separate products and IMO your wording was disingenuous.

Spycraft is a product line, of which SFA is a part. Had I meant the Spycraft book specifically, I would have said so specifically.

Am I correct in understanding that you think the similarity to D&D is an inherently bad thing?

Inherently bad? No. Some people appreciate that it dovetails with D&D and it does make things easier. OTOH, some folks (if you take a look at the d20 modern forum, many) explicitly did not want d20 Modern as being "D&D Modern", and not wanting slot-based magic is a lot more common sentiment among those seeking modern games than those playing D&D.

 

[Ranger REG]

It's ironic that you'd say this in the same post that you promote D20 Ultramodern Firearms -- which is itself a rehash of an old book for the Millenium's End RPG.

True, and there will be more rehashing in the near future, such as Gamma World, a revision of Darwin's World (it will be d20 Modern compatible, instead of being d20 compatible) but there are some originals like Digital Burn, Second World, Dark Inheritance, etc.

In any case, I think it's beyond dispute that Spycraft has been much better supported by AEG than has D20M by WotC and all the third-party publishers put together. Are you really suggesting that a couple of magazine articles and some free web supplements (and Rich Redman's cover and concealment article is just about as useful for Spycraft as it is for D20M) compare to the wealth of material both for the core Spycraft line and the Shadowforce Archer setting? D20M support might pick up in the next 3-6 months but right now it lags sadly behind.

Better late than never.

BTW, although it is not official but you can use Spyrcraft with d20 Modern. In a way, Spycraft requires the use of ANY Wizards' Core Rulebook, so in a way, it is a d20 Modern support.

And that's the beauty of d20 System. You cannot deny that, now can you?

 

[teitan]

I still hold that HP and WP amount to that same thing, just that WP gives the illusion that itis more realistic. Personally I do not struggle for realism, but for what makes a more intriguing story. I do enjoy the use of WP/VP in Star Wars and in Spycraft, but I sit in the same boat as Monte Cook, it amounts to the same thing. I actually think the damage system for MnM is the best anyway... =)

Jason

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I am not sure about this one, but wasn`t Spycraft a few months out before D20 Modern appeared?
So I wouldn`t wonder about having Spycraft more support - AEG had more time to create supplements, enhancements and so on.

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[Psion]

I still hold that HP and WP amount to that same thing, just that WP gives the illusion that itis more realistic. Personally I do not struggle for realism, but for what makes a more intriguing story. I do enjoy the use of WP/VP in Star Wars and in Spycraft, but I sit in the same boat as Monte Cook, it amounts to the same thing.

I don't really agree. I would agree that you do not always WANT to use VP/WP (indeed, for D&D, I am pretty happy to use HP with a few house rule tweaks. But I think they are different in a few important ways in the way that they actually play.

(Queue up my "4 things about VP/WP over HP).

1. Invincibility - The HP system as presented in D&D can create situations in which there is no real risk of fatality. This creates the unusual situation of character who do not flinch when held up by a crossbow, or voluntarily jump of a cliff to escape death. This is really the only unusual aspect of the HP system that the massive damage rule handles.
2. Wounded state - With the exception of the 0 hp state, the HP system has no state were the character is wounded but not unconscious. However, in the VP/WP system, if a character takes wound damage, they suffer penalties.
3. Implied heroism - HP are said not to be purely physical, but measure some type of script immunity or heroism on the character's part. In D&D (and in d20 modern), this extends to NPC experts, so a 10th level librarian gains HP as well. In the VP/WP system, you can skip giving NPC classes bonus VP.
4. Magic healing - Wounds are relative to the character, and normal healing reflects this by rating hp healing on a per-day scale. But magic healing is less effective relatively on higher level than low level character, which seems a bizarre incongruity. In the VP/WP system, wounds are wounds and are truly representative of damage. VP are a bit like HP, but heal so quick that they are hardly worth worrying about.
   [/list=1]
   
   Again, you may not want all these attributes for a given game you are running, but I think the (surprisingly large) segement of folks who profess that the additional tracking does not acheive anything are out to lunch.

 

[Apok]

I still hold that HP and WP amount to that same thing, just that WP gives the illusion that itis more realistic.

I don't think realism has anything to do with it, but I don't see why you consider the two the same.

Example:

Using the standard HP system...
A 10th level fighter swings his weapon and crits for around 50 points of damage against an opponent. Now, depending on how many HP's that opponent has, that 50 points of damage could be a near-fatal blow or nothing more than a scratch.

Using the V/WP system...
A 10th level fighter swings his weapon and crits for around 50 points of damage against an opponent. Since we are using V/WP, that damage goes directly to WP's (typically equal to your Con score). If the opponent isn't doesn't posses better than a 40 Con, he's dead. Toast. Joined the Choir Invisible. The spark of his life has been covered in shyte. You get the idea.

Since Wound Points don't scale the same way as HP does, it makes taking a critical hit that much more deadly. A creature with 300 hit points isn't going to worry about one crit. A creature with 25 Wound points, on the other hand...

Do you see where I'm going with this? They aren't the same. Switch your D&D game over to V/WP without making any other changes and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Criticals typically do the enemies more favor than the players - especially in this WP/VP System, where a critical will outright kill you in most circumstances. Not actually heroic.

If you consider the fast healing of vitality points an heroic trait, just rule that one day of rest heals all hitpoints you have...

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[Psion]

Criticals typically do the enemies more favor than the players - especially in this WP/VP System, where a critical will outright kill you in most circumstances.

No it won't. In VP/WP systems, criticals don't multiply damage, and you can survive negative WP just like you can survive negative HP.

Beyond that, it depends on what system you are talking about. Spycraft is less random, and lets you soak damage with action dice. SW REALLY needs to let you use force points in the same way.

 

[Morgenstern]

I would thnk HP vs. WP/VP would be one of the more minor differences between the systems. Armor as X% chance of complete miss vs. Damage Reduction seems every bit as significant. Or critical sucess and failure of skill checks vs. strictly pass/fail.

There is a lot more to base comparisons on .