Tell me about Savage Worlds

[Philotomy Jurament]

Savage Worlds kinda sucks honestly. I probably one of the worst systems Ive ever played.

While I wouldn't go that far, I do agree that all the love Savage Worlds gets mystifies me. When I was growing dissatisfied with 3e and looking at other systems I gave Savage Worlds a try. It just never clicked for me. On the plus side, it's inexpensive.

For a lunchtime game I'd say Savage Worlds is still a bit heavy. I'd probably look at something like Tunnels & Trolls.

 

[Sadrik]

It is different, if you have a D&D only player base they will not enjoy breaking out of the mold. If they are currently as dissatisfied as you sound it may be a little easier transition. It has a lot of feel of the d20 system with characters picking "edges" which are similar"Feats and Features". The big change is the damage system, you cannot jump off of 40' cliffs like in D&D. Things have an element of danger even lowly creatures. This is a huge change, and it is much more gritty. I would say try something other than fantasy at first. Start with cowboys, sci-fi or modern.

That said it is one of the best role playing games I have played. It scales very well with "grid" play and "non-grid" play, If you only have an hour to play you could probably get one good sized grid combat in or two smaller ones. Without the grid you could get more in.

One of the best part of the game imho is the open world campaign setting structures that they use in their settings. Just awesome. It also is an easy game to grab anything that you want to play and just convert even on the fly (I have done this with D&D modules). Really opens up the imagination... Good luck and have fun.

 

[Connallmac]

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.
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 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.
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.

I respect that you don't like SW, but honestly if it takes two hours for your group to get through one combat, it must have been a huge battle with numerous combatants on both sides or your group must be doing something incorrectly. Last month I playtested the SWs game I will be running at GenCon and in three hours and fifteen minutes I got through three full combats and a fair amount of role playing. None of these players had much experience with SW, no more than three or four previous sessions over the course of the last year and a half.

 

[BluSponge]

Savage Worlds kinda sucks honestly. I probably one of the worst systems Ive ever played.

Wow! Your experience with SW is the polar opposite of mine. Sorry it didn't work out for you.

And the game simply doesnt work. Unless you are a character that uses shooting.

I'll be sure to let the combat monster swordsman in my Solomon Kane game know this. Obviously, we're doing something wrong as he doesn't have shooting and is more than capable in combat.

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.

Ok, sorry but, red flag! Really, in any given SW game, you should be allowing, in general, 2 books (3 in the case of Deadlands now): the core rule book and the setting book. Of course, you can add whatever you want, but when you start mentioning limiting the number of books for players, it just sounds odd to me. Just what books is your GM allowing in this Deadlands game?

Tom

 

[tenkar]

I picked up the new Deluxe rules in PDF and I find them better organized then the previous edition. I also have a hard time "grokking it" coming from my AD&D roots, but I got to sit in on a session and it helped a lot come together. I still need to fully grasp the use of "powers". That hasn't come together as fast for me.

Tunnels & Trolls is ALWAYS an excellent choice

 

[Walking Dad]

Savage Worlds kinda sucks honestly. I probably one of the worst systems Ive ever played.

You resurrected a thread over a year old just for that? Doubt the OP still needs input...

With that being said I think if you are a good enough DM you can make it work.

A good DM can make work everything (maybe not FATAL...)

The game can work if you are allowing non-setting specific edges to be used.

Which I do
The edges in the other books are all in addition to the ones in the core book.

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.

Can you evaluate a bit?

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.

Does your group uses all available tactics, Test of Wills etc.?

BTW, we had many combats lasting longer than 45 min in our 3.X D&D game.

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.

I have seen long discussions if Savage Worlds is to much a toolkit for all the possible customization...
Take a look at the Setting Rules in the Deluxe edition or the Companions for example. I think it has much more depth than you give credit for. For advanced players, I wait for an answer to my above question...

 

[amerigoV]

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.

Sorry it did not work out for you. Everything you listed in your post is the complete opposite of my experience. I ran the Wild Hunt (the FreeRPG offering) yesterday for 3 people completely new to Savage Worlds, classic D&Der types. The 4th played in a Ravenloft campaign that I ran using SW who is also mostly a D&Der.

We rocked through it in about 4 hours with great roleplay and the system not getting in the way of what people were doing. One woman was completely engrossed into the trappings of a psionist, another guy ran the kid and was pulling all sorts of descriptive tricks. The 4e guy enjoyed the game. While he thought it might be more one-shot-ish in nature, he did admit there is no way they would have gotten through as much material using 4e. The woman that has run with me in the past enjoyed playing a completely different role and pulled it off great (she ran a not quite all there person into the occult - at one point she "interviewed" a zombie as a smarts trick, resulting in a raise and Shaken result - funny and somehow appropriate for the adventure).

We have "just show up on game night" people and they enjoy the system. I, on the other hand, am a system mastery and powergamer guy and I love the system. Overall, there is much more there than meets the eye. While it can run more simplistically, there is significant depth to the system without having to buy $500 in crunchy player supplements (honestly, if you need 600 pages of rulebooks to explain your system, you just are not doing it right IMO).

 

[Greg K]

Savage Worlds kinda sucks honestly. I probably one of the worst systems Ive ever played.

I have played over 100 and it is , in my opinion, one of the best that I have played.

With that being said I think if you are a good enough DM you can make it work.

A good DM can make any game work even if they have to rewrite it. A poor DM can make the best games suck.

The game can work if you are allowing non-setting specific edges to be used.

Really? The people at PEG would beg to differ. SW is not a universal system. Not every setting specific edge is appropriate or works for every setting. That said, for unarmed fighters, the game could use some additional edges for some settings (there is the free Modern Martial Arts by Clint Black) and there are some edges out there that will work in multiple settings.

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.

Ok, I don't play Deadlands, but this is not my experience with SW. As asked by others, are you using Test of Wills and Tricks? Is your GM rewarding bennies throughout the game for doing cool things, when you play your drawbacks, etc?

Especially if you are only allowing a very limited set of books.

Read my post above and that of Blu Sponge. The idea is that most of the edges in the main book will be appropriate and, then, you add or subtract based on the setting. If you start allowing edges from another published setting, you need to understand the other setting and be selective about what you allow or you risk allowing edges that will imbalance the game.

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 have never had a combat take more than 15 minutes with 4 players and the GM. And others here have stated that they have not had a combat take nearly that long.

Sounds like your GM doesn't understand the rules or is setting toughness to high or the players are not using the options available.

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

It falls between rules light and rules medium. My typical sessions ran 3-4 hours. I took a year break from running any rpgs.

'

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.

I have been playing since 1979 or 1980. I have played close to 100 rpgs if not more. I enjoy games like Rolemaster, d20, d20Modern, Mutants and Masterminds and used to enjoy GURPS and Hero (dislike both, because I came to dislike roll under systems). As mentioned above, SW rates among my top two games (the other being M&M 2e).

One of my players started in the 1980's. Others have been playing anywhere from 3-10 years.

As for customization, I get more customization in terms of skills than 4e and while 3e and 4e have more feats, In my opinion, edges are handled much better than 3e or 4e feats.

 

[Bagpuss]

All-but demands minis and a battle map (though you don't need grid/hex, you can just use a tape measure). You can do it in a more narrative style, but it doesn't come easily.

Curious about this as the only times I've played it has been at conventions without a map, and I didn't feel a need.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Curious about this as the only times I've played it has been at conventions without a map, and I didn't feel a need.

Caveat - I made that post over a year ago when I was much less experienced with the system. I would qualify it a lot more now. This ain't 4E D&D; not every combat action revolves around the 1" grid.

Explanation:
The game uses a number of Templates to determine areas of effect (Small Burst, Medium Burst, Large Burst, and Cone) - these templates have no stated size in the rules, so you either place them carefully on a table top or guesstimate in a narrative style. The newest version of the rules, Savage Worlds Deluxe, includes a quick guideline on using templates without a map - 1d3 guys in a Small burst, 2d4 in a Medium burst or Cone, and 2d6 in a Large burst.
Another issue is that all measures are provided in Inches for tabletop use - each inch is 2 yards, but that's still math that has to be done if playing without minis.
One more issue is the large potential number of combatants on each side. Keeping track of sixty or more combatants without some sort of representation is incredibly taxing.
Finally, there is the importance of terrain. Cover, concealment, difficult terrain, and lines of sight are all huge factors. You can ignore them, for ease of no-miniatures play, but that makes the game a lot more dangerous for the PCs, and greatly reduces the tactical options available (making combat a lot duller).

A good Game Master doesn't need miniatures for Savage Worlds. But they help, a lot. And a bad GM without miniatures is a recipe for extreme player frustration.