SPYCRAFT: The greatest RPG ever made! The best d20 game ever!

[Jester_OC]

Yeah the chase rules have some problems. Like how they assume that it is always safer if you jump out of a car. If that was true car manufactureers should have made seats that dump you onto the road instead of seatbelts.

But nothing that a a good GM (sorry GC, or what ever they call a DM) can't fix.

 

[hong]

And more importantly, we'd all be playing the one true RPG.

Perhaps we could even ask to be recognized as a major religion.

If it means we get tax deductions for RPG materials, I'm all for it.

 

[Horacio]

Tax reductiions for RPGs? Goood idea!
Let's create rpgism, a new religion!

I want to be a rpgism priest!

 

[drnuncheon]

Yeah the chase rules have some problems. Like how they assume that it is always safer if you jump out of a car. If that was true car manufactureers should have made seats that dump you onto the road instead of seatbelts.

When was the last time you saw an action hero stay inside the car as it wrecked?

I don't think Spycraft is supposed to be "true to life" any more than D&D is - it's supposed to be "true to James Bond/Mission Impossible/Die Hard/whatever".

J

 

[Jester_OC]

Last time I remember the heroes staying in a wrecked car was in Demolition Man.

When was the last time you saw an action hero jump out of a car at 120mph and it didn't make cringe at how dumb it looked? Don't even mention face off because that movie blew(IMHO)!

In most action movies, the hero stays in the car when it crashes, they just are not hurt, and continue the chase on foot, or pick another car. Not realistic, but not stupid either.

Most action movies that have heroes jumping out of cars it is usually because it is about to fly off a cliff, or into a trash compactor. The car is usually going at about 20-30 mph and it looks OK.

Don't take my comments to seriously, I just remarked that it seems silly that the hero's best way to reduce damage in a car crash is to ALWAYS jump out of it. To me that is silly. I'd rather add gadgets like ejection seats or 5 point seat belts, or even change the save to a fortitude check instead.

Jester_OC

 

[Sigmund]

Tax reductiions for RPGs? Goood idea!
Let's create rpgism, a new religion!

I want to be a rpgism priest!

Col_Pladoh can be our prophet

 

[Geoff Watson]

What's keeping them from retrying until they get a 20 is that they are just as likely to roll a 1 thus allowing the GC to activate a critical error and unleash trouble on them.
Does the GMC have unlimited action dice?

I.E.

A snoop is trying to enhance photographs taken from a digital camera on his computer. Instead of taking his time, he tries to be a showoff and starts rolling dice. On his third attempt he gets a 1, the GC activate the error by spending two action dice and as a result the agent, through bad luck and stupid mistakes, lose/corrupt all the data. The GC laughs while the agent's team mates are left to wonder how a supposed specialist in surveilance could bungle things so badly.

If you have plenty of time and face no danger, you just take a 20 and if you have any degree of competence in the skill you should succeed. There is no need to tempt the devil on a routine check, eh? Sure, you forfeit possible critical success, but so what? Reliability is a virtue.

The photo expert shoud Take 20. He could also make several copies of the data, and give them to his unskilled friends to play with. Half of them will get perfect results, possibly in less time than it takes him; and the other half will stuff up, if the GC has action dice to spare and chooses a critical failure that destroys the data.

The 'Auto-Success on 20' rule is a big mistake for skills, as it essentially changes any DC (with retries allowed) to no worse than a 50/50 chance.

Geoff.

 

[Jester_OC]

I think the auto success rule works great for a super spy game. If you are into a more realistic game, then not using it would probably make the game more fun for you.

I think that it introduces a lot of fun into the game. I creates an atmosphere where ANYTHING is possible. If my players would start meta gaming and start acting like you explained in your example, then I would be disapointed that they where trying to bend the spirit of the game.

In the end any rule set exists to simulate the 'reality' of the game world they wish to create. IMHO the auto success rule is only a mistake if it spoils the game's flavor and fun factor. I have only played one game session, and so far it has not. I think that it will fail if my players start acting like meta gaming munchkins instead of stylish superspies who know that anything is possible.

Jester_OC

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

The photo expert shoud Take 20. He could also make several copies of the data, and give them to his unskilled friends to play with. Half of them will get perfect results, possibly in less time than it takes him; and the other half will stuff up, if the GC has action dice to spare and chooses a critical failure that destroys the data.

Yeah right. No team will have enough surveilance gear and computers to pull this off. Not to mention that it is a trained only skill. In my game, only the snoop has the combination of gear and training required to enhance photographs.

Your objections are pure theory and simply don't happen in practice.

NB: Making several copies of the data isn't going to save players from costly critical failure. Nothing can protect them. There is no single error that the GC has to apply everytime. If I decide to activate a threat, I make certain that it will be a setback for the PCs. As long as I'm willing to pay a fair amount of action dice, anything goes.

 

[hong]

Yeah right. No team will have enough surveilance gear and computers to pull this off.

Um... Q? (No, not the poncy godling from TNG)

FBI forensics lab? CIA? NSA?