An Issue of Tone...

I've been silent for a while. Part of it is chaotic home life. Part of it is I am still developing Starpunk, now for SWADE. I'm having difficulty gauging how silly I want to make it (leading me to create the meme above.

I'm leaning somewhere between Star Wars Holiday Special and Lilo and Stitch. Honestly, the games usually end up like Stitch, but I have had a few players that want something more "serious". When I do, they still end up playing Stitch.

I'm mulling over publishing Starpunk. I'll need to scrub it. I began this setting using Daring Tales of the Space Lanes. I'll need to scrub out anything that plagiarizes his work.

Savage Worlds Edition Wars?

The sneak peaks of Savage Worlds Adventure Edition have me cautiously enthused. But I drank the Kool-Aid and bought into the Kickstarter. I love Savage Worlds, but that doesn't mean I think it can do no wrong.

I am very under-excited about the skill changes. I have a homebrew skill list and I will likely continue to use it, but the problems I had with the Deluxe skill list are not fixed with the new one. It's just that Adventure Edition is now more of a departure from my list than Deluxe Edition.

I'm on the fence about dropping Charisma. Since it is now based on Edges and we haven't seen those yet, I will wait until I have my copy to review.

As for the new Suppressive Fire rules: Am I the only one that thought the old rule was fine? I think the new rule adds more unnecessary complication than before.

I do like the new Status rules as well as the flat 3 action limit. That, imho, has actually made the game more F!F!F!

And the new Chase rules? Hmmm. I was quite a bit confused on my read through. Granted, it's only a snippet of the rules and I plan on running it a few times just to see how it feels but my first impression is that it's just like the Explorer's Edition Chase rules although there is a layer of complication that seems unnecessary with the "chase center point".

I am definitely eager to read through the "Behind the Scenes" add-on to get a better understanding of why they did what they did. Hopefully it may change my mind.

But here's the thing. With my mindset right now, it is easier for me to mod Deluxe Edition with the new rules I know I like than it would be to mod Adventure Edition. There is enough of a shift in how Savage Worlds appears to play between the two that for the first time I feel like I have to pick a favorite. Is this the beginning of Savage Worlds Edition Wars.

For those who don't know what Edition Wars are:
When a new Edition of a game system comes out and if it radically changes the gameplay, the fanbase of that game will become sub-divided. A perfect Example of this is Dungeons and Dragons where you find groups that only play specific editions of the game. There are people who prefer the very first Basic Edition of D&D over any of the newer editions.

While that seems "meh, there's no badwrongfun in that", it does mean that the publisher is selling to a smaller market (the fans willing to buy into a new edition). D&D has a fanbase split between 6 different editions of the game and WOTC only continues to support the current version. They became acutely aware of the issue and did their best to design 5E to be appealing to all groups in an attempt to re-consolidate their market.

Well, here I am. I've just dumped Pathfinder Society because of the second Edition. Not that it's a bad game, it's just that I don't have the time or energy to learn yet another complicated d20 system. And more than a few of my Pathfinder friends are of a similar opinion (although mostly their decision is based on the financial cost of buying into a whole new Pathfinder system). And now I am wondering if I am about to become an Edition Grognard, saying things like "Pah, Savage Worlds Deluxe was the best version!"

Time will tell. I am trying to keep an open mind on this because Savage Worlds has trumped my tweaker-gene before. Here's hoping I'll continue to be the same Grognard I've always been.

Breaking Good

Let’s talk about breaking things.

I recently played Savage Worlds with a gm who didn’t have a solid grasp of the Breaking Objects rule so I figured it would be a good subject to discuss here on the blog.

First up: Objects have a Parry of 2 as per the rules. I typically ignore this for as the North American Spotted Jib says “We only roll dice when we disagree about the result of an action”. You want to kick a statis, non-animated object? I think we can agree you will succeed.

Second: As per RAW, you do not count aces or raises on the attack roll because doors and vases do not have vulnerable spots! So an attack roll does not generate that extra d6 damage for a good hit. It’s another reason to forgoe the attack roll if you want, since its only effect is that a roll of 1 misses against a stationary, inanimate target.

Finally: The damage roll must equal or exceed the object’s Toughness in order to break the object.

Starpunk Update

For those that have been following my blog, I have been working on a sci-fi setting called Starpunk. It's kind of like Daring Tales of the Space Lanes but with an actual setting (and I'm leaning more toward a comedic bent). One of the biggest hurdles has been generating starships because the Sci-Fi Companion generator never sat right with me, and I have worked on a lot of Starship generator ideas. Here's what I have discovered:

a) I shouldn't need a starship generator ruleset. The point of the game is to play, not munchkin the ruleset to see what cool combo can be built.
b) The more complicated the starship builds get, the easier it is to introduce overpowered ships and weapons.
c) The more complicated the system, the less F!F!F! it got.

Well I finally have something worked out, at least for capital scale ships. It borrows concepts from a variety of sources but also required me to change my thinking process.

In every rpg that involves large starships, they have always treated them the same way as they treated smaller vessels: listing each individual weapon and its damage. If you ended up with two capital ships fighting each other, then you were expected to roll for each gun to hit, roll damage for each hit, etc. This takes too long, but thankfully it is rarely ever used since the players don't command these type of vessels in an rpg. What GMs should be concerned about is what affect all of those guns have on our hero's stock light freighter.

Here's my solution:
Don't sweat the details. Worry about the overall effect.

Capital ships have three weapon entries: Port Batteries, Starboard Batteries, and CIDS (Close In Defense Systems).

CIDS are what capital ships would use against small craft. It's treated as a single weapon, but with a RoF. The bigger the ship, the bigger its RoF (rated 2-4). A capital ship can make a single CIDS attack against each enemy fighter or missile per round.

If I do want to run two capital ships duking it out, the the Capital ships fire their batteries at each other. Each battery is considered a single attack roll. A starship can only attack with one side Battery per target unless they draw a face Card, and Ace, or a Joker for their action card. If they do, then the ship has maneuvered in a way to bring both side Batteries to fire on a single target.

Of course, if I'm going to involve more capital ships and fighters, then I would just bring out the Mass combat rules.

Curbing the Lethality

Savage Worlds is brutal. Any character, regardless of rank, can be one-shotted by a novice or extra. Dice explode, death happens. For some people, this is a feature. The players should be thinking twice before jumping into a toe-to-toe fight.

But there is also the common complaint from people used to attrition based games like d&d that combat is too quick. They don’t like the idea that their wild cards can drop like flies. I have one such friend. He loves Savage Worlds with this one exception. His rationality is that he wants heroes and villains to have time to switch tactics when they start to get hammered. I offered up this as a setting rule:

BEAT HIM DOWN
No character (Wild Card or Extra) can deal more than 1 wound in a single attack. If the attacker’s damage roll would have caused two or more wounds (>target’s toughness +8) then the attacker receives a benny. Bennies cannot be spent on soak rolls.

This guarantees that it takes at least 4 successful attacks to down a wild card. However with only dealing one wound, soaking would only kill the Fast!. The ruling doesn’t affect the ease of dropping extras. It also keeps players from hoarding bennies for soak rolls.

So far he has liked the new rule.

All that said, I prefer the unpredictability of Savage Worlds combat as written. It’s faster and more dramatic when you know you can be dropped in a single attack. I think that D&D and later videogames have reinforced the idea of long drawn out slugfests as the norm. It takes a reshaping of expectations to enjoy SW combat. Oddly, you need to set your expectations toward realism a bit more.

Modeling the light side and dark side of the force in Savage Worlds

Yup, I'm back. I finally found something to say.

I was listening to the Savage GMs Hangout Podcast episode "Everything I need to know about GMing I learned from Star Wars". It's crude, but cool and worth checking out. They were talking about how to model the Light and Dark side of the Force and the legacy of "Dark Side Points" from West End Games. Jarrod begins describing a very complicated system he had designed for his Star Wars Companion that ultimately drove down the path of Dark Side Points and complicated mechanics and yadda yadda yadda...before he trailed off.

Then it hit me, the best way to model the Dark and Light side. It comes from the Revenge of the Sith and all it takes is two new Hindrances.

Palpatine: "The Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power."

Anakin: "The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. They think inwards, only about themselves."

Palpatine: "And the Jedi don't?"

Anakin: "The Jedi are selfless, they only care about others."

New Hindrance: Selfless

The hero thinks about the welfare of others before his own. Even when he is starving, he'll split his last loaf of bread and given another the larger share.

New Hindrance: Selfish

The hero(?) acts in his own best interests, and has no qualms about abandoning others when it suits him.

So if you chose to make a Jedi character, you would have to take the Selfless hindrance. However, if your actions warrant it, the gm can switch that Hindrance to Selfish and your path down the Dark Side begins.

What's the mechanical benefit? Well they are Hindrances. The more they affect you in game, the more Bennies...ahem... Force Points you will receive. Bennies are a manifestation of the Living Force, and you don't have to be a Jedi or Sith to benefit from a bit of luck. 

Wait, what if I'm a Selfish character without AB (The Force)? Are you saying that I'm still using the Force even though I can't shoot lightning out of my hands?

Yup. And if you want to see a character that was consumed by the Dark Side but wasn't a Force Wielder, just look up Bib Fortuna.

Plus, there is this quote:

Luke: "Is the Dark Side stronger?"

Yoda: "No. Quicker, easier, more seductive."

Believe me, it is so much easier to play a selfish character than a selfless one. And that is the draw of the Dark Side.

As for how that affects Force Powers, it doesn't. If you are strong in the Force, you can use it to manifest abilities (AB (The Force)). All that separates a Jedi from a Sith is where they can draw that extra bit of luck from.

Making a World Map for any Fantasy Game the Lazy Way

I have started a D&D 5E campaign with a new local group. Afterward I figured I can ease them in to other games like Savage Worlds.

Interesting note, there isn't exactly a world map or digest for D&D's setting "The Forgotten Realms" the way there is for Pathfinder's "Inner Sea", and I would really like to make my own world for them to explore instead of something they could just read about on the internet.

But of course, I hate putting a lot of work into a world knowing that my players may only see a small chunk. Or making a new world for the same fantasy setting, etc. So I made a compromise. I am only ever going to make one fantasy world for D&D (and maybe even port it over to Savage Worlds). 

Well, lets start with the world map and I will explain as I go. I went over to Donjon and used their World Fractal Mapper. You could draw the coastlines by hand if you want. Then I blew it up to 15" x 30".

Note that this is just the land masses. I wanted a lot of islands and continents for my world to explore.

Then I chopped off a segment (7.5" x 10") and printed it out.

This is where my Party will start. I won't draw towns or geological features until they come up in game. My party started in a Village and had to cross a mountain range in their first adventure so I will mark the village and draw the range they had to cross on the printout. I'll just keep creating adventures where the party wants to go and fill in the map afterwards, that way there is no wasted prep! When this region is done, I will transfer my sketches onto the main world map.

Why keep track at all? In case I or the party wants to revisit a location they had been to before, like their home village, or a haunted keep they couldn't tackle the first time.