Does /tg/ like Savage Worlds?
It's okay for convention games or one shots. Can't imagine someone using it for long campaigns.
>>94589666Never played, but Savage Worlds for Pathfinder looks really fucking cool.
>>94589666I don't. Skill growth is too big and it tries to spin too many conventions that don't need spinning, just for the sake of doing it. It feels... reactionary. Like instead of saying "we've got a great idea for a game," it's "we're going to make a game because we want something different from that other one." It's just the vibe I get from it, but I've only read it and said "no thanks," so maybe it plays out differently.
>>94589666I personally love it.I mainly use it for short campaigns (especially wacky ones that need a lot of improv) and solo sessions.Highly recommended for both newbies and experts.
>>94589666I like it, although i didn't have yet managed to run a game in it. It's not even my ideal pick to go (i'm a gurpsfaggot) but i think it will fly greatly for an indiana jones / mummy pulp game.
>>94589666In a sense. I bought the pocket edition because I liked the idea of getting a full multi-genre system for $9.99. I've never ran it, never even read it really, I just like the idea of it.
>>94589666Alright generic system for running pulp games. Pretty swingy. Better for short games.
>>94589765As someone who did play in a long campaign, its shit. It could be up to our DM, who is just kinda bad and shitty stoner dude. The combat sucks dick, the stats = dice is the best thing about it.
>>94593461wut? I am totally on the oposite track, I like the tactical combat but hate the stupid dice chain thing.
>>94589666It never took off here because one extremely obsessive autist with a grudge against it aggressively derailed every single thread into screaming shitflinging for a stretch of like ten years. Like, every single thread, it's like he would check /tg/ several times a day just to flame people for playing Savage Worlds. I hope he's dead.
>>94589666We dont talk about games here. Only the same old "can (monster) be friends?", pointless elf threads, and some illiterate teen who just watched a lotr video on youtube making /lit/ threads about it.
>>94593613Thats fine? We just like it for different reasons. I find the combat too focused on move and crunchy but not in right places, its either swingy or very uneventful in my personal experience.
>>94589666I'm a pretty big fan of it honestly. I've played through a friends full campaign in it and then also now in his deadlands campaign. Overall I like the edges/hinderances as a mechanic because it mixes your rp with solid in game rules. Like others have said its pretty swingy sometimes but that does keep things exciting. My biggest complaint is for some reason once you get past the d8 upgrades it honestly doesn't feel like you are rolling much better. It could just be bad rng but I would like to see the stats on the growth of rolls with each dice upgrade.
>>94589765>>94593461I use it for almost all of my long campaigns. I'm sorry you have a bad GM, anon.
I liked reading the book but have never once had a group make it to session 1.
>>94589666Half-decent pulp system with close to zero functional character progression. It was originally made for one shots and it shows. Still, if you are running very short games or actual one-shots, works like a charm.>>94593625Anon, SW is one of the most successfu TTRPGs of the mid-00s till early 10s, the fuck you are huffing? /tg/ wasn't even a thing when this game was already big.
I still remember that one anon who promised he’d finish his Splatoon homebrew for this.
>>94596133>Anon, SW is one of the most successfu TTRPGs of the mid-00s till early 10s, the fuck you are huffing? /tg/ wasn't even a thing when this game was already big.I'm huffing the experience of regularly trying to discuss Savage Worlds on this board from about 2011 onwards.Where were you?
>>94589666Let me tell you something - Hellfrost. I fucking love Hellfrost.For the relatively miniscule amount of people who actually played it, Hellfrost is an excruciatingly detailed bit of fantasy worldbuilding. The gazzetteers and Atlas showing every last adventure location, dungeon, etc. with plot hooks included on a complete world map of Rassilon, the way all of the big questions of the setting (Where are the gods of the Sun and Fire, etc.) are left open for each GM to get creative with. The way it isn't just a kitchen sink - it's got real identity, it has a theme, it has these stories to tell and a way for its narrative to come to a close.So many supplements adding so much depth. It's fantastic.Slipstream was also tremendously slept on and very fun.
>>94589666What IS a savage worlds?
>>946007114
>>94589765lol your gm sucks dude. For long games advancements should be slow and come at appropriate story points not 1 a session
What are the best supplements for this?What settings have you used?I'm thinking of getting it for solo tinkering and for one shots/short campaigns with groups.Looking at the pdf it seems better than other choices I was considering (Barbarians of Lemuria/EveryWhen, Worlds without Number, Forbidden Lands), particularly because I want something flexible enough (ie where mechanics are not too married to flavor) but that still provides tools without being too crunchy.Plus I like classless and I like ability scores that aren't the shitty d&d sacred cow ones.
>>94604660The Superpowers Companion is a given even if you just want to make up NPCs with supernatural abilities that aren't covered in the existing list; our group has been doing SW campaigns/one shots for four years and I don't think we've done one where it wasn't at least used in partBeyond that, I've had some mixed success; usually there's some individual rule or equipment or something that's useful but not the entire book. My genuine advice is to pirate ones you think might be fitting for your concept and then buy them if they seem to work out fine.
>>94604692huh I think I'll keep that Powers chapter alone and dismiss the rest (as I don't really care about comic book stuff).Thanks.
>>94604692The Super Powers Companion is a must pirate for the expanded strength and speed tables alone
>>94589666It's a good game, though the Shaken mechanic filters some groups because they didn't put points in Spirit and their GM doesn't give out enough Bennies.
>>94594165On a d6, you have a 3/6 chance to roll 4 and above (50%)On a d8 you have a 5/8 chance, 62.5%On a d10 you have a 7/10 chance, 70%On a d12 it's 9/12, 75%Not only does the step become smaller, going from 12.5 to 7.5 to 5 percent, the impact also becomes smaller proportionally. Going from 50% to 62.5 has a much bigger impact proportionally than going from 62.5 to 75.This doesn't figure in that your skill only matters in 3/4 cases in the first place. So yes, higher skill levels are a lot less worth it, which is by design.
And what's a cool setting for it?
>>94606552Another anon already mentioned Hellfrost, wich is my personal favourite, Deadlands is a close second (fucking release Dark Ages already) but I'm not familiar with the others.The great thing about SW is that it's really easy to adapt to any universe you like, even those you homebrewed yourself for other systems.Personally I like playing in the Warcraft setting.
It's a system that's bad at being generic but actually good at letting you steal stuff for your chosen setting book from other setting books.Also everyone should actually play a midpoint between SWADE and the previous edition which currently exists as part of my very long houserule doc.Also the vehicle rules are like, half finished and I've yet to see a proper expansion of them. (no vehicle called shots for example)
>>94608023post the doc you COWARD
As someone with no experience with any version of the system: is the latest version good? If so, can material from older versions be used in the new version without too much struggle?
>>94608023>actually good at letting you steal stuff for your chosen setting book from other setting booksthat sounds like it being good at being genericI played FATE core with a cool GM some months ago who used the silliest settings, so the idea of a setting agnostic system seems super appealing. FATE was way too narrative, Savage Worlds seems a bit more game-like.
One of my favorite systems, I've used their superpowers book to run stuff like Megaman, Dredd, mahou shojo and Star Wars. The ruleset is the perfect balance between giving players and GM's a lot of toys to flesh out their characters (the hindrance system is excellent) but without encouraging excel sheet minmaxing. I like the wound system with mounting wounds stacking penalties to everything so players won't even want to take one and play smarter. I'm not sure about stagger only because I've seen players get stunlocked by ass luck and get killed really quickly. I guess the grittiness goes both ways. I think for homebrewing it's a really good system and I've never had any trouble keeping churning out content for longer campaigns when players liked something. In that case I'd just pause the players at one of the power levels (like veteran) and they'd still earn exp but they wouldn't be able to move on to the next level (like heroic or legendary) until the story got there. >>94606552I haven't run any canon settings but Rippers, Necropolis, Wonderland and Serpentfall were all fun to read and had some cool ideas.
>>94608510Basically, it's an issue of the "generic" stuff like core or Fantasy/Scifi it's bad because you have to do a lot more than pick and choose the bits you want to make things work, necessitating the use of a setting book.>>94608414Well I can't refusehttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1mMTl3G9CL9RFjgAofaoOYfijaXiI73Cl/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116951131215389667080&rtpof=true&sd=true>>94608420The main mechanics are largely unchanged, the big difference in SWADE is removing the cap on attacks and changing how some actions work.
>>94589666From what I gather, it's a love-it or hate-it system.It really needs the right setting/campaign/GMing style to shine. You need to be in for dumb fun for it to work well.Personally I love it. It works with my approach both as a player and a GM perfectly.
>>94600711A fast-pace action-adventure RPG that focuses on "pulpy" settings. They also have a bunch of high-profile licensed settings like Flash Gordon, Solomon Kane, Pathfinder/Golarion, and Rifts.
>>94606728>fucking release Dark Ages alreadyComing 2025, anon.
Opinions are so divided it's making me nervous about my fallout game using SWADE(also there's no place to ask questions about this system)
>>94589765this.>>94594867>>94604029how do you adress super tough things that you cant really do chip damage too due to the stager-defeat system?Thats something I remeber being a problem when I tried it a few years back.
Anyone tried this?
>>94610792>how do you adress super tough things that you cant really do chip damage too due to the stager-defeat system?In order of preference:- Ganging Up- Support- Test- Called Shots- Wild Attacks- Push
>>94610770Like everything else there's a discord and a reddit.And me
>>94610922>discord and a reddit
>>94610770Out of the Fallout ttrpgs I've read I'd probably still pick Savage Worlds over any of them. The problem is that all the Savage Fallout stuff is out of date and there are like 3 different versions made by different people. I'd recommend picking through those for what you do and don't like and using that. Or just running the game with just the core book and the sci-fi companion.Man I really wish Chris Avellone would dig out what him and the other Fallout 2 devs played when they were writing Van Buren and leak it and the game notes to us. Its probably better than anything else Fallout put out lately.
>>94589666>most of the edges are trash >ironically not enough edges, very little in the way of ranged specialization >roleplay only hindrances give the GM a bunch of homework to enforce possibly 2 or 3 hindrances per character in a roleplay context>typical "bribing players to actually roleplay in the game they chose to play in their own free time" baby-tier bull shit >skills are ridiculously narrow or broad, Swimming costs the same as Fighting, so no one ever takes swimming>new version cluster fucks inelegant rules even more by starting you with a d4 in skills that should have been stats, to avoid the untrained penalty on notice and stealth for example>said list is entirely arbitrary >bennies shit up the game and their usage depends entirely on session length >you're supposed to give even more throughout the session, partially solving the session length issue but also making it so you barely ever fail a roll>exploding dice are retarded, once you're past age 25 you grow out of wanting that>have fun dealing 12 damage to a monster and doing absolutely nothing, then your buddy does 13 damage and stunlocks it. >furry freakshit races in the core rulebook>character creation is presented out of order when you should be picking your hindrances first, because if you use those points to change your attributes then it changes everything else. I've run almost 200 sessions of Savage Worlds, no joke. My group insisted on playing it for a long time. I unironically think DnD 4e is better, that's how fucking awful of a rules system savage worlds is .
>>94589666I played a 50 Fathoms campaign and ran and played some one-shot Deadlands games, and it's okay. As a generic system goes it lacks the granular detail of GURPS/HERO/M&M types of games, and it's more "classical TTRPG" than light games like PbtA crap or Fate. But it also lacks the mechanical depth -and- breadth of GURPS/HERMO/M&M while feeling more mechanically constrained than Fate.I think it really hits a sweet spot for someone who wants a generic system, that's light, but also captures the experience of rolling different types of dice and supports "minis and maps" style tactical combat as well as "theater of the mind" fights (mostly). It's the kind of game you could use to introduce new/young players to TTRPGs, while being -just- robust enough to appeal to more experienced gamers.Personally, I'd look into SWADE and the Companion books, then maybe pick a setting that interests you if you don't have one in mind already.
>>94612475>it lacks the granular detail of GURPS/HERO/M&M types of games, and it's more "classical TTRPG" than light games like PbtA crap or FateThat sounds good>But it also lacks the mechanical depth -and- breadth of GURPS/HERMO/M&MMechanical depth and breadth is generally boring since it leads to autistic optimisation shit.>while feeling more mechanically constrained than Fate.Isn't that also good? I mean literally just writing a story in a black sheet of paper = zero constraints. Constraints make games actually playable and faster.
>>94610867>Guys, check out the cover art!Anon, it's 1750+274. If at this point you are judging objects by their wrapping and/or cover, you might have room temperature IQ>b-but I as...It's shite, you dumb faggot.
>>94608420It's decent and yes, it is almost completely interchangeable right off the box (and fully interchangeable with the minimal sliver of tinkering)
>>94615462Nta, but ask me how I know you never/barely played any games ever. And I don't mean it even as an insult, but general observation.The issue with this game is that there is no middle ground: you either suck at something, or always succeed in it. Which is like a cornerstone of the tail end of the 90s and early 00s, aka time when SW was designed. When you are making a generic system, your utmost goal is to have design that allows to have other options than "is incompetent" and "is world-expert".Otherwise, you end up with a system that very quickly runs of two important things: challenges that can be thrown at characters and options for said characters to develop. In this case, this is further compounded by being technically (but not really) a pulp system. The end result is a very boring game loop: either you just can't do something, or you blow through it without any resistance whatsoever. And not just in combat, but in all possible interactions with the world. You also can't,- by design - have a situation where your character is learning something and thus is semi-competent. Nope, you go from clueless to world-expert, no middle ground.Which is all responsible for SW's reputation as a game for short campaigns and one-shots. You have no development options, you have a party that's gonna just push forward and it very quickly gets stale on both sides of the table.Said all that, I agree with the original anon: it's one of the best introductionary systems, something you set up when having a new table of complete greenhorns and then collect their feedback to get some better suited game for them. It works in what it does, and while it has issues with long-time play, it is still a good game all by itself and within its niche
>>94615462> Isn't that also good? I mean literally just writing a story in a black sheet of paper = zero constraints. Constraints make games actually playable and faster.It's not good if you actually want a storygame.Savage Worlds is in that middle spot: too crunchy for a light game, too light for a crunchy game.
>>94594867You know what, you aren't even wrong. The DM was ass. But compared to all the other games he runs (that I mostly play out of pity and 'how is he to improve if he doesn't practice') it was one of the best. Tho probably just because what my character did and a bit because of the setting.
>>94611460> >roleplay only hindrances give the GM a bunch of homework to enforce possibly 2 or 3 hindrances per character in a roleplay context100% agree. People talk about how this is late 90's/early 00's design, but this part right here goes back to early 90's White Wolf stuff.What Savage Worlds needed to do was gut their Bennie economy and Edges/Hindrances and replace them with a straight up Aspect-like system and economy from Fate (with concessions for Arcane Backgrounds and powers/power points or something). It'd encourage player creativity and input, and actually give players motivation to make their hindrances actually hinder them.>skills are ridiculously narrow or broad, Swimming costs the same as Fighting, so no one ever takes swimming95% agree, since who the hell ever wastes build points on Swimming anyway? The only time you'd do it is when it'll be a highly used Skill (e.g. an underwater campaign) and at that point having it be its own Skill makes some sense. I'll add on to complaints with SW though that Skill advancement is tied to Attribute advancement: raise a Skill before you raise the Attribute, and you lose the advancement, which means players are locked into a step-step where they raise an Attribute, then raise the Skill, then raise the Attribute, ad nauseum. The option to advance a Skill first is punished, making it a system trap of a choice.
>>94589934Honestly I prefer gurps for that stuff, the combat is too slow in SW
>>94615466>>Guys, check out the cover art!Wut?It exists as a book in physical format and pdf, obviously someone who had tried it would have used it in either format. I did pirate it before asking, but obviously seeing the pdf is not the same as using it in games.You're utterly retarded.
>>94615494>Nta, but ask me how I know you never/barely played any games ever. And I don't mean it even as an insult, but general observation.Wrong.I did play a lot of FATE games because a friend always GMd it with weird settings, and while it was fun, it always felt way too much like just storytelling, with the fun aspects being unrelated to the system itself.>The issue with this game is that there is no middle ground: you either suck at something, or always succeed in it. Which is like a cornerstone of the tail end of the 90s and early 00s, aka time when SW was designed. When you are making a generic system, your utmost goal is to have design that allows to have other options than "is incompetent" and "is world-expert".That does sound like a legit problem indeed, but after playing swingy games where the squishy nerd can overpower the huge orc due to lucky rolls, this expert/incompetent binary seems a tad more acceptable.Plus idk why the normal assumption seems to be "every game must be a long campaign", the problems you mentioned seem like they wouldn't matter much if someone just wants the system for short/one shot games.
>>94611443>Or just running the game with just the core book and the sci-fi companionthat's what i intend on doingMost of the fallout stuff i've seen tends to make the "late game" stuff like power armor and energy weapons more of a side grade than the op super weapons they are supposed to be both in lore and in the classics. I'm trying to get this more "realistic" feel
>>94611460>starting you with a d4 in skills that should have been statswith that in mind. Can you get away with turning a skill into a stat (while adjusting the points for character creation of course)?
>>94593625The Savage Sperg is back>>94611460>claims to have read the "new" (2018) edition but still referencing old rules that have since been changed (fighting costs the same as swimming)>played it for multiple years/hundreds of sessions despite hating itYep, it's him
>>94618486I almost wonder if its the same retard who comes screaming about how bad 4e is like it raped his mother in those threads. Especially because he felt the need to compare it to 4e when they aren't even particularly related.
>>94616587>Plus idk why the normal assumption seems to be "every game must be a long campaign", the problems you mentioned seem like they wouldn't matter much if someone just wants the system for short/one shot games.You don't seem to get this, so let's be blunt:Do you plan to play a string of one-shots?No?Then tough luck with using Savage Worlds, then.
>>94618670>Do you plan to play a string of one-shots?Yes lol>No?Why wouldn't I?Long campaigns are a pain to schedule and to plan, and pulp does work better as short self contained episodes.Again, idk why the normal assumption seems to be "every game must be a long campaign", you're the one who didn't seem to get it.
>>94619059>Point? Who needs that, when I can just strawmanHere is my answer, then
>>94619068I accept your concession
How 2 long campaign in SW:Play settings with "gear treadmills" so your players can progress by working towards the Shinzo-Gremplo LLC Powersuit as they take the 3 meta edges for headshots.
>>94593461cute spider!
>>94610792The biggest hurdle my players had when I ran a year+ SWADE campaign was getting D&D combat out of their brain. Savage worlds is about teamwork to take down the big guy, not having one character at a time chipping down his 3 wounds.
I love Savage Worlds so much. It was my entry to ttrpg games and it also lets me play any genre I want so long as it's action and pulpy. Am a solo player but I think it would be nice to see in a group one day. I also like the exploding dice alot I got into it for cheap too so I get millage out of the game.
>>94620939Nice, I've been interested in Savage Worlds for solo, because somehow it feels wrong to play solo without using a setting that's exactly how I want it, and other systems just don't feel like they'd be a good fit.Of course I'm not that nitpicky when playing with others.
I've been mostly playing Savage Worlds Pathfinder and I'm finding it a huge improvement over the regular Pathfinder. I don't have that much experience with other systems but for what it is, it feels like a breeze to run.
>>94610770I've run Fallout three times with Savage Worlds. Shit is dope.
>>94616437I'm gonna assume you're being sarcastic here.
>>94622343Tell me more about your experience, please.Are you comparing it to PF 1e or 2e?
>>94589666Meh, for a generic system I tend to prefer brp or gurps over it.
>>94624645I can only compare it to PF2 even though I know it's based on PF1 in terms of lore if that matters for you. A starting character in PF2 has about 20 different keywords and abilities to keep in mind during combat, SWPF character has 3 or 4. You don't have to track XP, encounters are easy to balance and powers are simultaneously much simpler and much more robust than spells - no more need to memorize 20+ spells for higher level characters. Overall, there's less content if you're willing to convert, which is easy, it's an improvement.
>>94624292Try it out sometime
>>94589666I didn't care for the metacurrency-as-core-mechanic, nor the card initiative (does it still do that? I dunno). Anyways. On my end: no.
>>94622343>I've been mostly playing Savage Worlds Pathfinder and I'm finding it a huge improvement over the regular Pathfinder.Few things aren't let's be real.
>metacurrency
>>94589666>Does /tg/ like Savage Worlds?Yes. We like Savage Worlds just fine. That's why it doesn't get much discussion here. It's a perfectly okay system for almost any situation. Anything that's not okay enough for you, you can find one of hundreds of supplements and settings to make it more okay. High fantasy? It can do that. Sci fi bullshit? Works fine. Mixing them both together in a Vancian Dying Earth setting, it's still entirely okay. There's not enough to trigger people about the system aside from our pet schizo who will reply to this post to bitch about shotgun damage.Except vehicles. You're better off just finding another system to run vehicle combat in.
>>94629199>Except vehicles. You're better off just finding another system to run vehicle combat in.how so?I don't really care about vehicles, but I'm curious.
>>94629239It's like that old joke about initiating a grapple, and the DM says "hold on" and pulls out the 400-page grappling rules supplement. In SW people-scale combat is usually on a map and it's fast and deadly because shit can explode. Pulpy vehicle chase scenes are long and have lots of shooting and back and forth and almost no one dies, so the rules work completely differently and it's almost its own system already. It uses theater of the mind and a card drawing system to track the positions of the vehicles relative to each other across arbitrary range increments and probably just ends up forcing a battle at the end anyway. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, it's just that a GM who could make it work could make anything else work too.
>>94629199>Except vehicles. You're better off just finding another system to run vehicle combat in.I asked about a vehicle rule expansion earlier and I guess that's a no. Is there a system whose rules I should steal instead?>>94629239If he's talking about SWADE then it's because they took the Previous Edition's somewhat clunky rules and gutted the ability to use them in tactical combat. Went from vehicles having battle speeds to having a Speed Rating
>>94629199>Except vehicles. You're better off just finding another system to run vehicle combat in.That's another thing, they try to push the vehicle combat even in the core book for savage pathfinder where it makes absolutely no sense.
>>94618486No one who actually played the game for years like SWADE. It added loads of rules bloat and acts like fixing some broken rules everyone already house ruled is a justification to charge 40 dollars for a physical copy when the old book was ten bucks.
>>94593625There may be one guy totally obsessed with hating it, but he's not the only one here who didn't like it. (I haven't /run/ 200 sessions of it while hating it though, that would be crazy). Back when I played it it still had the Benny-Stunlock routine. But I hated it for the Bennies and dice-initiative.The thing I've played too much of while not enjoying it was WoD. And that was mostly on the player-side. Fuck CtL; VtR; and MET in Particular. Mediocre mechanics and shitty settings and campaign themes. (Dark Ages was okay.)
>>94631971>he's not the only one here who didn't like itI'd bet that's true for every system though
>>94631971*card-initiative. Sorry was distracted when I wrote that.>>94632074Most likely. Just pointing out that most of the "There's only one guy who didn't like it and he's crazy" claims people make on this site are obviously ridiculous. But also, having a guy who screeches about how much something is shit can certainly get in the way of discussion about that thing.I don't like WoD's settings, and it's mechanics are pretty mediocre (and I say this as someone who started gaming with WoD, who owns a bunch of WoD books (got rid of the NWoD ones in a move, kept my oWoD books, they're better for reading than running, IMO, but they do have some stuff I like in them even if I dont like hwo the game plays at the table), and has played a lot of it because it was ubiquitous from 1999-2010); and while I may have disagreements with people when it comes up in other threads>>94622647 >>94626303 , But I just stay out of the WoD General.
>>94589666sure
>>94609666I played SW for over two years and fast it ain't. Maybe compared to DnD3.5 back in the day, but compared to modern games it's fairly slow.
>>94638147>modern games that are more modern than Savage WorldsIs this code for PBTAslop?
>>94589765my group tries but our GM tends to kill of campaigns too frequently. over all it's a fine system, easy to break? sure but I like it
>>94638221I know nothing about pbta, but there are lots of itch.io "one page RPGs" that are just slightly gamified creative writing with some flavor constraints.Also, systems that were created literally to play with kids, like tricube tales.
>>94589666I know that a lot of folks here aren't very fond of it, but it's my go-to. Whenever I've got a group of players looking to play a game and there's likely not going to be time for a campaign, then I'm busting out SW. I can teach it in less than ten minutes, and if I bring pre-gen characters we can get a game going in less than 20. Every time I run a game of SW it always ends with people smiling and stories to share. It also helps that the older books are so cheap I can buy handfuls of them to give away as gifts or as raffle prizes.That said however, it is far from a perfect game. As a lot of folks have already pointed out here, I don't think I have it in me to run SW as a campaign. Character progression can ramp up pretty quick if you aren't careful. As well, you need the right group in the right mood to run it. SW can be a very silly game and you need to let people know that things might get silly. I have no problem with this and lean into the silliness with pride. The last two SW games I ran focused around the players battling a grizzly mad scientist. No complaints were heard. It's great if folks are just looking for a dumb adventure that can be wrapped up in 2-4 hours, but if you're gonna go pushing it any further then you need to be prepared and temper your expectations. SW is for making Comic books and TV shows from the 70's, not Game of Thrones or Star Wars.The best players for SW are folks who are new to RPGs and those looking for a break from DnD. The worst players for SW are grognards and people who want to play DnD.
>>94604660Fantasy Companion: Not necessary, but handy because it gives you so much to work with. Great if you're lazy.50 Fathoms: Pirates of Dark Water with the serial numbers filed off. Introduces ship-to-ship combat and a couple of interesting races, but can come off as a little anemic.Apocalypse Prevention Inc.: Men in Black, but the aliens are extra-dimensional beings, mermaids are real and are pricks, Magic is real but can get you slapped, and becoming a cyborg is possible if you have the patience to fill out the paperwork (or know a good back ally surgeon). My personal favourite SW setting book.Low-Life: Post Apocalypse like you've never seen before. Bombs drop and the whole world goes to shit. Quite literally. Characters are insects, mutants, and evolved snack cakes going on wacky adventures through a world where everything is made up of garbage, feces, and whimsy (the book is also a hoot to read).Necessary Evil: A Supers setting where the Supers were killed and now the villains have to step up and fight off something even worse than them. Provides rules for building supers, but is more notable for providing an entire episodic campaign that takes the party from busting out of a prison to taking down the big bad (and basically tells you that the game is best played using the provided campaign).RIFTS: The best version of RIFTS ever made, simply because it doesn't use the Chaosium system.Savage Pathfinder: DnD for folks who are too hip for either Dnd or one of it's competitors. Is actually a passable game that folks manage to enjoy.Realms of Cthulhu: A noble attempt at introducing a sanity mechanic. Makes some sense but can be a slog to read.Accursed: Fantasy setting where humans have lost a war and are now slaves to several powerful witches. Now it's up to the former soldiers of the witch armies to free humanity from their oppression. Interesting setting, fun character races, some good art, just not sure how I would run it.
>>94608420The biggest differences between the current edition and the previous one is a couple of slight changes to Skills, a tweak to character creation, and the upgraded price tag.
>>94606552See>>94642915
>>94642915>RIFTS: The best version of RIFTS ever made, simply because it doesn't use the Chaosium system.Clueless
i'm looking at a few different systems for my low fantasy setting i'm running on foundry and savage worlds seems pretty cool. its foundry module looks pretty complete compared to some other systems i was considering, but i'm worried it might be a bit too pulpy and heroic for what im doing. can you play without using bennies or are those too core to the overall balance?
>>94643843The bennies are absolutely necessary in this game so players don't get one-shotted by a random exploding die.
>>94627345>and powers are simultaneously much simpler and much more robust than spellsCan you give an example?A comparison of a spell and an equivalent power that you've seen in use.I've skimmed the book and Savage Pathfinder looks dope as hell.
>>94642915>Rifts>ChaosiumWrong company there dude.
>>94646258that post is a retard but hit point still stands
>>94589666Not as much as dnd.
>>94642906Why is it bad for Star Wars? Isn't it as pulpy as it gets?
thinking of making some sort of Dragon Ball style short campaign (or just few one shots)As in, heroes and villains with multiple forms, transformation, group attacks, planets getting destroyed, etc.maybe with core book + supers
>>94644725>implyingSpending a benny for soaking wounds come with a vigor roll that you could still miserably fail and get one-shotted anyways as consequence. The actual reson for bennies being sort-of mandatory is that a lot of submechanics depends on them.
>>94655590>Spending a benny for soaking wounds come with a vigor roll that you could still miserably fail and get one-shotted anyways as consequence.at that point, it was the character's destiny.
>Dramatic Tasks>Social Conflicts>Quick Encountershow do these "mini games" work in practice? (SWADE)
>>94589666what do you all use as bennies?
>>94664184Personally i have a little pouch with aquarium stones, otherwise i "borrow" from my brother his collection of stone futhark runes (for fantasy) or use anything else at hand (popcorns, pieces of paper, a single die as a visual countdown trapping, etc...)
>>94589666How does it compare and contrast to other similar systems?
>>94666078less autistic than gurps, more modular and crunchy than fate or most rules light setting agnostic systems
>>94646100In Pathfinder you'd have:Acid ArrowImplosionFireballDelayed Blast FireballRay of ExhaustionMagic MissileWeb Boltand a bunch of others that have the same basic effect - fire a magic projectile at a target causing damage and potential debuffs.In Savage Pathfinder, all these and many more spells are one spell - Bolt - with additional trappings and extra effects. How you choose to cast the spell will affect its cost but there's no more memorizing one projectile spell per element, you get to adjust your spells on the fly based on your needs.
>>94671143This is great for some games and shit for others. If I wanted to play a fire mage, I am just arbitrarily nerfing myself for theme. When it comes to magic these systems are always way less generic than they claim to be. I am starting to accept that “generic” and “has magic” cannot coexist.
>>94671395This can be administered by your GM that can make the trappings of opposite school magic more expensive to impossible based on your "class". A mage that specializes in water/fire/earth etc. should not be separate classes.
>>94671476I was speaking more to savage worlds as a whole, because im pretty sure magic works the same way in the base game, but is classless.
>>94671643Yeah, Savage Pathfinder is kind of its own thing because they wanted to translate as much of Pathfinder as possible while making it faster, more furious and more fun. I think it works but if you don't enjoy the powers system, you can pre-make a set of distinct spells available with fixed costs and give access to a few spells with every advancement.
>>94671143A build-a-spell kind of system then. That's pretty dope.How'd you make say, implosion vs delayed blast fireball vs magic missile using this bolt spell?
>>94673237IMPLOSIONBase Formula: Bolt + Disintegrate Power Modifier + Greater Bolt Power Modifier Power Points: 7Rank: Novice School: EvocationSpell Lists: Cleric (Death, Destruction, Sun)ACID ARROW Base Formula: Bolt (Acid Trapping) +Lingering Damage Field Power ModifierPower Points: 3Rank: NoviceSchool: ConjurationSpell Lists: Sorcerer/WizardThese are two official conversions, can't be bothered to look up the others but you get the gist. For some spells, there's more than one way to get the result you want.
What are the best supplements?>Inb4 "depends on what genre you prefer"I mean stuff that's actually creative or useful rather than thematic reskins, such as subsystems like the ones in the core book's toolkit
>>94676452>What are the best supplements?Vitamin D, Magnesium and Zinc.
>>94589666What are its strengths and weaknesses?
>>94589666It can be okay.
>>94680243Strengths>Makes better Pathfinder than Pathfinder>Could potentially make for a decent wargame>Shotguns are objectively betterWeaknesses>Cars suck>Bennies are annoyingly important
>>94610867It's fucking awesome.I wasn't expecting osr style Savage Worlds to be so quick and fun.
>>94676452I'm partial to Low Life myself. It's not for everyone, but the idea of a grubby post-apocalyptic setting where everyone is some horrible mutant freak that feels like a muppet isn't something I find to often in TRPG settings. It also has the benefit of the author and artist being the same dude, so it sets a mood extremely well.
>>94589666It's very easy to pick up and play, and it's so generic that you can use it for anything. I've played it, and I've enjoyed it.
>>94685494I've read something about the author disappearing after some kickstarter that failed to deliver, which looks like it could obliterate the chances of updated or new content for Low Life.:(
>>94683374>>Bennies are annoyingly importantwhat are some fun homebrews to use for bennies so that they're not always saved for soaking and recharging powers?different types of bennies, maybe?
>>94687536I never tested it but i suppose capping the number of rerolls per scene may work (for example you can soak wounds only once per fight and you're allowed only one roll per soaking attempt) and making more costly the power recharging, for example instead of simply exchanging 1 benny for 5 pp you spend a benny instead of pp, up to five, in the activation procedure (and by so risking to waste one if the arcane skill roll fails).
>>94687536Disallow recharging PP with bennies, awful mechanic when failing a power roll costs you 1 PeePee and the bennie recharges 5>>94687931Half the fun of SW is blowing three bennies on a fluff roll.
>>94688129>Half the fun of SW is blowing three bennies on a fluff roll.yeah that's why I wouldn't want players to feel like they have to save bennies for soaking and recharging Microsoft PowerPoint.
>>94589666Is savage worlds good enough for long campaigns?If not then what is a good premade DnD universe for long campaigns?
>>94694448>Is savage worlds good enough for long campaigns?Yes>If not then what is a good premade DnD universe for long campaigns?Wtf is this question
Is the Solomon kane setting fun?
>>94589765Depends what you mean by "long campaign".If you ran something the length of an adventure path in Pathfinder or one of the 5e campaign books? It's fine.If you are talking about a year and some change, weekly sessions at 6 hours a session, old school stuff? Yeah, it's shit. MOST systems are shit at handling that kind of length. The only reason old games were good at that was because they kinda expected you to work on getting a castle, building and maintaining a kingdom, raising an army, and doing high level country management while delving for loot to finance your fucking kingdom. Shit, that kind of gameplay hasn't been a focal point in decades.
>>94695475>6 hours a session>The only reason old games were good at that>expected you to work on getting a castle, building and maintaining a kingdom, raising an army, and doing high level country managementThat was boring as shit in old games too, that's why it hasn't been a focus on decades. Plus, videogames just handle that autism better.
>>94589666I do
>>94695885I pronunce you anon and faggot.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDcIfFwgWLM
>>94599225>I fucking love HellfrostGot a PDF you could upload so we could check it out? Catbox.moe is right there.
>>94673291I like it.
>>94696016>I pronunce you anon and faggot.Fuck that got me good
>>94696942nta but come onthey're not hard to find
>>94698361Nta but i can't find anymore the savage pathfinder core, care to help a retard?
>>94698887tryrebrand(dot)ly(slash)SaWoTrove
>>94599225I'm curious about this bookhttps://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/228784/hellfrost-resource-management-2nd-editionI did pirate it, I just wonder how does it work in practice.
If Conviction is going to be a setting option for all the suggested subgenres in the various Companion books, why not just make it a core rule at that point?
>>94704939Companion books seem to repeat a lot of shit between them for some reason, it's annoying.
>>94615466what the fuck happened in your brain to make you write this
>>94704939Maybe to emphasize it's still optional.Idk I see so many people complaining about regular Bennies, it makes sense to not emphasize Bennies 2.
>>94589666Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmNyo
>>94589666Yeah Satan
>>94629199>Except vehicles. You're better off just finding another system to run vehicle combat in.eh it seems fun. kind of like a secondary combat systemhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGRJDRJUpnc
>>94716020or maybe the 666 was for Santa
>>94620695Literally playing in a BattleTech campaign that has "Pilot" sessions out of mech in SW and then uses BattleTech for the mech combat sessions. The campaign does just about exactly what you said. In fact, we generally look forward to what new shit we can salvage more than experience on our SW characters.
>>94642915If Rifts used Chaosium's BRP rules it would have a more sterling overall reputation. Palladium's rules are basically AD&D mashed together with BRP as it is.
>>94652262Supers companion is a must. You might want to look into Savage Rifts for the sake of high powered campaigns as well.
I shared it a year or two ago but my group uses a house rule that transforms combat into something more strategic and tactical with one small change.You know how SW draws cards for initiative? Cards have values for 2 to Ace, a range of 13? They almost had something there, but it's functionally identical to just rolling a d12. No, here's what we do for initiative.1) At the beginning of combat, the GM deals a HAND of 5 cards to every player.2) The GM gives every enemy Wild Card their own hand of 5 cards.3) At the beginning of every round, the GM declares what the Extras will do. He then turns over the top card of the deck to reveal when their actions will go off.4) The players may play any card from their hand to declare their action and when it will happen.5) After all players have declared their actions, the GM declares enemy Wild Card actions and plays their cards from their hands.Every time that hands run out of cards, the GM shuffles everything back together and deals new hands.
>>94720172That seems like it'd make shorter combats easier for PCs.
Is beasts and barbarians good?
>>94720172Also sounds like no benefit for faster acting characters.
>>94724660It speeds up combat in part because you deal cards at 1/5 the rate.It also gives an added benefit for being a Wild Card.
>>94725416Meant for >>94722040
>>94724660If you are referring to the Quickness or Level-Headed Edges, we do this:> QuicknessAll characters with Quickness draw first. Their entire hand must have a value of 6 or higher.> Level-HeadedPlayer draws an extra card for a hand of 6. They play 5 cards from their hand like everyone else, but now they have more options.I have thought of making new grades of Quickness and Level-Headed though. Versions that interface with having a hand versus drawing a single card. My group has tinkered with ideas for even more Edges than those two since a hand creates all kinds of new possibilities.
>>94725461>All characters with Quickness draw first. Their entire hand must have a value of 6 or higher.Except in the original you may choose to discard based on the situation so not only do you lose the ability to control if you have low cards, you can't even decide turn to turn if you want to go early or late based on the situation.>Player draws an extra card for a hand of 6. They play 5 cards from their hand like everyone else, but now they have more options.This is now shit and there's no reason to ever buy this edge. Literally useless.
>>94725461New poster here. Two questions:Do players get to play more than one card to "bump up" their initiative, like if I play a 2 and an opponent plays a 3, can I add another 2 and go first? In Deadlands, does your actual hand (as in poker) matter? Like, if I'm dealt 5 cards, and I have 4 of a kind, is there any benefit?
>>94725686> QuicknessPerhaps a better version of the Edge would be to draw a normal hand, but then every round the player can discard a card to draw a new card as per Quickness (6 or higher), but, as you note, they do not have to.> LevelheadedI don't know about "literally," since it means that the character has 6 options out of 5, but what would be better and in the spirit of Levelheaded? The way it normally works is that you draw 2 cards and can pick either one. Should a Level headed character draw another card every round and then weigh it against the rest of their hand?
>>94726152> Pump up InitiativeNot under the current paradigm because 1 card = 1 turn. However, it might make a neat Edge where the player can draw a card and add it or something. Didn't even think of that before. I like the idea at least.
>>94720172I'm intrigued, but how does this not just lead to players playing all their highest cards down the line? How does this not let enemy wild cards completely gank the PCs? "Oh he declared he's casting a Power, I'll just use an Ace to Wild Attack, gg no re"
>>94723635ok/10I wouldn't really bother with it overall, just skim it and see if there's anything you want to nick.
>>94726152>In Deadlands, does your actual hand (as in poker) matter? Like, if I'm dealt 5 cards, and I have 4 of a kind, is there any benefit?Maybe if the fucking dice gave me the explosions I desire
>>94620695anyone got tips on how to do this in your own setting?
>>94729414isn't it mainly about scale?ie at first the pcs are noobs so they're expected to only deal with noob shit, and the gear they can access if perfectly serviceable for noob shit.If they get cooler gear, they're more likely to be able to deal with more advanced stuff.ie maybe the kids and their dog start out solving mysteries in their neighborhood, but after one of them gets a driving license they can go further away.
Opinions on this? Anyone here played it?I like the idea of PCs in an army/mass battles and pseudohistorical, but without huge simulationism autism + allowing pulpy fantasy. And Rome seems more fun than magic nazis.Doesn't seem to be updated for SWADE though.
>>94728744A few things control for that in my experience:1) Wild Cards can draw all good, all bad hands, but mostly mixed hands2) Wild Cards can coordinate by not playing their best right away3) The Extras can draw a good card right off the top of the deck and go first. 4) The enemy Wild Cards can try to do the same thing, so there comes a point where throwing your highest card right away is a waste if it's only going to be trumped in the end.
>>94589666Bennie is the dumbest sounding shit
>>94629199>"Nigga i don't fukin' care i gotta jawb ta DO.
>>94730087Never even heard of it, but I'm interested. Moving to SWADE should be pretty easy. If you have a pdf I'll skim it and see about an update.
>>94733540Yes, any time I run SW I change it to FATE or Void Point or Karma or something.Same with Wild Cards and a few other terms they should have stripped out.
>>94733540What, you never heard of Benzedrine?
>>94733767easyupload (dot) io/pj05zbpass: thesetting
/tg/ should be deleted
>>94734151My dick should delete your bussy but that's not happening either
The biggest Savage Worlds pain point for me was, ironically, combat - you roll to hit with a bunch of mods and choices and rolls for explosing dice, and then you roll for damage, and then you see if the target soaks it, and etc etc. However, the rest of it is solid enough, and I like the raise system, especially for powers.Has anyone out there devised a fix for that aspect of combat?
>>94736580Depends on what your problem is with default combat, is it because doesn't make "sense" (like you successfully hit and then you roll your damage under the toughness tn and you feel like your "hit" was wasted)? Then try as follow:>Rename "Damage" as "Threat", add Test effects to attack roll (so a successful roll against Parry applies a condition, even if the damage roll isn't enough for inflicting one)....is it because there are too many rolls? Try to jury rig a "mutants and masterminds" approach:>Instead of rolling for damage you have a flat value (for example add 1 for d4, 2 for d6, 3 for d8, etc...) and roll against this tn with you vigor +armor, effectively reducing the combat rolls as one for the attack and one for defense.
surprised by the lack of lewd options
>>94733540yes, i insist on calling them benefits (because "Bennie" is American slang for "Benefits"(???))
>>94733773Wild card and extras isn't that bad imho.But "bennies" is absolutely retarded.I like just calling them fate points, even if it makes me think of the other setting agnostic RPG.
>>94736677Yeah it's that it takes too fuckin long
>>94739127Well then you can try with the juryrigged mnm method, expanding a bit on it:Damage TN>pick the higher die, half its type (eg: if d8 then it's a 4) then add 2 plus half the die type -1 for each remaining dice (eg: if d6 then it's 2, because 6:2=3-1=2). So a weapon that deals 3d6 would have a TN of 9 (2+3+2+2).Wounds adjudication>if the vigor +armor roll vs damage tn results in a success with a raise there aren't effects, if it's a simple success then you get shaken, it it's a failure you get 1 wound and, finally if you critically fail you get incapacitated. An attack that scores a success with a raise the vigor + armor roll gets a -2 penalty.Soaking wounds>spending a benny simply allows for a reroll but, if successful, removes the shaken condition (if any).There you go, i just put down the idea as i got it so would be better if you test it beforehand if you plan to ever use this variant in your games.
>>94737384Outside of SW I have never heard of anyone using it that way and I am pretty sure the devs just made it up.
I ran Deadlands in it and it was fun. I love the stats as dice thing.
>>94739696MNM?
>>94740103No, they didn't - for example people might talk about the bennies of working a given job, such as "The benny of working at Denny's is all the bacon you want"
>>94742517Mutants and masterminds
>>94742529it does sound old fashioned and corny, which I guess is appropriate for Savage Worlds.
anyone got an opinion/experience about changing the attributes (like adding new ones)
>>94709320> I see so many people complaining about regular BenniesI'd argue it's because /tg/ in particular has a vocal group of people who fucking loath meta currency in all of its forms.
>>94746206I'm fine with them mechanically, I just hate the nameAlthough desu last time I ran Savage Worlds I just smashed it together with FATE
>>94746206/tg/ has lots of people that want every RPG to play as either a board game or a very rigid (rules wise) old text adventure pc game.Pretty much kills the point of playing ttrpgs instead of just vidya.
>>94746206>>94749302In general, I think mechanics that align with both character and player are stronger than ones that circumvent your character and, in doing so, put distance between you and them. But there are lots of factors to consider, and that's just one of them, and if meta currency allows you to do something important/fun that you wouldn't otherwise be able to do, it may well be worth it. In particular, I think it's great when something allows you to focus or "go all out" on doing some particular thing, rather than putting forth a consistent and unchanging level of effort (which, let's face it, isn't even how real life works, given pushing yourself, adrenaline, willpower/drive, fatigue and so forth). I do, however, hate "bennies" as a term. I think "fate" is better, and there's an argument to be made for something like "drive", "talent", "spirit", "mettle", etc. that could reasonably represent an effort your character is actually putting in. Of course, "fate" is potentially a decent bit wider in terms of the stuff the term suggests it can cover, including non-character-facing stuff, and that may be desirable. Depending on the game and subject to GM approval, I've allowed players to spend fate to alter the facts of the narrative in ways that aren't too extreme or intrusive (like spending fate to say that a bandit they encountered was from the same group that one of the characters used to work with).
>>94752048what about luck?spirit is already taken by the attributeplus the lucky edge is about benniesthinking of using 4 leaf clover tokens to represent bennies and just call them luck points.good idea or is something likely to go wrong? (ie is the term "luck" used anywhere else in the system in a way that could make it confusing to use it for bennies?)
>>94752387>spirit is already taken by the attributeYeah, I was just giving examples for games in general.>what about luck?Better than bennies, in my opinion. I've seen it used in other games. But it's still not my favorite, because of how it feels divorced from your character. Like, even fate could be seen as the strength of your character's existence and could tie into the concept of their destiny as a great hero or whatnot, but luck just seems arbitrary. If somebody wins a fight or athletic contest because they got lucky, you're not saying something good about them. So I'd personally prefer other terms, but I do think it's a big step up from bennies.>plus the lucky edge is about benniesTechnically, it's the luck edge (that and great luck), but I honestly think "lucky" and "very lucky" work better for those anyway (and maybe use "unlucky" in place of "bad luck", though I suppose you could leave it be, and maybe use "good luck" for "luck" and retain "great luck").
>>94752637>because of how it feels divorced from your characterImho that's a plus, they should feel divorced from the characters since they are. If it were something innate to the character you wouldn't need to spend bennies for it.>even fate could be seen as the strength of your character's existence That's already within the fact that they're wild cards. And the spirit attribute maybe.
>>94753035>If it were something innate to the character you wouldn't need to spend bennies for it.But if you frame it as mettle, drive, focus or something like that, it potentially becomes something your character is doing. Yes, they're going above and beyond what they can usually do, but as a matter of pushing themselves. But it really just comes down to personal taste.
>>94740103They definitely didn't. It especially comes up with corpo types. They'll talk about their "bennies" and why they were willing to take a "wage cut" for them.
>>94753836>But it really just comes down to personal taste.Indeed.>But if you frame it as mettle, drive, focus or something like that, it potentially becomes something your character is doing. yeah, but things about the character itself are represented more explicitly by the attributes, skills and edges.Bennies can be used for influencing the story, and it is advised to give bennies to players that roleplay their hindrances. Neither of those really sound too much like mettle, drive or focus.So I'd also treat soaking/rerolling damage and so on as just luck rather than something about the character itself.But yeah that's just many words to say again that it comes down to personal taste.
Mass battle rules seem fun.I wonder if a campaign with tons of focus on then could work.
>>94758692You'd have to be GREAT at narrating them, improvising a lot of new variables and possibly homebrewing your own mass battles, because the rules as they are on the manual won't feel exciting for long.I think AGE did mass battles very similarly, but better.
>>94745993What do you want to do, specifically?
>>94734147The biggest change seems to be SWADE no longer awarding XP for the Awards and Promotions sectionOther than that it should all be pretty straightforward. If there's anything that troubles you, fire away.
>>94766111There are several references to charisma.Would it make sense to just replace those by bonuses/penalties to persuasion?
