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.
|
|
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.
|
|
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!
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jan 16, 2013 23:24:17 GMT -8
We've actually found that using GM bennies to soak wounds now and again gives the feel of progress for those folks that kind of miss hit points. "At least I shot one of his bennies off" is how it's usually phrased.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jan 9, 2013 18:52:07 GMT -8
One thing about the Scorpion that touches more on the original question(that I sort of veered away from in my earlier post), is that the Scorpion were never really tasked to BE dishonorable. Their task in actuality was to be the keepers of secrets and to keep the other clans in check. They CHOSE to be dishonorable in doing that. Yes, but that choice put weapons into their hands that the other clans simply cannot use without harming themselves. It's a good choice if your main goal is to be effective above all else. Then again, the Scorpion just speak to me.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Dec 24, 2012 1:33:39 GMT -8
Not once you let "the public" get involved. Or my mother. Either way, you're doomed.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Oct 21, 2012 19:44:08 GMT -8
I was at Target the other day and ended up getting some "table scatter" that were cool translucent red maple leaves that just cried out to be used for bennies.
Did I have a plan for 'em? No. Do I now? Yes. The bennies inspired a scenario for me to use 'em, The Leaves Rained Red. Nobody likes elves, right? Right! This particular scenario is based around the final push in the campaign to utterly eradicate the elvish menace from the face of the world.
Now I'm having more ideas for scenarios for those bennies, and I suspect I'm going to let myself do more of that "oh, these are cool, I'll get them and the scenario will follow" plan in the future.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Aug 30, 2012 19:23:53 GMT -8
Other than the emotional reaction, there's usually no real difference between hitting an extra for 87 points of damage and something in the low teens.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Aug 3, 2012 21:40:33 GMT -8
I'm game to give it a shot. I've never done an online game, so whatever we pick as a platform I'll have to get hold of, so it'll all be new to me there.
System and setting I'm pretty flexible on. I tend to prefer some element of the fantastic in the setting, with realistic modern military probably being my least favorite.
I'm on Eastern Time and about to start student teaching, so I have something of an old fuddy-duddy schedule.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jul 23, 2012 20:26:38 GMT -8
It's much easier than that. If your OCV and your opponent's DCV are the same, your target number is 11. If your OCV is 1 higher. Add 1. If your OCV is 1 lower. Subtract 1. and so on. You know, if that makes sense to you, you can use very similar logic with a slight twist and not care what the DCV is. It becomes: Your target number is eleven. If you get that, you hit your OCV. If you roll one higher, you hit one lower than your OCV. If you roll 2 lower, you hit two higher than your OCV. If that's odd, you can think of it in terms of better and worse instead of higher and lower. If you roll one better than 11, you hit one better than your OCV. If you roll two worse than 11, you hit two worse than your OCV. Or the formula. Or our tried-and-true method of roll the dice and stare blankly at the GM as if you were a semi-electrocuted tree frog. (I'll let you try to guess if I was usually the GM...)
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jul 2, 2012 10:44:25 GMT -8
JPK's a good resource. Also he might be cheating and asking Clint from time to time. #BaselessAccusation Thanks. Sadly, Clint doesn't recognize my unbridled rules genius quite as often as I think he ought to, so it's usually just me. I do sometimes double-check the actual book just to make sure I've not dreamed up an answer wholecloth, though. Sometimes.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jun 28, 2012 21:54:36 GMT -8
The rules as written also allow autofire into melee, using the same hit another target on a 1 rule. Does anyone else feel this is too lenient? I dont think the one is enough deterrant. Well, possibly because those aren't the rules as written? If you're firing a shotgun or on full auto, you have the chance to hit an innocent bystander on a 1 or 2 on the die. If the average guy has a d6 Shooting, that's a 33% chance of a miss hitting someone else. Of course, the core philosophy of the game is that you'll apply Setting Rules to evoke the particular feel of the campaign you want to run. If you want a game where far more "innocents" get shot, add in a Setting Rule that bystanders are hit on a 1-2 normally, 1-3 for autofire or shotguns. It's just that easy. ;-)
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on Jun 17, 2012 22:35:03 GMT -8
One general suggestion I tend to have for folks is that if you're coming of an existing fantasy game, you should probably try a few non-fantasy one-shot adventures (say, the free One Sheets off http://www.peginc.com) to get a feel for the rules.
Otherwise it tends to be a direct comparison of rules sets, and there's a fundamental difference between Savage Worlds (or most core systems) and D&D-style games that can be offputting for a direct changeover.
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on May 22, 2012 14:46:48 GMT -8
I hate to bring up an unfair common argument against GURPS, but at least for me, after a playing SW for a while, no matter what genre of game you play, it just feels like the same Savage Worlds. I think that's an endemic danger for all generic/core/modular systems. It's easy for a game to turn into "I bolt him," "9 body, 37 stun, 2 knockback" or "12 piercing to the face."* As much as the rules systems allow you to turn into that sort of slack descriptionist, it has be guarded against by both players and GMs. *It's been nearly twenty years since I've really played much GURPS, and I didn't realize that until I started typing. I suspect it shows...
|
|
jpk
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 58
|
Post by jpk on May 7, 2012 22:33:56 GMT -8
How could you have an all jungle planet? Freakishly efficient atmospheric convection could disperse the heat from the solar energy evenly across the surface of the planet.
If you feel that all your plant life has to have direct light, you could have a similar gas layer that absorbs the "raw" sunlight, becomes excited, and similarly distributes the "secondary" light across the planet. If you want to go really crazy, it could be efficient enough that there pretty much wasn't any effective light- or dark-side to the planet at all. Sadly, that would really screw with Lord Vader's plans.
Special bonus: you don't have to monkey with the planetary orbit mechanics at all to accomplish that.
|
|