My apologies for not getting back to the boards sooner. My previous posts were made from Alex's house up in Portland and since mid-last week I've been traveling home, recovering from what turned out to be five weeks on the road out of the last seven (not a typo), waging the ongoing war with my inbox, and spinning back up, slowly but surely, with the creative end of my docket. (For those keeping track, yes, that's Spellbound - about which I'll post something in a bit, over in the Spellbound threat. It'll be brief, so don't expect some earth-shattering revelation or anything.)
Back to the business at hand. I'll try to answer everyone's questions as succinctly and squarely as I can. There's an important caveat here: while we want
to get the word out with regard to where we are with the project and what to expect, a lot is still up in the air and there's much we simply cannot say yet. We can't comment on specific rules, for example, as we're still very early in playtesting and too much could change.
With that in mind...
I've enjoyed SC Classic, SGSG1, SC2 and FC greatly so I'm sure i will enjoy SC3 as well.
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
But what means all this changes to the Mastercraft concept? From the beggining I understood that MC was a core system that would be adapted to the genre of the setting, with all the required changes and making them "portable". But what are you hinting about here sounds more and more like a new system and a different "philosophy" about the concepts and how the engine works... So whats the point of Mastercraft? And I'm wondering...did the development of Mistborn influence on how you look at the system now?
It's been a long five years or so since we started development on Fantasy Craft. In that time the market has changed dramatically
, and just as importantly Alex and I have gathered a not-insubstantial amount of direct data about how the game is perceived, what folks want out of it, what they feel it does well, and how they feel it fails. We've learned even more about ourselves as designers: what we're capable of, what we're not, what we're good at, and how to capitalize on it.
As we got started on Spycraft Third the intent was to build a Mastercraft game. That was our starting point, but things change, and more than any previous design this has illuminated where Crafty Games needs to go and how it needs to operate. What we found in the course of a full year of design and literally weeks of deep conversation about our games, and games in general, is that they work best when they're designed for a purpose, and in this case - in our case - that purpose is serving the genre. Singular.
Forcing one system to meet the needs of every genre just shattered in too many ways, and what was coming out of that discussion for modern was nothing we wanted to make, or anything we think you would have enjoyed.
So we took a chance and looked at what would happen if we used Fantasy Craft as a launchpad rather than a destination, and the process took off in fantastic new ways. The game is everything we wanted it to be: faster, simpler, easier to learn and teach, and yet still robust enough to proudly call a Crafty game. It's adaptable for any modern genre with enough room for expansion into sub-genres and even bringing some radical ideas into the mix (for more on that, see below). It is not
, however, the same game as Fantasy Craft, and that means that in all likelihood it won't be a Mastercraft game either. It would simply be disingenuous to make that claim.
I was looking forward to using Spellbound with SC3 & 10K Bullets, but it seems that ain't gonna happen.
Hold that thought. You might not be able to use Spellbound directly with Spycraft Third - at least, not unless you want to tinker a bit to port over the core of those spellcasting rules - but...
That could be what Vow of Silence is for, assuming its on the dev board still.
It is, and Vow will be a Spycraft Third product line. It'll be of the 'closed' variety, which is to say that it will have a beginning, middle, and end, with only a set number of products planned as one complete thought. That line will
necessarily contain magic and that system will
be fully compatible with Spycraft Third Edition (and by extension, Ten Thousand Bullets).
I dunno. I think if they're focusing on plug'n'play and espionage, and leave magic for something else to plug in, we may be far better served.
This is another one of those things we had to learn the hard way. Even modern sub-genres like, say, military, counter-terror, and blockbuster action simply drown out the espionage when they all try to live under the same roof. So we're moving them all into their own condos and doing them up right on their own *. You'll be able to tour any of their lovely homes on their own, and even drag one or more of them over to the others' houses with zero effort, but trying to get them all to live together is simply a recipe for disaster (or a bad sit-com - you pick).
* Everyone gets that I'm just talking about these game types being split off into their own books, not into separate lines, right? Yeah? Good. Let's move on...
My interpretation* has been that SC3 won't be interchangeable with FC; however, you can use them together with a little work. Same can be said for SC2 and FC. I can't drop the Mage into SC2 wholesale but it wouldn't take much. Going the other way, I can't drop the Channeler into FC without a little work. Doesn't mean I can't use them, just means that I may have to do some thinking up front.
This is close to true. Close.
I would say the difference between Fantasy Craft and Spycraft Third Edition - in terms of magnitude
of change, not tone, complexity, or really anything else - is closer to the difference between Classic Spycraft and Spycraft 2.0. It's a pretty big leap, but you can still see the strands of DNA deep in the muscle. It's deep
, but's it's there.
What I am referring to is the magic page of legalize called the Open Gaming License in the back of the book. Correct me if I'm wrong, you could certainly create a book with the OGL and exempt your own new mechanics from it, but when you own the original text (in this case, Fastasycraft), do you have to bother with the OGL at all?
Allow me to be very specific here, to hopefully avoid any confusion...Spycraft Third Edition is not an OGL game. It will not include, nor does it need to include, the Open Game License contract language.
Once you see the game, you'll understand. It's similar in some ways, but also very
different - different enough that there's really no basis for the OGL anymore.