Experience with Grim Tales

[Boddha]

I'm thinking of getting Grim Tales but would like to hear from others who have played using the rules, especially the magic.
Would it work with the generic classes from Unearthed Arcana?
Also I'm using Ken Hoods Grim 'n Gritty combat system at the moment, am I right in presuming it should work with GT?

Any advice/opinions/warning would be great.

Thanks.

 

[Turanil]

Would it work with the generic classes from Unearthed Arcana?

I don't think it would be so great. GT magic relies on talents, made for the d20 Modern style of classes. You could turn them into feat, but even like this, it wouldn't work so well. Of course you could take the Wizard generic class, suppress its normal spellcasting, and replace with GT spellcasting given as special abilities in additon to their bonus feats. Well, it's workable, but is buying Grim Tales just for that, so interesting?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm thinking of getting Grim Tales but would like to hear from others who have played using the rules, especially the magic.
Would it work with the generic classes from Unearthed Arcana?
Also I'm using Ken Hoods Grim 'n Gritty combat system at the moment, am I right in presuming it should work with GT?

I would say, if you definitely and specifically want to use UA and Grim n' Gritty, then you don't want to get Grim Tales.

On the other hand, if what you want is a ruleset to do what UA and GnG do for your game, without having to cobble it together, then Grim Tales is the better choice.

Basically if you have Grim Tales you won't need to bolt on UA and GnG. If you want to bolt on UA and GnG to something, then bolt them onto standard D&D and forego Grim Tales.


Wulf

 

[GlassJaw]

One of the things I like about GT so much is that you only need ONE book. If you are interested in a low-magic campaign, everything you and your players needs is contained therein. If you want to run a low-magic D&D game, you have to hack it apart and pull in material from different sources. GT eliminates all that.

Even if you don't go with the GT ruleset, it's still a great resource, if for nothing else than the magic system. Then there is the CR/EL calculation, the creature building guide, and the horror/insanity system. These are all usable in any campaign.

 

[Maester Luwin]

Also UA gives you 4 basic classes whereas GT gives you 6. The magic system is great (completely controled by the dm). The combat can be made very "Gritty" if you want by decreasing Massive Damage Threshold & other rules. I would recommend Grim Tales overall! Thanks Maester Luwin

 

[Fenris]

I would say, if you definitely and specifically want to use UA and Grim n' Gritty, then you don't want to get Grim Tales.

On the other hand, if what you want is a ruleset to do what UA and GnG do for your game, without having to cobble it together, then Grim Tales is the better choice.

Basically if you have Grim Tales you won't need to bolt on UA and GnG. If you want to bolt on UA and GnG to something, then bolt them onto standard D&D and forego Grim Tales.


Wulf

Wulf,
Could I ask for more elaboration on this? I was planning on using the revised GnG rules with Grim Tales for one of my games (Would that be Grim and Gritty Tales ) as the combat system. Everything else would be Grim Tales. Part of this is experimenting with interesting systems. I have a second game that will start earlier that is straight GT so I may see the lower MDT. etc in action there. Not having seen it in play (yet-soon!) I can't yet forsee how GT combat will go (other than the narratives that have been provided).

So mechanical issues, efficiency issues or just too darn grim?

(Not that Grim Tales needs any bolt ons per se, but I think those persons who like to tweak things are drawn to Grim Tales because many of the things they would have like to bolt on are already there)

Thanks

 

[Boddha]

Not Definite on what I want to use, but the magic system from GT seems to be what I want, not having access to a copy I'm unable to preview it so thought I'd get some opinions.

I prefer GnG mainly because I don't like Hit Points overly much, maybe it's just a carry over from Cyberpunk.

I'm intending to run the campaign in the warhammer world and what I've read of GT (reviews and the like) seems to indicate that the right "feel" would be achievable with it.

Thanks.

 

[Turanil]

GT magic basically runs like this:

1) To cast a spell you must know a spell. To know a spell you must have learned it through the use of the Spellcraft skill. Anyone who can get Spellcraft ranks has the potential for learning a spell, independant from his class (spellcaster or not).

2) Default caster level = 0 when you just know a spell and nothing else. To cast you must succeed a caster check equal to 10 + spell level (if I recall correctly). The spell is cast either at your caster level or the level of the spell, whichever is greater.

3) Casting a spell draws on your life force. When you cast a spell you roll 1d6 per level of the spell (this is called "spell-burn"). This is the number of temporary Con points of damage you suffer. These lost points come back as normal through rest.

4) Magical Adept: the character takes a talent (you could make a feat of it) that gives him two things: Caster level of 1, and then Spell-burn resistance equal to his Int modifier (or Wis modifier if he chose Divine spells). Now, when casting a spell the spell burn temporary damage is applied to Strength instead of Constitution; you substract your Int modifier from each d6 of spell-burn rolled. There is noetheless a trick in that a 1 cannot be reduced, so if you have Spell-burn resistance of 4, roll 3d6 of spell-burn and obtain 2, 1, 3, yo still suffer 1 point of temporary Str damage.

5) Improved Magical Adept: each time you take this talent you augment your caster level by +1.

Hope you now understand how basically works GT low magic.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Wulf,
Could I ask for more elaboration on this? I was planning on using the revised GnG rules with Grim Tales for one of my games (Would that be Grim and Gritty Tales ) as the combat system. Not having seen it in play (yet-soon!) I can't yet forsee how GT combat will go (other than the narratives that have been provided).

So mechanical issues, efficiency issues or just too darn grim?

All of the above. I think GnG is overly complex for a game.

Also remember that by default GT is meant to be low magic, high adventure. GnG would be low magic, low adventure-- it's just very grim.

GT plays like a movie.

GnG plays like real life.

Decide what you want to play, and go with the system that works best for what you want to do.

Of course, GT is tweakable to be more grim and gritty; and as long as the end result is the same (a healthy fear of combat) then I personally don't believe in overcomplicating the ruleset. That's just a personal approach to design-- I almost always default to the easiest method (and find that it is also usually the best for enjoyment of the story over the mechanics).

I am sure you could find a narrativist/gamist/simulationist argument in there without trying too hard.

Wulf

 

[Fenris]

All of the above. I think GnG is overly complex for a game.

Also remember that by default GT is meant to be low magic, high adventure. GnG would be low magic, low adventure-- it's just very grim.

GT plays like a movie.

GnG plays like real life.

Decide what you want to play, and go with the system that works best for what you want to do.

Of course, GT is tweakable to be more grim and gritty; and as long as the end result is the same (a healthy fear of combat) then I personally don't believe in overcomplicating the ruleset. That's just a personal approach to design-- I almost always default to the easiest method (and find that it is also usually the best for enjoyment of the story over the mechanics).

I am sure you could find a narrativist/gamist/simulationist argument in there without trying too hard.

Wulf

Thanks Wulf. Having still not seen GT in play I forget. My big problem had always been that removing hit points really hurts the tough hero's schtick.

But adventure is the fun part so why minimize it.

Thanks again for the grounding.