-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Savage Worlds
- Thread starter Mokona
- Start date
Derulbaskul
Adventurer
It's a fantastic system.
The issue of generic powers needs some attention. I would suggest using 4E's damage types as a start to creating customised powers.
It's my choice over 4E that's for sure.
The issue of generic powers needs some attention. I would suggest using 4E's damage types as a start to creating customised powers.
It's my choice over 4E that's for sure.
BeauNiddle
First Post
It's a great system for skills but I find it shallow on character creation and it (can) fall apart on some combats.
Base success is target number 4. You get a wild dice of d6 so even a beginner has a 2/3rds success rate - which is great. Since people succeed a lot they tend to try things a lot. Being better at a skill tends to give you more raises (an extra 4 over the target number) so you are flashier as you get better.
The problem with combat is your parry and toughness can be raised well past 4 and thus chances to be hit and hurt nosedive into the 'very unlikely' catagory very quickly. This relegates (high end) combat to a game of who can ace the dice first with virtually no skill involved. This can be avoided if you keep an eye on bonuses or if you use missle weapons (back to target number 4). The base system is generally okay but if you start including a lot of edges from different sources then a lot of them can give parry bonuses.
Character creation is limited by every tree only having two steps. You can be skilled in a number of things but you can never be an amazing expert in just one field. This tends to mean that characters get all the abilities they want about half way through their career and then are forced to 'waste' advances on spreading out.
All that said the rule system is brilliant if you want to include groups. Crews of boats, troops under your command, slaves you've just freed, etc. The rules are clear and simple and the battles seem to take the same amount of time regardless of the number of participents.
If you want to have a good SW game then make sure bennies are handed out often during the session. Since they can be used to block damage combat can get very irritating once they have run out (unless your players like death spirals).
I loved the system when I first played it and I'm happy to play it any time but I favour short 4-6 month campaigns with it rather than multi year epics I'm happy with in D20.
[N.B. the quick edge and the Jack of All Trades edge are both brilliant - take them if they are applicable!]
Base success is target number 4. You get a wild dice of d6 so even a beginner has a 2/3rds success rate - which is great. Since people succeed a lot they tend to try things a lot. Being better at a skill tends to give you more raises (an extra 4 over the target number) so you are flashier as you get better.
The problem with combat is your parry and toughness can be raised well past 4 and thus chances to be hit and hurt nosedive into the 'very unlikely' catagory very quickly. This relegates (high end) combat to a game of who can ace the dice first with virtually no skill involved. This can be avoided if you keep an eye on bonuses or if you use missle weapons (back to target number 4). The base system is generally okay but if you start including a lot of edges from different sources then a lot of them can give parry bonuses.
Character creation is limited by every tree only having two steps. You can be skilled in a number of things but you can never be an amazing expert in just one field. This tends to mean that characters get all the abilities they want about half way through their career and then are forced to 'waste' advances on spreading out.
All that said the rule system is brilliant if you want to include groups. Crews of boats, troops under your command, slaves you've just freed, etc. The rules are clear and simple and the battles seem to take the same amount of time regardless of the number of participents.
If you want to have a good SW game then make sure bennies are handed out often during the session. Since they can be used to block damage combat can get very irritating once they have run out (unless your players like death spirals).
I loved the system when I first played it and I'm happy to play it any time but I favour short 4-6 month campaigns with it rather than multi year epics I'm happy with in D20.
[N.B. the quick edge and the Jack of All Trades edge are both brilliant - take them if they are applicable!]
Protagonist
First Post
Asmor
First Post
That's funny, when 4th edition was announced I swore off 3e forever and went to Savage Worlds as my interim system.
So there you go, SW appeals to both 3tards and 4ons.This is actually mitigated a bit by the available equipment. More advanced settings with more protective armor also tend to have access to weapons which are more effective at punching through armor.
I do agree, though, that the numbers can get a little out of whack and slow down combat.
Hawke
Explorer
I really like SW for one-shots or short runs that are in non-fantasy worlds (not that they couldn't work in a D&D setting, I just would rather use D&D there).
I was first introduced to SW playing an Aliens game - we played as Marines storming a space ship that had went dark and fought a bunch of them. Really really fun. The system didn't get in the way of running exactly what we wanted and feeling like we had a fun night.
I just don't think it holds up over multiple sessions with the same characters (personally I'm a fan of leveling as a component of character growth)... but on the flip side that isn't something I'd want for a marines v. aliens world.
Definitely has a niche in my gaming.
I was first introduced to SW playing an Aliens game - we played as Marines storming a space ship that had went dark and fought a bunch of them. Really really fun. The system didn't get in the way of running exactly what we wanted and feeling like we had a fun night.
I just don't think it holds up over multiple sessions with the same characters (personally I'm a fan of leveling as a component of character growth)... but on the flip side that isn't something I'd want for a marines v. aliens world.
Definitely has a niche in my gaming.
Inferno!
Explorer
OMG! Thats the funniest thing I've read in a long time
I'm wiping away the tears of laughter as I type this. Maybe it should be called Jedi Knights of the Dinner Table
Last edited:
Asmor
First Post
As I said, I ran SW as an interim between 3e and 4e. I actually ran standard fantasy with it, and was quite happy with the experience.
I've also run Necropolis, which is basically a futuristic setting where the church is essentially a military, and the players are knights of the church fighting undead.
I really can't think of any genre the system wouldn't be able to do well.
To answer the OP, the Savage Worlds rules are awesome. I find them very easy to grasp and implement. I found myself doing about 90% less work GMing with SW than DMing d20.
I had Pirates of the Spanish Main but got rid of it. It did not have a plot point campaign, which is the real strength of the settings books to me. I've run Tour of Darkness (a weird Viet Nam War) and a little bit of Necropolis (a futuristic knights vs. undead). For some reason, SW has appealed to me for games with a military structure. Maybe it's the ease of the players running allied troops as extras. I would like to run Deadlands Reloaded or at least a Savage western, and I think the game could do Star Wars and Conan well. But, my players aren't interested in anything that ain't D&D. It's a shame, because I think SW is really a superior game in many ways.
And that's the "danger" of SW. It fairly ruined me other games, including d20; and I really loved d20.
I had Pirates of the Spanish Main but got rid of it. It did not have a plot point campaign, which is the real strength of the settings books to me. I've run Tour of Darkness (a weird Viet Nam War) and a little bit of Necropolis (a futuristic knights vs. undead). For some reason, SW has appealed to me for games with a military structure. Maybe it's the ease of the players running allied troops as extras. I would like to run Deadlands Reloaded or at least a Savage western, and I think the game could do Star Wars and Conan well. But, my players aren't interested in anything that ain't D&D. It's a shame, because I think SW is really a superior game in many ways.
And that's the "danger" of SW. It fairly ruined me other games, including d20; and I really loved d20.
Pepster
First Post
Savage Worlds is my system of choice to play and run. It's a toolkit meant to take the core book, add a setting book, and then you have a complete RPG. That doesn't mean you can't create your own setting, like my setting where all the heroes are 10-year-olds.
As for downsides to the system, it does seem that some of the skills are must-have skills. The notice skill has too much rolled up in it not to take it.
That said, I am way too lazy to learn six sets of mechanics to play six different RPG's. I can take the Explorer's Edition, add the setting tweaks and jump right in!
Pepster
As for downsides to the system, it does seem that some of the skills are must-have skills. The notice skill has too much rolled up in it not to take it.
That said, I am way too lazy to learn six sets of mechanics to play six different RPG's. I can take the Explorer's Edition, add the setting tweaks and jump right in!
Pepster
Similar Threads
