Sell me on Savage Worlds

[Retreater]

Where it breaks down for me is Combat, which is a horrible simulationist mess (particularly when guns get involved) that looks like something from the late 90's fantasy heatbreaker gun porn. Overly complex and detailed weapon tables (and stats) and many combat options like autofire, 3 round burst, rapid attack, area attacks etc are needlessly complex (when you take into account the simplicity

And my negative view is largely because of this. I was running the Rifts setting, which is probably the most equipment driven setting on the system.
The only real issue I had with the core fantasy system was the swingyness of combat. We converted a D&D campaign to SW, had a TPK, and that was the end.

 

[MGibster]

And my negative view is largely because of this. I was running the Rifts setting, which is probably the most equipment driven setting on the system.

Rifts is really, really bad in that regard. I ran one Rifts campaign and probably won't ever run another one.

 

[Retreater]

Rifts is really, really bad in that regard. I ran one Rifts campaign and probably won't ever run another one.

Yeah. It was definitely a trial by fire for me to try to GM my first SW game, also for 6 players (5 of whom were completely new to SW).

 

[Flamestrike]

Rifts is really, really bad in that regard. I ran one Rifts campaign and probably won't ever run another one.

Im hearing you.

The interplay of rail guns + autofire, lead to multiple attempts to soak on a single turn from some PCs, presuming they even had the Bennies for it (which they often didnt even if you were throwing them around like candy), and a ton of PCs getting turned into pink mist.

I managed to 'fix' it by changing the way autofire worked (you can either spray an area with a burst making it an area attack potentially affecting multiple targets, or you can hammer a single target with multiple shots inflicting an extra dice of damage). Whichever option you chose, the burst was resolved via a single attack roll with the -2 autofire penalty.

I removed 3RB and ROF and weapons were redone as either Auto, Single shot or Semi auto.

Made it a lot smoother, but then we still had to deal with multiple actions, the quickness power, two weapons (or more) etc. To fix that I had to basically limit each turn to 3 actions (before SWADE did this officially), and amend a lot of Powers and Edges that added extra actions (instead having those powers reduce the MAP).

My next step was going to be giving all weapons a simple fixed damage value that is added to 1d6 (you get an extra d6 for a raise) for damage to speed that up as well, and removing AP entirely.

Then I tweaked how Soaking works by adding an extra wound level (4 wounds = dead), and tallying all wounds a PC gets in a pool for the turn (and applying them at the end of the turn) stopping counting when the PC reaches 4 wounds (and dead), and disregarding any extras. At that point the PC Rolls to Soak (instead of after each hit that turn). You still need a Bennie, and for each success you can soak a wound you took that turn.

If you took 4 wounds in a single turn you're dead unless you can soak at least one at the end of that turn (meaning you're only incapacitated) Soaking two wounds leaves you with 2 (-2) soaking 3 leaves you with 1 wound etc.

At that point it was running a lot smoother, but I kind of just lost the love for it I had at the beginning.

Really, the system would run a LOT better with a handful of generic weapons with basic stats; like a single weapon called a 'Firearm' with nothing more than a basic two ranges (short and long at -2) and a single fixed damage value (that is added to a d6), and room for one or two traits (autofire, long range, concealable, large calibre, silenced, accurate etc) that you can pick from a list.

 

[dbm]

It’s definitely fair to say that Savage Rifts is the toughest ‘on ramp’ for Savage Worlds. It has often been a criticism of SW that ‘it can’t do high powered games’ and Savage Rifts was possibly one of those attempts at showing what can be done with a bit (fair bit) of customisation.

Having played a few campaigns in the past using the Explorer edition I previously found the game a little too thin, but with the Adventure Edition it is a really well featured system in the core and you can do a lot with it. I’ve been running a weekly game of SWADE using The Last Parsec sci-if campaign over the last ten months or so. It’s been great fun and really easy to GM. Another of the fringe benefits of the system is excellent VTT support.

It is true to say that generic systems have their own flavour which accompanies any game you run with them. For SWADE that flavour is ‘pulp action’ and since that is the type of game I like to run it’s a good thing from my personal perspective.

 

[innerdude]

So, comments on combat ---

I've mostly played fantasy campaigns in Savage Worlds. The two campaigns that weren't fantasy were the War of the Dead / zombie apocalypse, and a very short-lived cyberpunk campaign.

I don't recall there being a huge issue with the gunfire / modern weaponry rules in the two non-fantasy campaigns, but then we weren't playing Rifts.

Savage Worlds combat is probably similar to D&D 4e combat in some respects, in that it works best when the players are really looking to "hook" into the rules and build advantages for the whole party.

It's really not designed to play like a D&D 1e fighter---"I swing my sword, I hit, subtract 19 hit points"---even if you envision your character concept as something akin to a D&D fighter. Even your basic "fighter" style character in Savage Worlds has more options/decision points per round available to them than your typical D&D fighter.

To work well, players need to understand the rules, how certain edges (read: feats) interact together, how each combatant contributes to the greater whole. And because it doesn't resemble D&D, it's not something that D&D players will intuit through play immediately. It takes practice and teamwork to really make it shine.

If your players aren't invested in really digging in to the group dynamics/interplay of combat, it's going to be a rough go.

And truthfully . . . like any game, the dice have a lot to do with it. An off night on your players' dice can become a bit of a slog for sure.

 

[Aldarc]

Combat also involves way too much math for mine. At its simplest, you roll your appropriate skill dice vs TN 4 (modifed by range and other penalties), tally up raises (every 4 you rolled over what you needed to hit), roll damage (affected by raises) on multiple dice (that all explode), subtract THAT result from the Armor Value and Toughness of your target (less the armor piercing value of your weapon or attack) and then divide that number by 4 to see how many wounds you inflict.

Personally, the game would run a lot better for me if they stripped all that Combat and equipment crap out, and streamlined and abstracted combat a ton more.

Agreed. I'm not really a fan of systems or games that are into almost needless "equipment porn." It seems to run contrary to the spirit of the rest of the game.

 

[Flamestrike]

Agreed. I'm not really a fan of systems or games that are into almost needless "equipment porn." It seems to run contrary to the spirit of the rest of the game.

Totally agree.

The game is advertised as 'fast, furious' fun' and that simulationist gun porn is anything but.

They nail the traits, attributes, edges and skills, and the base mechanic is good (and mathematically sound barring some wonkiness with the d4). Easy to learn, fast in play, simple and abstract to cover multi-gene stuff.

Best base platform for a multi-genre RPG I've seen in fact (GURPS, Hero etc). Does everything those systems do without a laborious 'point buy' slog to get started, and without being littered with trap options and obsolete abilities and attributes.

But then (other than the initiative system which is cool) the rest of the combat and equipment section just ruins it, and the Powers section (while on the right track) lets it down as well with some poorly thought out mechanics like round by round PP expenditure for maintenance (instead of just making powers last 'per encounter' and just cost X and do Y [or Z] on a raise) and some powers that are just blatantly OP.

It's one of the weirdest and most jarring disconnects between mechanics and styles I've seen in a RPG.

 

[dbm]

round by round PP expenditure for maintenance

I’m not sure what you are thinking of, here? Certainly in SWADE a power can be maintained for it’s base duration by spending a single power point. Most powers last five turns, so 1 PP gets you another five. And few fights last longer than five or ten turns in my experience.
I guess everyone has a different sweet spot. I find that Savage Worlds has a really nice level of crunch which keeps the gameplay interesting without descending into the level of minutia that GURPS does, for example.

 

[innerdude]

I will admit that Savage Worlds' combat isn't perfect, but I'm going to defend it for a bit here.

In terms of "mathiness", it's a slight increase in contextual adjudication above 5e. It's certainly less "math-y" than D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, or 4e.

I said it before, if the players aren't willing to dig in to the rules and really get a handle on the action / resolution feedback loop, combat can devolve into a slog. It's not about the raw addition/subtraction of the numbers; it's the ability of the players to conceive what the numbers are doing and how they maximize their results working as a team.

In my experience (again), it's the D&D players that struggle the most. They're either used to just doing simple attack actions and subtracting hit points, or just saying, "I activate ability/spell X" and expecting the GM to adjudicate the result. If you're playing Savage Worlds this way, you're doing it wrong, and missing out on the real fun that can be had in participating in its tactical play.

One of the awesome things about Savage Worlds combat is that all fighting options are viable. Ranged, two-weapon, single "large" weapon, unarmed, duelist/fencing, etc. No matter how you envision your character working mechanically in combat, you can always play to those strengths, and have your character be effective at it.