I'm thinking of getting into Savage Worlds as a multi-genre rpg. Any thoughts?
I've tried GURPS and it's too crunchy. I've tried FATE Core and it's not crunchy enough. Where does Savage Worlds stand on the spectrum?
>>47253603
Savage Worlds is cool. GURPS want to get things right in terms of being realistic. Savage World wants to optimize for fun. But in terms of its mechanical outlook, it's fairly conventional, unlike Fate and it's narrativist approach to things, where the players have their hands in the meta-aspects of plot.
>>47253603
Cool, thanks.
The group at my LCG is open to new things, but they mostly do Pathfinder and 40k, so I think they'd number grind the shit out of GURPS and just shake their collective heads at Fate.
I'm thinking of springing a Weird West one-shot on them to see how they react to Savage Worlds.
Any weird quirks I should prepare for? The Bennies stuff and the Initiative Deck looked like they might take some adjustment.
>>47253811
Init deck can be removed easy, just roll a d12, 12 is an ace, it's close enough.
Benny management is kinda integral.
I like to strip out even more of the system, personally.
I can suggest getting the Savage Armory. It's a fanmade PDF with some rebalance in terms of weapons and armour but it also lets you and the players make new weapons and armor.
>>47253944
Looks good.
Anything like it for modern weapons?
>>47253603
>FATE
>too crunchy
I mean... it's not like you have to like it, but seriously, too crunchy?
>>47254787
Is English not your native language, or are you just American?
>>47254806
even Americans know what he wrote, probably not a native speaker.or a troll
>>47253603
savage worlds is a middle ground of both systems. it's really nice, though playing with grognards was a huge bitch.
>>47254770
I think it works for modern weapons as well. It provides some modifiers for them, such as higher cost and various qualities.
Been a while since I re-read it.
>>47253603
It sits probably just about where you want it to sit on the crunch spectrum.
>>47254895
I'll never understand why fiasco is grouped in there
>>47257503
Why not
>>47254787
>I mean... it's not like you have to like it, but seriously, too crunchy?
>>47253603
>I've tried FATE Core and it's not crunchy enough
Anyway ignoring your complete and utter failure to comprehend basic English, Fate Core has a weird habit of codifying and making rules for things that are wholly unnecessary and should just be intuitive parts of the game, and applying 'unique' terms to them that don't accurately portray their purpose and intentionally avoids calling things by what should be the most obvious terms. Turning what should be simple concepts into a convoluted mess.
I actually do like Fate Core but it didn't click for me until I found explanations of how the rules were supposed to work that cut out all the bullshit jargon.
