Why doesn't Spycraft use d20 Modern Rules

[Von Ether]

I wish I knew of a product timeline, because I thought that Spycraft came out a whole year before d20 Modern. Though to be fair, "Action Dice/Points" came out in d20 Deadlands as Fate Chips first (unless you count Force Dice in Star Wars.)

For me, I like the higher power level of Spycraft. AEG has also been more open about offering tips on how to tweak classes as well, so between SG-1 and SC, you have a very comprhensive Modern/SF game on the cinematic side.

YMMV, though, for me, I have already bought SC, so I am invested in that direction. And anyone who want to tease me about that motivation has to put away their Forgotten Realms stuff first. LOL!

 

[Cergorach]

D20 Modern is from October 2002, Spycraft is also from 2002, but before October (i thought the beginning of that year).

 

[The_Universe]

Spycraft was out no later than July of 2002--I bought it near the end of that month at a WotC in Washington, DC before they all started to suck.

 

[swrushing]

I think overall their d20 is cleaner.

the fluid init per se is not. It is much more complex, although in practice not all that hard.

You are correct some actions adjust your init, some weapons adjust your init, and some events like getting shot adjust your init. This is not cleaner but better in terms of detail. Getting hit will lower your init even if you only take hit points. That seems to work well.

of course, if it becomes cumbersome, say a game with frequent large firefights, you can just drop it in favor of d20's static init.

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?

 

[Davelozzi]

swrushing - thanks for the clarification.

As for when Spycraft came out, I'm pretty sure it was April 2002 for the core rulebook, followed by Shadowforce Archer in May.

 

[Psion]

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

Count me among this fanbase.

Not that I think that d20 modern is bad, but Spycraft has several unique innovations that may never had come about if it were following in d20 modern's footsteps.

 

[Ranger REG]

The way I see it, the market is big enough to have a lot of variant d20 rules engines. I play Spycraft (but I've yet to get into SG-1) and I play d20 Modern.

Personally, bashing one engine in favor of the others is uncool.

 

[Garmorn]

They cover to different modes of play. It is like having a low magic/nitty gritty rules set that is compatable along side of a more cinimatic/high power rules set. They both are great and can even cross over to the other but do their style better then the other one.

D20 Modern tries to be lower powered with a more real life feel, while Spycraft/SG-1 tries to bring you the feel of the James Bond, other larger then life type shows and movies with a larger then life feel.

 

[Henry]

Actually, I'd say d20 Modern is not "real life" feel either. The scale I'd use, using movies and Television as a reference point:

"Call of Cthulhu" Reality: This is pretty darned deadly. Characters aren't heroic - they're just heroes, or dead. Movies like Insomnia, Seven, or your modern psycho-killer movie are the kind of feel for this.

20 Modern" Reality: This would be more like TV Detective shows, where the hero can get beat up but rarely gets seriously hurt. Magnum P.I., Walker Texas Ranger, and JAG would be in this alley.

Spycraft: Full-on James Bond, or Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Outrageous heroes, outrageous actions, and the hero rarely gets killed outright, and usually, it's cinematically.

Of course, all three of these games have rules that can be used to alter the cinematic feel and setting (SHadow Chasers for Modern, for instance), but in general each one has a feel to it that makes it popular to its crowd.


Spycraft would not feel right strictly using d20 modern rules, because some of its rules, in particular chase rules, action dice, and the VP / WP system, are in some ways SUPERIOR to the Modern system (after using Spycraft Chase rules, I'll never use MOdern's vehicle rules ever again.)

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Honestly, the only thing you need from the PHB for Spycraft is the rules on how to advance to the next level, and the XP table. (And that's just because d20 products have to leave that out.)

Spycraft really does different things from D20Modern, and the classes work totally differently. A 1st level Spycraft character is assumed to be pretty good at their specialty, compared to your average joe, while a level 1 D20Modern character is only slightly superior to a level 1 Ordinary.