key mechanical elements for a cinematic/swashbuckling game

[Hypersmurf]

key mechanical elements for a cinematic/swashbuckling game?

1. Dinosaurs.
2. Pirates.
3. Ninjas.
4. Monkeys.
5. Robots.

-Hyp.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

1. Dinosaurs.
2. Pirates.
3. Ninjas.
4. Monkeys.
5. Robots.

-Hyp.

Yep. Low or no magic. Chase scenes. Chase scenes are really vital!

Mechanically, I've never quite been satisfied with anything D&D has to offer for this. Iron Heroes comes close (especially now that Adam Windsor has been tweaking the rules), but there's a lot of complex rules to get used to in that system.

 

[barsoomcore]

Chase scenes. Chase scenes are really vital!

Mechanically, I've never quite been satisfied with anything D&D has to offer for this.

May I humbly suggest Hot Pursuit: The Definitive d20 Guide to Chases?

Well, I just did.

 

[GlassJaw]

Mechanically, I've never quite been satisfied with anything D&D has to offer for this. Iron Heroes comes close (especially now that Adam Windsor has been tweaking the rules), but there's a lot of complex rules to get used to in that system.

For the record, Grim Tales would be the core ruleset I would use a game like this.

I've gained a newfound interest in Iron Heroes recently, especially after playing it at GenCon. Not sure I would run it as-is but there's definitely a lot of good stuff to steal from it to add some high-action flair to a game.

 

[Zoatebix]

Hong's Iron Heroes house rules look pretty darn cool. Let me see if I can scare up a link...
Here you go: http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/ih/

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I've been playing in a FATE system 1920s game. It has a pretty cool maneuvers system ... and fate points.

You start with 10 fate points, and you can spend them on things like action points. Two of the cooler things you can do are "make a declaration" and "inflict/tag an aspect".

My character, Duncan Dirk, is a private eye who got into a battle with four ninjas (it's pulpy, not all that serious). The battle took place on rafters over a theater. I spent a fate point to "make a declaration" that there was a huge upside down pot (the kind the three witches in Macbeth would tell fortunes around; we were putting on a production of Hamlet) so I could jump on it and gain bonuses. Other characters have done things like jump onto a character with a moving backpack. The system doesn't codify terrain all that much, which is good for GMs who have a hard time creating interesting maps (eg bars with chandeliers and other things to move on, with, around, under or through).

 

[NCSUCodeMonkey]

Action Points make it possible for players to offset or ignore those penalties and therefore they are more likely to try such actions. Likewise Swashbuckling Cards, many of which allow unorthodox actions without penalty (or even with a bonus: "Let The Wookie Win" gives a +10 bonus on an Intimidate check, which encourages a player to try and use a skill that generally gets little use).

Action points may work well if your players are really into making a swashbuckling fight scene, but IME they don't actually do much to help. I mean, if one of my players has to choose between swinging from a rope and using an action point to negate the penalty, or just attacking normally and getting +1d6 to make sure the attack succeeds, there's no contest. They'll go for the latter every time. For a swashbuckling game, maybe action points need to only work in combination with an outlandish description of your action. Something to, as barsoomcore said, encourage the swashing, rather than making it mechanically unattractive.

 

[barsoomcore]

I mean, if one of my players has to choose between swinging from a rope and using an action point to negate the penalty, or just attacking normally and getting +1d6 to make sure the attack succeeds, there's no contest.

Nor should there be, because what you just described is an anti-swashbuckling ruling.

MUCH better is saying, "If you swing on the rope, you get the bonus for charging."

If choosing the swashbuckly option is less good than the tedious, boring and unimaginative option, then you as a DM are failing to encourage swashbuckly play.

But part of running a swashbuckling game is having players who would rather look cool than maximize their effectiveness. Some players just don't want to buckle their swash, and nothing you do is going to change that.

 

[Hypersmurf]

... players who would rather look cool than maximize their effectiveness.

Is that the line fett's spinning to explain his ninja?

-Hyp.

 

[NCSUCodeMonkey]

Nor should there be, because what you just described is an anti-swashbuckling ruling.

MUCH better is saying, "If you swing on the rope, you get the bonus for charging."

If choosing the swashbuckly option is less good than the tedious, boring and unimaginative option, then you as a DM are failing to encourage swashbuckly play.

But part of running a swashbuckling game is having players who would rather look cool than maximize their effectiveness. Some players just don't want to buckle their swash, and nothing you do is going to change that.

I agree, which is why I find that action points don't generate that kind of action at the table. Much better if their dramatic action is guaranteed success or always provides some sort of bonus. Then the non-swashbuckly players are looking for inventive ways to gain cool bonuses.

You know, I've never actually thought about it from that direction before and it's given me some cool ideas. Too bad I have to work now.....