I'm so disappointed by Fabula Ultima. I've run two small one shot adventures using the system and both times by the end I just felt like I had wasted everyone's time. You would think a system inspired by JRPGs would have a little more to say about dungeon creation, but there's only like six pages and two of them are lame rolling tables for concept creation. They could have spared a page or two for explaining basic five room dungeons I guess. Creating custom monsters felt awful, and I didn't get a real good sense of balance. If I made a custom boss it was either too strong and I was doing too much damage or too weak and the players tore through them without breaking a sweat. Character classes were the only fun thing in the book, but even then I don't think they're handled very well. I don't know what I was hoping to get out of Fabula Ultima but I sure as shit didn't find it. Has anyone actually had a good experience with this system? What did you actually like about it?
Currently Playing it rnMy problems are that at lvl 1 heal costs 10 and heals 40 per person while most ppl have 20~30 hp at that level unless they are a heavy melee classMy other is that our group plays every Sunday but alternate between GURPS and FU (two different DMs) and I really prefer Gurps
>>98241771Bump for interest.
>>98241771>You would think a system inspired by JRPGs would have a little more to say about dungeon creationNo you wouldn't, JRPGs are all about prattling dialogue and LE EPIC TWIST REVEALS.
>>98241771If you're going to play something based on videogame RPGs from Japan, it needs to have been designed no later than 2001, as anything released after that suffers from the RPG/WRPG flipflop to JRPG/RPG slop.
>>98241771Recently ran Press Start for my group to similarly underwhelming results. Combined player/GM world generation was fun, and everyone had a great time making characters. Actual combat was swingy, either a cakewalk or too much HP for the villains. I can absolutely see potential in it, but it requires a group that can lean heavy on roleplaying and abstracted combat. Honestly, FU might work better as a boss-rush style game. 2-3 big, flashy fights with unique mechanics would probably work better.
>>98246571>If you're going to play something based on videogame RPGs from Japan, it needs to have been designed no later than 2001, as anything released after that suffers from the RPG/WRPG flipflop to JRPG/RPG slop.Yeah it's starting to feel that way which is kind of a shame imo. One of my favorite things about this hobby is finding new systems to try out. >>98246798>Honestly, FU might work better as a boss-rush style game. 2-3 big, flashy fights with unique mechanics would probably work better.That's the vibe I've gotten after running it twice.
I don't get how any one can actually hold picrel's opinion that FU is built for roleplay. Does it have anything aside from Traits/Bonds that have anything to do with roleplay?
i'm having a lot of fun running it. the clock system is a great progress meter that allows for stuff like stealth missions. >>98247312i don't get how anyone can hold the opinion that FU is NOT built for roleplay. you have bonds and traits, you have a (revamped) arcanist class that explicitly requires in-universe exploration for mechanical progression. you have themes and identity for each character that can act as sources of conflict. you have fabula points for "forgive me master i must go all out just this once" moments. a huge chunk of your character sheet is relevant for roleplay in one way or another.
>>98247868>i don't get how anyone can hold the opinion that FU is NOT built for roleplay. you have bonds and traits, you have a (revamped) arcanist class that explicitly requires in-universe exploration for mechanical progression. you have themes and identity for each character that can act as sources of conflict. you have fabula points for "forgive me master i must go all out just this once" moments. a huge chunk of your character sheet is relevant for roleplay in one way or another.I can't speak for the revamped arcanist class, but everything else you mentioned is just basic roleplaying which you do in 5e as well unless you're dogshit at the hobby. On the 5e character sheet you have spaces for your personality traits, ideals, bonds, flaws, background, allies and organizations. Just because people don't use it doesn't mean it's not there. I don't think these mechanics are all that stronger in FU than in 5e either. You can make a bond just by resting. Its not like Fabula points are some insane innovation either. Invoking a trait lets you roll with inspiration. You can use a point to add to the story, something 5e also lets you do for free and with the same caveat as FU that the GM has the final say. The only thing Bonds do that I don't think 5e does is add to your roll's result. Maybe I shouldn't have said that it was the wrong opinion to think that FU was built for roleplay, but let's not act like 5e wasn't.
