Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2013 4:31:45 GMT -8
This was discussed in small part on the podcast, but what is the actual viability of a Savage Worlds long-term campaign? Does genre matter? I love SW, but it strikes me as maybe more one-shot or webisode oriented. I ask, as there is a fair chance that I have drummed up support for running a SW campaign, nit sure of genre.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Mar 7, 2013 5:30:52 GMT -8
Can't speak for all genres but Superhero and Savage Worlds of Solomon Kane have both lent themselves to long term play rather nicely...
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Mar 7, 2013 6:16:53 GMT -8
I've been running two campaigns in Savage Worlds one is a pulp adventure set in an alternate pre-WWII (Think Indiana Jones or the Mummy movies and you have exactly the right idea) called Sturmgeist (ap recordings available on the feed), and a Deadlands game called Ghost River. Sturmgeist just passed the one year mark and we're just finishing up the 2nd story arc, and Ghost River is at around 9 months or so and is in its 2nd story arc.
I see a point where both of these campaigns will end, or at the very least the stories with those characters will end and they will be retired and replaced with new young fresh faces. Though it is more likely at that point in both groups that we'll wind up the campaign and start something new. What that something new will be I have no idea at this point.
The crux of it though is that SW works fine for campaigns. I will say that I handle character advancement a little differently than the book does though it works out to be about the same.
1. I start characters with one (1) advance (5xp). 2. Rather than award xp each game session I just have the players advance every 3-4 game sessions depending on how much ground we've covered.
JiB
|
|
|
Post by savagedaddy on Mar 7, 2013 9:07:53 GMT -8
I feel that this debate is due in large part to Savage Worlds use of Ranks instead of levels commonly found in most systems (especially D&D). I would argue that D&D/Pathfinder don't lend themselves to long term campaigns because of their focus on combat, attrition, collection of magic items and gold, and cookie-cutter adventure scenario plot-line; e.g. you meet in a tavern... hired to kill a dragon... hack a corporation's main frame... and so on, and so forth.
That is, of course, a ridiculous argument. In my opinion, the only criteria of a system's ability to support long term campaigns is the setting and story itself. To put it another way, I wouldn't read twenty pages of a dictionary and proclaim, "Well... this story sucks!". Savage Worlds is a reference manual -- an intentionally 'generic' roleplaying game rule set.
I don't mean to rant, or flame here.. but WTF?! In all fairness you should pick up a licensed setting book such as Deadlands, Shintar, Evernight, Solomon Kane, Necropolis, Rippers, or Weird Wars II - all of which contain Plot Point Campaigns if I remember correctly - before making such an argument.
[climbing off my soap-box now]
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Mar 7, 2013 13:49:41 GMT -8
I think Savage Worlds is perfectly viable for a long-term campaign. I've been in a few and run one, and they've been of different genres.
Honestly, I suspect the likelihood of a long-term campaign happening has less to do with the system used and more to do with the group and GM running the game.
Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Mar 8, 2013 7:04:29 GMT -8
I think Savage Worlds is perfectly viable for a long-term campaign. I've been in a few and run one, and they've been of different genres. Honestly, I suspect the likelihood of a long-term campaign happening has less to do with the system used and more to do with the group and GM running the game. Good luck! What he said. JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2013 14:43:34 GMT -8
I feel that this debate is due in large part to Savage Worlds use of Ranks instead of levels commonly found in most systems (especially D&D). I would argue that D&D/Pathfinder don't lend themselves to long term campaigns because of their focus on combat, attrition, collection of magic items and gold, and cookie-cutter adventure scenario plot-line; e.g. you meet in a tavern... hired to kill a dragon... hack a corporation's main frame... and so on, and so forth. That is, of course, a ridiculous argument. In my opinion, the only criteria of a system's ability to support long term campaigns is the setting and story itself. To put it another way, I wouldn't read twenty pages of a dictionary and proclaim, "Well... this story sucks!". Savage Worlds is a reference manual -- an intentionally 'generic' roleplaying game rule set. I don't mean to rant, or flame here.. but WTF?! In all fairness you should pick up a licensed setting book such as Deadlands, Shintar, Evernight, Solomon Kane, Necropolis, Rippers, or Weird Wars II - all of which contain Plot Point Campaigns if I remember correctly - before making such an argument. [climbing off my soap-box now] I have all of the setting books...kinda of boring or at least not what I am in to. The reason I ask, is that invariably, when SW is discussed and adventures are displayed, we see silly and/or inane themes: My Little Pony, Scooby Doo, Ghostbusters, Day After Ragnarok, etc. Sure, they make more serious settings, but it always seems as if people SW as a distraction. Glad to see people playing a no shit RPG with the rules. My only experience with SW at the tabletop so far has been my own silly ass adventure about taking on the Ice Cream Man.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Mar 10, 2013 12:04:04 GMT -8
I have all of the setting books...kinda of boring or at least not what I am in to. If you do actually have all the setting books and none of them appeal to you, I really have to wonder what it is that you are into. Not to go all B5 shadows on you, but what do you want? The reason I ask, is that invariably, when SW is discussed and adventures are displayed, we see silly and/or inane themes: My Little Pony, Scooby Doo, Ghostbusters, Day After Ragnarok, etc. I would caution against sweeping statements. I suspect most people don't consider Weird War II, Tour of Darkness, Deadlands, Deadlands Noir, Realms of Cthulhu, the Horror Companion, Beasts & Barbarians, Hellfrost, or Solomon Kane silly or inane, and those are just the off-the-top-of-my-head counterexamples. Sure, they make more serious settings, but it always seems as if people SW as a distraction. Glad to see people playing a no shit RPG with the rules. My only experience with SW at the tabletop so far has been my own silly ass adventure about taking on the Ice Cream Man. Again with the "always." I think what you see there is that Savage Worlds is a remarkably prep-light game. Silly games tend to be one-off scenarios, not campaigns (by and large). For that purpose, you want the most prep-light system you can get your hands on that will handle it, and for many, that's Savage Worlds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 13:54:58 GMT -8
Beasts&Barbarians is good, actually reading that now. I am not knocking the system, I have not yet had an opportunity to play more than a one-shot. The crux of my question was whether or not SW has the moxxy to sustain a long-term game. Obviously it can, but how well does it hold up? Pathfinder can do epic levels, but the system begins to fall apart around tenth-thirteenth level. However, savage daddy has some truth to his statement: in Pathfinder or other such system, there are obvious benefits to advancing/gaining a level. SW reads a little plain Jane comparatively. I worry that players might feel cheated or bored after a few advances. Agin, no real experience, so I need to ask for first hand accounts.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 10, 2013 19:32:33 GMT -8
I don't have much firsthand experience with long-term Savage Worlds games. I've played a grand total of three sessions of a fantasy game that then fell apart. So take everything I say with a grain of salt.
I think that any system can sustain long-term play if the players are invested in the story and don't care all that much about "leveling up" their characters. If the players are only playing the game to rack up the XP, gain levels, and improve their characters, then any system is going to top out eventually.
All things being equal, games like Pathfinder and D&D 4e will allow groups to play longer campaigns, as their advancement system goes up to level 30 and the XP requirement increases with each level. Compare that to a system like Savage Worlds or an Apocalypse World-based game where the XP cost to "level up" (usually) remains constant regardless of how advanced your character is. Those types of games can lead to shorter campaigns simply because the rate of advancement remains steady.
But again, that's only true if the players are focused on character advancement over story. If you look at pulp stories, the characters don't really get any better. Indiana Jones stays pretty much the same across all three movies (yes, I said three). He didn't get better at shooting or using his wip. He didn't get stronger, or suddenly gain a new ability. Instead he just kind of did the same thing in a different place, against different foes, with different things at stake. While it would probably be unsatisfying to play a pulp game for years of real time and never have anything on your character sheet change, you can play for a long time with the same characters in pulp games. Which is what Savage Worlds is.
Eh, I'm getting a little ranty here. My point is this. Savage Worlds character ranks are not Pathfinder character levels. If your group is all about advancement, Savage Worlds probably won't give you the length of game you're looking for. As GM, you'll need to include more "story rewards" that have nothing to do with a characters's stats or abilities to stretch out the game. Some groups get a sense of accomplishment when their character's actions affect the world around them, even while their character remain largely the same. Other groups get a sense of accomplishment when their characters get better at what they do. If your group is the former, Savage Worlds should be fine. If you group is the latter, then Savage Worlds will feel short.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Mar 10, 2013 19:40:50 GMT -8
However, savage daddy has some truth to his statement: in Pathfinder or other such system, there are obvious benefits to advancing/gaining a level. SW reads a little plain Jane comparatively. I worry that players might feel cheated or bored after a few advances. It's been my experience that there was always something else I was wanting to get with my next increase, even well into the Legendary ranks. I've not seen anyone go "Huh, I think I'm done." Each advance tends to matter. I've seen Savage Worlds game fail for all sorts of reasons (schedules, enthusiasm, illness, group conflict, and so on), but so far not because the system broke.
|
|
|
Post by rickno7 on Mar 11, 2013 7:34:26 GMT -8
I am one of those that have expressed reservations about Savage Worlds and its long term viability. Though I will like to say most of that comes from looking at the stock game.
As mostly a GM and a sometimes player, I fully admit to wishing for a magical world where all players put more emphasis on story and not so much the character sheet. But it is NOT a sin to like to level up, and there is a lot in this thread insinuating that real players would not care about such a thing. I call poop on the field, sir.
Looking at setting books I have for Savage Worlds, almost all augment and adjust, and almost universally expand on what happens when a character "levels" up.
Leveling up is FUN(i guess most sins are). The answer to "your system doesn't look like it supports leveling and long term goals" is not "leveling is lame, real players don't care about it". I may have less experience as a Player than I do GM'ing, but it has not been so long ago that I forget that looking forward to new skills, increasing my viability at the mechanical side of things, and just plain seeing some progress through number representation can be very satisfying.
That does not make me a munchkin DM or a wargaming miniature battler in disguise. Leveling is an aspect of almost all RPG's in our hobby, and it is ok to enjoy it.
Off my soapbox and on topic;
I think the reason I personally thought Savage Worlds was not that great long term is because it is harder to see that future goal when it comes to character mechanics. Later, as I played the game(it is my most played system these days), I learned the system and learned just what Edges and Powers can do long term. With enough knowledge, I learned where a character could go. I began seeing what a high level character is capable of. But it did take time.
Compare this to Pathfinder. A new player can open up the book and see a road map. They can see where they are going and what they can look forward to. Perhaps level 4 is an exciting prospect for that player. Maybe a Wizard looks and sees a particularly cool spell comes at 9. Ten minutes into character creation for a new player, and they're already looking months into the future.
Compare that to stock Savage Worlds and any game that is set up similar. The player has to make his own road map. Holy crap that is cool! That is awesome! They get to decide the road they're on. Thing is, there has to be a lot more experience about the game before they can decide where that road is going. This puts the emphasis on what my character can do NOW. They can not make a road so soon, perhaps they can see a couple of blocks down the street. This is pretty awesome too, especially for small campaigns and one shots.
Both approaches have their merits. I have had players be very upset with the amount of time they put into making a Pathfinder character to find out we're only playing 2 or 3 sessions. In Savage Worlds you are encouraged to look at the here and now, and so its hard to see far into the distance. In Pathfinder, everything is geared toward planning far in advance, it almost makes the here and now less shiny.
So I would not say its preposterous to say Savage Worlds does not "look" like it can support a longer campaign. In reality Savage Worlds is as capable of supporting long term campaigns as any game. Its emphasis on the here and now just make it harder to see from the start.
|
|
sam
Initiate Douchebag
A Happy Jacks GM
Posts: 41
Preferred Game Systems: Savage Worlds, GURPS, Star Wars: EoE
Currently Playing: I mostly GM.
Currently Running: Star Wars:EoE, Savage Worlds
|
Post by sam on Mar 11, 2013 10:18:25 GMT -8
I feel that this debate is due in large part to Savage Worlds use of Ranks instead of levels commonly found in most systems (especially D&D). I would argue that D&D/Pathfinder don't lend themselves to long term campaigns because of their focus on combat, attrition, collection of magic items and gold, and cookie-cutter adventure scenario plot-line; e.g. you meet in a tavern... hired to kill a dragon... hack a corporation's main frame... and so on, and so forth. That is, of course, a ridiculous argument. In my opinion, the only criteria of a system's ability to support long term campaigns is the setting and story itself. To put it another way, I wouldn't read twenty pages of a dictionary and proclaim, "Well... this story sucks!". Savage Worlds is a reference manual -- an intentionally 'generic' roleplaying game rule set. I don't mean to rant, or flame here.. but WTF?! In all fairness you should pick up a licensed setting book such as Deadlands, Shintar, Evernight, Solomon Kane, Necropolis, Rippers, or Weird Wars II - all of which contain Plot Point Campaigns if I remember correctly - before making such an argument. [climbing off my soap-box now] I have all of the setting books...kinda of boring or at least not what I am in to. The reason I ask, is that invariably, when SW is discussed and adventures are displayed, we see silly and/or inane themes: My Little Pony, Scooby Doo, Ghostbusters, Day After Ragnarok, etc. Sure, they make more serious settings, but it always seems as if people SW as a distraction. Glad to see people playing a no shit RPG with the rules. My only experience with SW at the tabletop so far has been my own silly ass adventure about taking on the Ice Cream Man. I used SW for a serious Wild West game at the convention here and it worked fine. Its easy to make serious, the system is deadly.
|
|