Why doesn't Spycraft use d20 Modern Rules

[johnsemlak]

I don't know Spycraft, but it has seemd odd to me that this game says 'requires the D&D PHB' on it, when the d20 Modern game is also in the SRD and available for use as a core system. It seems to me that d20 Moderns would fit Spycraft much better.

I suppose and obvious answer is that Spycraft was released before d20 Modern. Has there ever been talk of an update for Spycraft to d20 Modern?

 

[Cergorach]

Probably because SpyCraft was released before D20 Modern was released...

 

[Davelozzi]

There's been talk of a Spycraft 2nd edition (although nothing coming too soon) but not of updating to d20 Modern. As Cergorach said, Spycraft came before Modern and does a lot of things very differently, and as several Spycraft fans would argue (myself included) better*. The classes are different, it uses VP/WP instead of HP, the psionics system (in Shadowforce Archer) is way different (skills n' feats based). It's really just a completely different animal.

The only reason that it requires the D&D PHB is because they can't give some of the character generation rules and still use the d20 logo. In my opinion, when they do release a 2nd edition, they'd be better off just going OGL so that they can include that stuff without it being an issue. At this point, I think the Spycraft brand is well established enough to stand on its own.

*At least for the spy genre. Arguments certainly can and have been made that it's better in general, but let's avoid that here or this thread will go down in flames, and I don't want to be the cause of that.

 

[DMauricio]

There's been talk of a Spycraft 2nd edition (although nothing coming too soon) but not of updating to d20 Modern. As Cergorach said, Spycraft came before Modern and does a lot of things very differently, and as several Spycraft fans would argue (myself included) better*. The classes are different, it uses VP/WP instead of HP, the psionics system (in Shadowforce Archer) is way different (skills n' feats based). It's really just a completely different animal.

I'd even put it down as Spycraft probably has more in common with Star Wars d20 (ruleswise) than d20 Modern.

With Psionic powers being more akin to Force powers than d20 modern psionics.



D.

 

[Ranger REG]

I don't know Spycraft, but it has seemd odd to me that this game says 'requires the D&D PHB' on it, when the d20 Modern game is also in the SRD and available for use as a core system. It seems to me that d20 Moderns would fit Spycraft much better.

Perhaps, but since Spycraft was in the market 6 months before the launch of d20 Modern, it has already developed a large fan following who like the game the way it is presented. No additonal attack due to BAB (so you can make up to two normal attacks, regardless of level), no AoO, no HP.

I suppose and obvious answer is that Spycraft was released before d20 Modern. Has there ever been talk of an update for Spycraft to d20 Modern?

If there is one, it would have been shot down by their fanbase who prefer the ruleset "as is."

 

[Gaius]

AEG just released the 1.5 Spycraft erratta, which I guess could constitue a "new version."

Gaius

 

[swrushing]

I am only a casual spycraft user, i use their engine in stargate.

i gotta say that their version of d20 is imo much cleaner than modern's. The more simple two half actions" without iterative attacks, the fluid init system and fairly comprehensive combat actions scheme appealed more to me than modern did, and i liked modern.

I am not that much of a fan of the wounds/vitality system and see it used rather inconsistently in spycraft, so if you took spycraft and added the d20 modern style massive damage you might end up with a better product imo.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Another thing is the classes. The core classes of Spycraft don't map all that well to the basic classes in d20M. Sure, you could just do the classes and still use the d20M rules, but I agree that the game as a whole is closer to D&D/SW than d20M.

Plus, I like the Action Dice better than d20M's Action Points. They encourage a little more of the over the top, crazy stuff you see in action movies. I think since they're a renewable resource, more than Action Points are, players are a little more free with them.

 

[Davelozzi]

Yeah, I like Action Dice better than Action Points too.

i gotta say that their version of d20 is imo much cleaner than modern's. The more simple two half actions" without iterative attacks, the fluid init system...

I agree about the half actions, but I like the VP/WP system for Spycraft. But about the fluid inititiative system, I've heard people say that it's cleaner before (or smoother, easier, whatever), but I don't get it. Now I haven't looked at it in a while, and I'm familiar with it from the Spycraft Modern Arms Guide, not from Stargate, but I seem to remember it being much more complex than the usual d20 method, in that different action types, or even weapons used, can make your position in the initiative order slide around. This seems a lot more complex to me -- more realistic possibly, but not cleaner. Am I missing something?

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

Truthfully there is VERY LITTLE you need the PHB for regarding Spycraft. My guess it is mostly there as a catchall.