Tell me about Savage Worlds

[Rel]

I'm guessing the OP has long since formed any opinions. But I'll chime in to say that Savage Worlds is my system of choice these days. I find that it completely lives up to the Fast, Furious, Fun billing.

The campaign I'm currently running contains some rather strange elements and I'm continually surprised at how easy it is for me to translate these into game mechanics.

 

[MacMathan]

Wanted to add in how much I love this system.

It is so easy to GM. It is a great break from 3.5/4e for me (which I still love btw). Totally different feel than 3.5/4e and I think that variety keeps me from getting burned on any one system.

Some points of difference that I have found enjoyable:

1. It does not require maps or even minis.

2. The combats go really fast for my group.

3. There are so many ways to tweak the base rules with settings.

4. I have found that by pulling rules from a variety of settings that I can get a very specific to taste flavor for my group.

5. The cost! So low to pick up a lot of great stuff.

I am currently running a derivation of Darwin's World with some Fallout mixed in.

 

[Accursed]

I've recently started a game with SW and while I am truly enjoying it, I do find there are some issues. Starting characters are wusses, they need to be babied - a lot.

For those used to D&D style RPGing, the wound system is an adjustment, to say the least.

Also the explorers edition rulebook leaves a lot to be desired. The layout is obtuse and explanations lacking, even headache provoking. That said, having briefly seen a PDF copy of the Deluxe rulebook, I think they've solved that issue.

 

[Greg K]

I've recently started a game with SW and while I am truly enjoying it, I do find there are some issues. Starting characters are wusses, they need to be babied - a lot.

What makes you think that they need to be babied? What issues have arisen that led you to this conclusion?

 

[amerigoV]

Starting characters are wusses, they need to be babied - a lot.

For those used to D&D style RPGing, the wound system is an adjustment, to say the least.

Interesting - are you comparing to 4e or earlier version of D&D? Given prior to 4e that most first level D&D parties are at risk of a TPK from a herd of cats, that statement surprises me. SW from what I have seen plays from "good to great" vs. old D&D "farmboy to demigod" range - say L3-L10 in pre-4e D&D.

I'd be curious to know what the opposition was that created your impression.

 

[Votan]

Interesting - are you comparing to 4e or earlier version of D&D? Given prior to 4e that most first level D&D parties are at risk of a TPK from a herd of cats, that statement surprises me. SW from what I have seen plays from "good to great" vs. old D&D "farmboy to demigod" range - say L3-L10 in pre-4e D&D.

I'd be curious to know what the opposition was that created your impression.

Agreed. 4E characters are almost unkillable. But in AD&D (1E) not dying at negative hit points was an optional rule. It was quite possible for the toughest of first level Magic Users (16+ constitution) to have d4+2 hit points and be subject to instant death from an arrow, a spear or a longsword.

Even a first level Fighter could have a 12 Con and then roll 1 hit point . . .

 

[OpsKT]

Alright, for quite a while I've been hearing a lot of people talk about how great Savage Worlds is. I'm curious about it because I'm tired of 4E. Everything takes too long. Combat, turns, everything.

So I'm asking for some info on Savage Worlds. Just how Fast and Furious is it? Could it be used for a lunchtime campaign? How many encounters could I fit in in an hour?

What are the strong points and weak points of the system?
Thanks in advance.
Josh

Being that the guy below necro'd your post, I doubt you're still reading but if you haven't already tried it, here is another vote for DOOOOOO IIIIITTTTTTTTT!!!

Savage Worlds kinda sucks honestly. I probably one of the worst systems Ive ever played.
With that being said I think if you are a good enough DM you can make it work.
The game can work if you are allowing non-setting specific edges to be used.

You forgot, in your opinion. You necro'd the post for this little data? And the core book is FULL of non-setting specific edges. Is your DM (or you) daft or something?

Im playing in a deadlands campaign right now thats been going on for nearly three years off and on. And the game simply doesnt work. Unless you are a character that uses shooting.
Ive found that the biggest weakness of the game is that it is focused on ONE type of character. Especially if you are only allowing a very limited set of books.

I don't think you guys have actually read the book. Deadlands has a LOT of different character types.

I actually find combat takes longer than d20. Yesterdays game for instance took over two hours. Ive never had a combat take longer than 45 minutes in any system.

I've never had a d20 game of any type but Star Wars Saga have a combat that lasted LESS than one hour. Too many options, too many Hit Points! Where in contrast, my combats for Savage Worlds and World of Darkness are both 1/2 hour or less, always.

Did you guys not realize that a raise on damage (vs Toughness) results in a Wound and the enemy is down? Only wild card NPCs get the full three wounds. Savage Worlds has an up, down, and off the table philosophy of combat.

Or, was no one able to do enough damage to get over toughness, or did you forget to focus fire so that one team member could shake the target, and the next could wound?

It sounds like you really did not understand the wound system.

In my honest opinion it seems to be at its core a light game, thats not good at lasting longer than a few hours tops, and is made for those new to Role playing games. Its really not for advanced players, who will get frustrated at the lack of depth and customization.

That's funny, I think v3.5, Pathfinder, and 4e have the lack of depth and customization. Almost every feat is based on combat. Every power. And it forces you into classes! What is more of a straight jacket than a class? Savage Worlds has no classes, if you want to be a spell casting swashbuckling swordsman, you can be! Rich bastard with no real skills whatsoever but the ability to throw money at a problem? You can do that!

 

[Eric Tolle]

That's funny, I think v3.5, Pathfinder, and 4e have the lack of depth and customization. Almost every feat is based on combat. Every power. And it forces you into classes! What is more of a straight jacket than a class?

A system that due to limited attribute points and edges, forces characters to specialize in order to be effective?

In AD&D if I wanted my fighter to be intelligent and charismatic as well a being a good fighter, it was simply a matter of rolling well. In Savage Worlds, that requires assigning points away from the attributes and edges that make one an effective fighter.

Of course one can always get a couple extra edges by taking flaws. I really truly hate systems where in order to be competent you have to post a "screw me over GM" sign to the character's back.

Savage Worlds has no classes, if you want to be a spell casting swashbuckling swordsman, you can be!

At the cost of being ineffective at both roles. The limited number of edges and attribute points available, plus the importance of edges means that specialization is pretty much required.

And as long as you mentioned spellcasting, let's talk about the magic system, which is evidently designed for those people who disliked all the flexibility and options in 4E. You start off with three incredibly generic weak powers, along the lines of "magic missile that's not as good as a handgun", or "magic mail armor" You are then stuck with those three powers for the next however many game sessions until you can buy a new power. Joy. Admittedly I'm biased in that I usually like to play mages, but if my character is going to be restricted to being magical field artillery, he should at least be effective artillery. But at least I'm not as bad off as the poor sod who decides to play a mad scientist.

Savage Worlds seems pretty well designed for one particular style of games- pulp style ones where an investigation leads to a quick and lethal yet detailed combat. It doesn't seem much good for other styles of game. If I were to go for a simple system, I'd rather use a much more flexible system like PDQ# or FATE 3rd edition.

 

[nnms]

My initial forays into Savage Worlds leads me to a very different conclusion. My friend played a generalist and did just fine. I think the highest thing on his character sheet was a d8. And another character had the young/child disadvantage which just cut his stat and skill points by a third. We were playing a Call of Cthulhu type game with the gritty damage rules from the Deluxe PDF. The balance recommendation on page 123 worked perfectly for me.

Hindrances that you would find onerous if the GM actually used them in play should not be taken. Edges and Hindrances are "flags" for the GM that scream "please include this in play-- I found it interesting enough to pick it, so please have it be part of the game!". If you are taking Hindrances merely to increase the power of your character, I think you may have missed the point. A GM using your hindrances in play isn't screwing with you, the GM is simply giving you what you picked.

Savage Worlds is a traditional game that answers simple task based questions that most RPG systems answer: "Did I succeed?" and "How well?" The idea that you can only do pulp style investigation-leading-to-combat games with that is a bit silly.

 

[nnms]

And as long as you mentioned spellcasting, let's talk about the magic system, which is evidently designed for those people who disliked all the flexibility and options in 4E. You start off with three incredibly generic weak powers, along the lines of "magic missile that's not as good as a handgun", or "magic mail armor" You are then stuck with those three powers for the next however many game sessions until you can buy a new power. Joy. Admittedly I'm biased in that I usually like to play mages, but if my character is going to be restricted to being magical field artillery, he should at least be effective artillery.

Savage Worlds characters do not start as strong as beginning 4E characters. The very, very first thing I did when I got the Savage Worlds book was to make one of my D&D characters. I didn't have enough money to get him the equipment he had. And while he had some neat abilities, he certainly did not have the variety of powers that you start with in 4E. I'm thinking a starting Wizard in Savage Worlds is not analogous to a 4E wizard, but to the wizard in earlier editions of D&D. 4E characters start out as heroes, so why would you compare them to novices?

The probably the most potent starting character I've seen in Savage Worlds was a theif-mage with confusion magic. I believe he could also walk on walls and read minds.