Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 01, 2014, 07:35:16 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Welcome to the Crafty Games Forums!

Note to New Members: To combat spam, we have instituted new rules: you must post 5 replies to existing threads before you can create new threads.

+  Crafty Games Forum
|-+  Products
| |-+  Spycraft Third Edition
| | |-+  I sit on the lighter end of rules spectrum , will 3.0 be for me?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: I sit on the lighter end of rules spectrum , will 3.0 be for me?  (Read 3729 times)
TheTSKoala
Control
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2012, 04:44:46 PM »

Got it!  Okay cool.  And.. okay.. let me rephrase that as the damn die is also the name of a system mechanic.  Does SC3 roll D20s as the main die?  Smiley  

Yes, Spycraft Third still involves rolling a d20 with higher values being better. That much (and some more) is absolutely set and completely unchanged.

Excellent!  The Koalan Inquisition is done with its 2,000,001 random questions.  Thanks Craftys!
Logged
Gundark
Recruit
*
Posts: 40




View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2012, 09:46:10 PM »

Though.. if the Crafty are feeling generous.. ..did the dramatic conflicts survive to SC3 alpha?    Lips Sealed

Alpha (the most very core mechanics) is not beta (draft of final game) so the answer is not yet Smiley

Also worth repeating, as we've said this for a long while too: Dramatic Conflicts will return.

Their form and function remains in flux, however.

Chases are some of my most fondest memories from Spycraft. Glad to hear they are coming back.
Logged
Aldus Vertten
Handler
*****
Posts: 690


Los Otros Planes


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 14, 2012, 08:40:59 AM »

I've enjoyed SC Classic, SGSG1, SC2 and FC greatly so I'm sure i will enjoy SC3 as well.

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?
Logged

"No queda sino batirnos"
-------------
-El Capitan Alatriste
Fastidious Monk
Recruit
*
Posts: 31


There's always a 4.5% margin of error; + or -


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: November 14, 2012, 07:09:53 PM »


"Compatible" is the term we use to mean "little to no effort to use books together."

"Portable" is the term we use to mean "these books are not intended to work together but you can hack them together with some effort ...
(Bold mine)

Well, that just killed my excitement.

I was looking forward to using Spellbound with SC3 & 10K Bullets, but it seems that ain't gonna happen.
Logged

TheTSKoala
Control
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 14, 2012, 07:55:31 PM »


"Compatible" is the term we use to mean "little to no effort to use books together."

"Portable" is the term we use to mean "these books are not intended to work together but you can hack them together with some effort ...
(Bold mine)

Well, that just killed my excitement.

I was looking forward to using Spellbound with SC3 & 10K Bullets, but it seems that ain't gonna happen.

That could be what Vow of Silence is for, assuming its on the dev board still.  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. 
Logged
Number Three
Handler
*****
Posts: 796


I have become Deathbus, destoyer of threads.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2012, 11:19:54 PM »

As to d20, well, Fantasy Craft isn't d20 - it's OGL. Spycraft Third is... something else.

I find this line intriguing.  Does this mean that you feel SP3 is so far removed from baseline D&D3.x that you no longer consider it related, or will Crafty be eschewing the Open Game License entirely?
Logged

ludomastro
Control
******
Posts: 1655



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2012, 03:15:09 AM »

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.


* Yes, I'm well aware I'm not Crafty.
Logged

Coyote0273
Operative
****
Posts: 465



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2012, 01:54:52 PM »

As to d20, well, Fantasy Craft isn't d20 - it's OGL. Spycraft Third is... something else.

I find this line intriguing.  Does this mean that you feel SP3 is so far removed from baseline D&D3.x that you no longer consider it related, or will Crafty be eschewing the Open Game License entirely?

I honestly don't think Fantasy Craft is OGL either. The only stuff taken specifically from Wizards is the Vitality/Wound rules from Star Wars. Which isn't OGL either. I could be wrong, on that though.

Edit: Whoops, didn't notice the original was from Pat.. and I'd assume he'd know the legalities. *blushes*
Logged
Number Three
Handler
*****
Posts: 796


I have become Deathbus, destoyer of threads.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2012, 09:38:52 PM »

As to d20, well, Fantasy Craft isn't d20 - it's OGL. Spycraft Third is... something else.

I find this line intriguing.  Does this mean that you feel SP3 is so far removed from baseline D&D3.x that you no longer consider it related, or will Crafty be eschewing the Open Game License entirely?

I honestly don't think Fantasy Craft is OGL either. The only stuff taken specifically from Wizards is the Vitality/Wound rules from Star Wars. Which isn't OGL either. I could be wrong, on that though.

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?
Caveat 1: I am not a lawyer.
Caveat 2: This is all baseless speculation on my part.
Logged

Morgenstern
Control
******
Posts: 5206



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: November 15, 2012, 09:45:42 PM »

I honestly don't think Fantasy Craft is OGL either. The only stuff taken specifically from Wizards is the Vitality/Wound rules from Star Wars. Which isn't OGL either.

20 levels, the big 6 attributes, the three saves, the Level + 3 skill cap, class skills, 0-9th level spells, feats, multiclassing...

I'd have to throw out and start over on a lot of fronts to feel like I didn't need to ackowlege the shoulders of the giants I had stood on.
Logged

At your own pace: Do. It. Now.
How about some pie? - Heroes of the Expanse
Crafty_Pat
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 9443


End of the World? Donít believe the hype.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 20, 2012, 12:21:09 AM »

Chases are some of my most fondest memories from Spycraft.

That's great to hear. Smiley

Quote
Glad to hear they are coming back.

So... What do you love about them so much, and how do you think they could improve?

Please be as specific as possible.
Logged

Patrick Kapera
Crafty Games
www.crafty-games.com

UPDATES/PRESS INFO
Mailing List: http://bit.ly/14FJIw7
RSS: www.crafty-games.com/needtoknow
Facebook: www.facebook.com/craftygames
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Crafty_Games
YouTube: www.youtube.com/craftyhomeoffice

In game terms, reality is b
Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 20, 2012, 01:39:00 AM »

So... What do you love about them so much, and how do you think they could improve?

Please be as specific as possible.

I'm not Gundark (obviously), but my group also got behind Chases in a big way.  Mostly because they were Chases.  At that point (and possibly still) no other game had a good mechanic for chases, and they are something that's so prevalent in the sort of source material we use that having a system for them was just fantastic.  Well run, they were fun and evocative sequences, and the rules had enough depth to cover a whole heap of situations, while not being so dense that they were painful to use.

In terms of improvement, there is two big ones that come to my mind:
Remove Strategy Penalties.  My group decided very early on that a handful of Strategies (Redline and Outfox in particular) where "the Strategy", depending on if you were Predator or Prey.  Having a +2 bonus when I was suffering between a -4 and -8 meant that they'd frequently get another advantage (or use the net benefit to practically guarantee winning).  It meant that the "Chase" bit became less exciting (and more predictable), and the stuff going on around it had to be ramped out to keep the scene exciting (opponents suppressing their driver, attacks against tyres, etc).

Improve Chase Specialists.  Chase feats were cool, but often you didn't need them to win (high drive + custom ride + vehicle familiarity left you in really good stead, often able to dominate).  Since that was all they did, many players I came across preferred to have generally useful feats, instead of specifically useful feats.  I think the entire Chase tree would have been far more popular if they had a general, "always on" benefit and a chase trick (or even a strategy specific trick).  Most of the feats have gone this way between SC2.0 and FC, but I feel it's worth mentioning, since I just never saw Chase feats get the same love as the others.

Additionally, I'd consider changing it so the strategy is simply the advantage desired - so the player just chooses Impact and rolls their opposed check.  At that point it's obvious they're ramming the enemy vehicle, so you don't really need to choose Ram (and you can make lead requirements based on the advantage itself - which will probably make them more logical).  The player can describe how they achieve their desired advantage, and the GM can give them a circumstance bonus / penalty based on their description.

Finally, I think it'd be great if there were some Chase (and other Dramatic Conflict) specific Narrative Control options / examples.  If only to give players something to think about for their dice (and keep the focus on Narrative Control - something I consider to be a big standard of your system, and one of the coolest uses of Action Dice).


EDIT:
Also in the "we liked" column is the Vehicle statlines - my group has a bunch of gear heads who liked having varied Acceleration and Turning, and having it have an impact on chasing someone (that it's harder to catch a motorcycle in a van then it is on another motorcycle was something that we all liked).  Same with upgrades - being able to performance tune a vehicle is a cool use of Wheelman gear.  Though I'd limit it more (say X upgrades per vehicle - make people really think "Do I want handling or power?").
« Last Edit: November 20, 2012, 01:41:27 AM by Sletchman » Logged
Crafty_Pat
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 9443


End of the World? Donít believe the hype.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: November 20, 2012, 01:44:18 AM »

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! Smiley

Quote
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).

Quote
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.
Logged

Patrick Kapera
Crafty Games
www.crafty-games.com

UPDATES/PRESS INFO
Mailing List: http://bit.ly/14FJIw7
RSS: www.crafty-games.com/needtoknow
Facebook: www.facebook.com/craftygames
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Crafty_Games
YouTube: www.youtube.com/craftyhomeoffice

In game terms, reality is b
Crafty_Pat
Crafty Staff
Control
*****
Posts: 9443


End of the World? Donít believe the hype.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: November 20, 2012, 01:58:45 AM »

I'm not Gundark (obviously), but my group also got behind Chases in a big way.  Mostly because they were Chases.  At that point (and possibly still) no other game had a good mechanic for chases, and they are something that's so prevalent in the sort of source material we use that having a system for them was just fantastic.  Well run, they were fun and evocative sequences, and the rules had enough depth to cover a whole heap of situations, while not being so dense that they were painful to use.

First, thanks much for the feedback. As it happens, DramCons are one of the last, if not the last, major component Alex and I have yet to settle on. We have strong thoughts about how it should work, but those ideas have yet to coalesce on paper.

Quote
Remove Strategy Penalties.  My group decided very early on that a handful of Strategies (Redline and Outfox in particular) where "the Strategy", depending on if you were Predator or Prey.  Having a +2 bonus when I was suffering between a -4 and -8 meant that they'd frequently get another advantage (or use the net benefit to practically guarantee winning).  It meant that the "Chase" bit became less exciting (and more predictable), and the stuff going on around it had to be ramped out to keep the scene exciting (opponents suppressing their driver, attacks against tyres, etc).

This is actually one of my biggest personal issues with the 2.0 system, so consider that point well represented at the design table. Smiley

(Thanks for the assist BTW. As a designer it's very nice to see other folks validating your ideas. It helps you suss out when you're not crazy - which, let's admit it, is often a dicey diagnosis.)

Quote
Improve Chase Specialists.  Chase feats were cool, but often you didn't need them to win (high drive + custom ride + vehicle familiarity left you in really good stead, often able to dominate).  Since that was all they did, many players I came across preferred to have generally useful feats, instead of specifically useful feats.  I think the entire Chase tree would have been far more popular if they had a general, "always on" benefit and a chase trick (or even a strategy specific trick).  Most of the feats have gone this way between SC2.0 and FC, but I feel it's worth mentioning, since I just never saw Chase feats get the same love as the others.

Yeah, see, it's posts like this that tell me you folks will love Spycraft Third. It's different, but when we did something right in the past... It's still there, pressed, polished, and ready for duty.

Quote
Additionally, I'd consider changing it so the strategy is simply the advantage desired - so the player just chooses Impact and rolls their opposed check.  At that point it's obvious they're ramming the enemy vehicle, so you don't really need to choose Ram (and you can make lead requirements based on the advantage itself - which will probably make them more logical).  The player can describe how they achieve their desired advantage, and the GM can give them a circumstance bonus / penalty based on their description.

Great suggestion. Noted.

Quote
Finally, I think it'd be great if there were some Chase (and other Dramatic Conflict) specific Narrative Control options / examples.  If only to give players something to think about for their dice (and keep the focus on Narrative Control - something I consider to be a big standard of your system, and one of the coolest uses of Action Dice).

See my response to your specialist suggestion, above. Phrase that a little more emphatically and drop ti in here.

Quote
EDIT:
Also in the "we liked" column is the Vehicle statlines - my group has a bunch of gear heads who liked having varied Acceleration and Turning, and having it have an impact on chasing someone (that it's harder to catch a motorcycle in a van then it is on another motorcycle was something that we all liked).  Same with upgrades - being able to performance tune a vehicle is a cool use of Wheelman gear.  Though I'd limit it more (say X upgrades per vehicle - make people really think "Do I want handling or power?").

The "A/T" lines have been a point of much discussion lately. Not sure where we'll land on that but don't fret - vehicles will have their own flavors and work into whatever we land on for DramCons in different ways. It's a given.
Logged

Patrick Kapera
Crafty Games
www.crafty-games.com

UPDATES/PRESS INFO
Mailing List: http://bit.ly/14FJIw7
RSS: www.crafty-games.com/needtoknow
Facebook: www.facebook.com/craftygames
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Crafty_Games
YouTube: www.youtube.com/craftyhomeoffice

In game terms, reality is b
Sletchman
Control
******
Posts: 4108


Gentleman Scholar.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: November 20, 2012, 03:09:34 AM »

Sounds good.  I don't mind if the A/T rules go by themselves, the big thing we liked was that a bike was different from a van which was in turn different from a pimped out sedan.  The "feel" was what we liked (more then the specific rule itself), and from other aspects of your games (knives vs axe vs club, for example) I have no doubt that'll continue.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!