What went so wrong?

Who gave Virt a new IP block?

Just stop with these horrid threads, buddy.

This,

And having half the goddamn game balance rely on that shitty benny system.

Not enough selfwank material for PbtA, not enough crunch for GURPS fans.

Other than that it's pretty good.

Pretty much this
Fuck savage worlds and all numale rpgs

Don't make it weird.

>numale rpgs
lolwut?

What is a noomawlee?

the only problems i really have with it is the mediocre design of the book itself and the unnecessarily kitchen-sinky rules. other than that it's fine.

>a d4 giving you a higher chance of getting a 5 than a d6

I see it's time for another episode of Veeky Forums cannot into probability.

anydice.com/program/9e4b

You know, RPGs written for those insufferable losers who like Wil Wheaton and penny arcade. Numales. The kind of "guy" who posts on Facebook about how white people are what is wrong with society hoping to get laid

It felt more like a wargame with an RPG tacked on but if I ever ran it again, I would put a cap on how many times a dice could explode to speed things up. I had to recost items which was a pain in the ass. I liked how I could scale up and down battles with little effort and balancing encounters was simple enough. The wound system was probably my least favourite aspect of the system, where bad luck could just obliterate a character.

the fuck is a benny

thought PA was rapewolf t-shirt muh freedom of expression nobullypls entitlement

>numale rpgs

Oh good, /v/ is here.

>numale rpgs
you know, it isn't even that old, and already I'm getting really sick of the younger brother of "cuck"

Action points are called "Bennies" (apparently short for benefits) in SW. Fuck if I know why.

Everything in the game is balanced around this poorly designed Action Point economy.

These action points also effectively double as your HP.

>card based initiative
>overly simplistic die system that makes more vet and hero rank rolls much more swingy.
>The above is fine in some settings if it's thematically appropriate, but because the system is so basic it's poorly counteracted
>bennies are not a good implementation of tokens to allow players to override mechanical input. Fate points, action points, whatever, are all more useful as well as better integrated into their system's mechanics.
>point-buy is always easily broken in every system, but is particularly bad with numerous low-impact Disadvantages here.
>wound system is dumb.

Now, that being said, there's some nice things about the system. It has one of the few pirate/sailing ship systems (not seven seas, but the fairly great Pirates of the Spanish Main) that is a fairly good balance between a) being a tacked-on, shallow interest attempt and b) hyper autistic sailing ship wargames that require spreadsheets to keep track of provisions, historical weather patterns, and spread of disease in a crew.

>What went so wrong?

But that's a wrong question. The question you wanted to ask is "what went right?" and the answer to that question is "nothing". Absolutely nothing.

I've wanted to play Deadlands for such a long time, but Savage Worlds is holding me back.

>op doesn't know enough about the system to shitpost properly
>inb4 he samefags and parrots what said for the whole thread

Not OP, but

Sum it up fairly nicely.

>Even if you're fine with a d4 giving you a higher chance of getting a 5 than a d6
>What is math?
There are, in fact, 4 instances where you're better off rolling a die that's one step smaller: when your target number is the maximum value of the die you're rolling. So if you're rolling vs. a target number of 6, you're better off rolling a d4 than a d6; if your target number is 8, you're better off rolling a d6 than a d6; if your target number is 10, you're better off rolling a d8 than a d10; and if your target number is 12, you're better off rolling a d10 than a d12. These are the only instances where you're better off with a smaller die, and the difference is marginal enough (ranging from .7% to 2.1%) that you'd have to roll the dice a shitload of times to distinguish the discrepancy from random variation. A d6 is significantly more likely to roll a 5 or over than a d4 is (33% vs. 25%). And if you're directly rolling a die vs. a die, you're always better off with the higher die size.

Anyway, the only reason the lower die size is ever preferable is because you effectively skip over a number with exploding dice. There's no way to roll a 4 on a d4; you go straight from 3 to 5. If you tweaked the system so that you didn't skip over a number, you'd always be better off with the higher die. A really simple way to do this is to only allow your dice to explode once, with a maximum result on your second roll indicating 0, sort of like shooting the moon. So if you roll a d6 and get a 6, that gives you 6 + whatever your second roll is, but if you roll another 6, that's 6 + 0 = 6. Another way of doing it is just to make a maximum roll on your d6 give you 5 + another roll. So, 6 + 6 + 5 would give you 15 (with the only difference between a 5 and a 6 being that a 6 also gives you another roll).

Or you could just shrug off the difference as being too minor to even worry about (the average difference is less than 1 1/3%).

The math hiccups are annoying but are the least of the systems problems.

The math hiccups can also be addressed by adding 2dF to your rolls.

>Or you could just shrug off the difference as being too minor to even worry about (the average difference is less than 1 1/3%).
There are circumstances in life where the person who is slightly more skilled overall may have a slight disadvantage. I'm thinking right now of how a complete noob in a fighting game who just furiously mashes buttons may actually score more hits vs. a decent player than a relative noob would. The relative noob understands more of the game and has an advantage over the complete noob, but the complete noob's spasticness is more likely to catch the decent player by surprise.

Oh, and a third way of fixing the problem would be to simple allow somebody to use a die one level smaller whenever the target number equals the maximum value of their die. So if you have to roll an 10 on a d10, you can roll a d8 instead. Hell, you could tell people that they can roll a smaller die whenever they want, but they'll be sabotaging themselves in all other circumstances.

The d6 vs d8 one is the only one which is generally relevant in Savage Worlds, though. The difficulty for tasks is generally a 4, with an 8 for an Ace. I guess it also comes into play if you're badly wounded because of Savage Worlds' cripplingly painful wound penalty system, or if you're trying to hit someone with exactly the right fighting skill in melee, but it's not really something you're going to run into most games.

This is what I was going to bring up. TN 8 is a success with a raise, which is a very significant number.

>It felt more like a wargame with an RPG tacked on
Unsurprising, it's built on the Deadlands wargame's rules.

A fourth way to fix the problem would be to just play a different fucking game.

>Universal RPG, works for any genre or game type.
>Savage Worlds
Or you know:

>Unisystem
>Cinematic Unisystem
>Cortex Plus
>FATE
>FAE
>GURPS
>HERO
>Tri-Stat
>d6
>BRP

there's a lot of options here.

Seriously, there's no shortage of universal rpg systems out there. You can't use the "then suggest an alternative" argument when talking about these kind of games because there ARE dozens of alternatives.

Don't like Savage World's shitty mechanics? Fuck doing mental gymnastics to try to force them to work, just switch systems.

Great.

So there are a variety of fixes for the math hiccups, which are the least of the system's problems.

What about

It's nothing to write home about. wild west with spoop, or post-apoc with spoop.

You could easily run it in Unisystem instead.

>Its skill system make no sense if you're not doing combat all the time, and often can be easy to exploit even if you are.
>Many of the firearms have some bizarre rules.
>The Advantages/Disadvantages system that it took from GURPS has the exact same problems it had in GURPS.
Mind elaborating about these? The others are all serious flaws in the system I'm well aware of, although the damage system one doesn't really make sense - if anything it's a system where you're acutely aware of how fragile you are all the time.

The card based initiative system Works fine if you're okay with random initiative, which I'm used to it since my DM still uses the d10 initiative system from Advance Dungeons & Dragons.

No game is perfect. In order to do one thing well, you have to sacrifice something else. That doesn't mean that all rule sets are equally well executed, but letting a minor flaw, such as the particular one we are discussing right now, drive you to another game is silly.

If the way to fix the flaw is completely changing how the dice system works, it's not as minor as you're trying to make it out to be.

And don't even pretend because you're only addressing one specific flaw at the moment that that means we have to ignore the laundry list of others.

It's not "silly" to just go play a different game that works better, it's silly to insist that it's silly not to rewrite an entire system to make it work the way you want it to when there are other games that do exactly what you want.

God now I feel like I'm arguing with a PF fag.

>If the way to fix the flaw is completely changing how the dice system works, it's not as minor as you're trying to make it out to be.
Bitch, please. At most we're talking about a minor tweak to address an issue that is, itself, extremely minor.

>And don't even pretend because you're only addressing one specific flaw at the moment that that means we have to ignore the laundry list of others.
I'm addressing one particular mechanic. I'm not defending Savage Worlds as a whole, not because I necessarily think it's flawed, but because I don't feel I have the experience to make a well-founded argument one way or the other.

>God now I feel like I'm arguing with a PF fag.
Right back at you. I'm rationally discussing a particular mechanic and you're spazzing out and framing this as an "us vs. them" fight that you need to win by trying to delegitimize the other side.

Hey now.

>"Fix it with houserules"
is far more reasonable a choice in Pathfinder.

Nearly no other game offers anything like high-level caster play besides Pathfinder (3.0/3.5 being the exceptions).

You might be able to manage it with a high-point buy GURPS or HERO campaign, with the right options turned on, that's about it.

So in some cases it might genuinely be easier to make Pathfinder do what you want than to find another game (because you may have to write that game yourself).

But if you just want a generic universal system?

There are literally dozens of alternatives to SW.

Not that guy, but, that one particular mechanical issue, is a minor annoyance. The other SW problems are much bigger.

In particular, how reliant the game is on the poorly thought-through action-point system.

Also, PF offers tons of Adventure Paths, which is another reason it might be easier for you to tweak pathfinder than use another game.

Finally, pathfinder has so many options, that making it into another game, much like gurps, can largely be accomplished by picking and choosing which ones are allowed.

You can calibrate PF into several very different games simply by blacklisting or whitelisting different subsets of character options, and moving around the maximum level/using e4/e6/e8 rules.

Granted, Combat Maneuvers and Skills require an actual houserule to fix since they're universal, but most of the game is toggle-able options which you can enable or disable at your option.

Pathfinder is overly-complicated, completely unbalanced piece of shit. Even if you were to be able to convince me that Savage Worlds was as broken (which I don't buy), it would still be a much better game on account of being lighter and easier to run.

Is there any RPG out there that Veeky Forums actually likes?

>Is there any RPG out there that Veeky Forums actually likes?
It only takes a few people to fill a thread with enough hate to make it seem like Veeky Forums in general hates a game. Also: no.

user, I've got some shocking news for you. You might want to sit down for this.

Ready?

Veeky Forums is not a single person. Nor is it a like-minded hug box.It's actually a large collection of people with differing tastes and opinions, so sometimes we disagree and sometimes we clash.

If you can't handle this fact, which I know is difficult for some people to swallow in 2016 where the idea that all members of a given online community must agree on everything is prevailant, you should consider using a different website.

You mean... these past 5 years... I thought I had a friend :(

No user, you don't have A friend.

You have MANY friends!

Friends are just the people you've let close enough to yourself to be able to betray you, and they will.

fucking shotguns need to apply targets armor per each die of damage separately. That fixes the meatgrinder buckshot and makes it laughable to anyone with any sense to wear even light armor.

also exploding dice roll with -1, so you can still roll a 6 on exploding d6 etc.

I have yet to see a single person on Veeky Forums actively dislike Unknown Armies, and those that don't care for it either don't like the rules or the setting but never both.

>unbalanced
thats where the whitelisting/blacklisting comes in.

select the stuff of the power level you want.

Mini Six is one I've never seen get any hate, even people that dislike WEG's d6 system, the system it's based on, usually say Mini Six is a vast improvement.