>>47259794
Savage Worlds does pretty much everything I want. Easy system, fast combat, reroll mechanics, etc. It's simple to work with and you can run just about anything with minimal effort.

Im putting together a game od Ops and Tactics right now. I mean its generally a system for modern combat but it has some great melee rules too. I could see using it for everything from medieval to future combat.

My game is a bit like shadowrun with less crunch and none of shadowruns fluff ( i hate shadowruns left leaning nature). There is magic and cybernetics with rules in the splat book for it, as well as being friendly for new players and dms.

>>47259932
Quick question, though.
Do they expect people to use 3.5 monsters?

>>47259830
I don't like drawing cards

>>47260087
This, gets slider sauce everywhere.

>>47260087
Then use a different initiative system. They list some variants in the book.

>>47260033
I dont think so, mean youd have to convert them. At that point might as well make you own. Theres enemies in the modern magicka book that are more fantasy and normal enemies in the core book. But i mean their might not be as much as youd like, really wouldent be that hard to create your own.

>>47259830

OP here, I agree. Part of my issue iwth Savage Worlds is that it lacks meatier combat. Either make all solo encounters wild cards, or deal with one-hit monsters? Nah, I'd like Wounds to be a stat, mooks have 1, characters have 4, and monster have 3 to 5 or maybe a bit more, so you can have more drawn out battles. Also limit the exploding dice.

What niche(s) do you think are unfilled by a generic system? GURPS is good for rules heavy "realism", Savage Worlds is good for rules medium pulp, d20 is good for rules heavy heroicness, FATE is good for narrative stuff... any generic systems you'd want to see?

>>47260556
Thx, bro

>>47260811
Generic horror with pick and choose shock tables.