This might sound odd, considering how much of a general d20 fanboy I am, but I'm not sure that d20 is the right system, all by itself, for swashbuckling play. I don't know enough about the Skull & Crossbones rules to know if they help encourage cool swashbuckleracity, but I tried to make a d20 Modern "Action Movie"-type adventure with a fun cinematic theme, and it wasn't wholly successful. It wasn't unsuccessful -- the people who were inclined to try cinematic stuff were able to try it -- but the folks who weren't flavor-wise into it, but who could have gotten into it from a minmax perspective, really didn't get much out of the game (which is a shame -- the cinematic-minded folks and I had a blast).
(For the record, I used no major rule changes except for saying, "If you describe something acrobatic, I'll let you roll a relevant skill check to get a bonus on the next attack or damage," so sliding across a table to kick a gun out of a bad guy's hand was a Balance check (for balancing as you slide), DC 15, and on a success, you got a +2 bonus on your disarm attempt and didn't provoke an Attack of Opportunity. Climb was used for swinging, Jump was used for leaping, and Balance was used for Sliding. Athletic was, needless to say, a popular and encouraged occupation.)
What ended up happening, though, was that the people who enjoyed that stuff got a kick out of it, but they were voluntarily making suboptimal choices in order to do so. The minmax folks were looking at the numbers -- and by the numbers, the basic d20 system doesn't support moving once you've engaged your opponent. You suffer an AoO when you do so, and you also lose out on iterative attacks. Standing there unimaginatively and using your full attack action is much more productive in almost all circumstances. As the GM, I could make it more flavorful and interesting, but it was a bit of a letdown -- I can make anything more flavorful and interesting.
I believe that both Spycraft and M&M get rid of iterative attacks (although I could be wrong about Spycraft), and I know that M&M gets rid of attacks of opportunity, so swinging around on the chandelier and whacking people as you go by is a perfectly valid tactical choice.
Actually, goofily, the idea of a M&M swashbuckling game could be fun. A hero with a whip gets the swinging power, the evil hypnotizing cardinal uses mind control, and so forth...
(For the record, I used no major rule changes except for saying, "If you describe something acrobatic, I'll let you roll a relevant skill check to get a bonus on the next attack or damage," so sliding across a table to kick a gun out of a bad guy's hand was a Balance check (for balancing as you slide), DC 15, and on a success, you got a +2 bonus on your disarm attempt and didn't provoke an Attack of Opportunity. Climb was used for swinging, Jump was used for leaping, and Balance was used for Sliding. Athletic was, needless to say, a popular and encouraged occupation.)
What ended up happening, though, was that the people who enjoyed that stuff got a kick out of it, but they were voluntarily making suboptimal choices in order to do so. The minmax folks were looking at the numbers -- and by the numbers, the basic d20 system doesn't support moving once you've engaged your opponent. You suffer an AoO when you do so, and you also lose out on iterative attacks. Standing there unimaginatively and using your full attack action is much more productive in almost all circumstances. As the GM, I could make it more flavorful and interesting, but it was a bit of a letdown -- I can make anything more flavorful and interesting.
I believe that both Spycraft and M&M get rid of iterative attacks (although I could be wrong about Spycraft), and I know that M&M gets rid of attacks of opportunity, so swinging around on the chandelier and whacking people as you go by is a perfectly valid tactical choice.
Actually, goofily, the idea of a M&M swashbuckling game could be fun. A hero with a whip gets the swinging power, the evil hypnotizing cardinal uses mind control, and so forth...
