Is there a good system to play S.T.A.L.K.E.R?

Well... there's the STALKER rpg, if that'd help.

drivethrurpg.com/product/100243/STALKER--The-SciFi-Roleplaying-Game

Savage Worlds

Dark Heresy, but you roll on the Perils of the Warp chart even without s psyker.

That's good if you want setting like in the book. For pc game version there's suggested GURPS. And someone made Savage Worlds mod, with increased lethality.

There are a couple of STALKER games - one is a module for savage worlds.

Personally I would use Traveller. It has all the weapons and armor you need and also covers radiation, beasts, etc.
Its a good simple system with solid gun combat and tactics / leadership. It would be perfect for STALKER, just need a good GM.

Shouldn't threads like these start with "Any better system for X than GURPS"?

I think people are just so sick of being recommended to play GURPS they automatically disregard any GURPSposts

GURPS fit anything, so it should be default option and there should be question if there anything better or if GURPS as good enough to not have need to search anything else.

I got hyped desu, stalker style open world in the metro setting.? Yes pls.

yeah its becuase GURPS fits everything that people are sick of hearing about it. No matter what kind of setting people want to play, someone always answers GURPS.
What if they don't want something generic but something custom made for their specific setting? Without having to wade through endless supplements and pick and choose certain parts of certain supplements. You would have to know all the supplements in order to know which ones to use, by the time you're at that stage you're already playing GURPS so there is no need to suggest it.

I mean, what if people just don't like GURPS, but want to run X setting?

Im running a 5e game inspired by stalker

Rolled 2, 3 + 1 = 6 (2d6 + 1)

Going to do a quick demo combat with Traveller rules.

Randomized some stats - 1 Stalker is pretty average, has basic tactics (can boost his initiative at the start of a combat) and gun combat skills. Armed with AK-74 and flak jacket

2 Bandits, one is a strong guy but not so tough, armed with a shotgun, the other (bandit 2) is pretty average armed with a pistol and has basic leadership skill (allows him to boost his buddies initiative). Both have basic jackets for protection - not enough to stop anything more than a poorly thrust knife.

We rolled initiative, Stalker got the drop on these bandits, but only just. He fires his AK at the first bandit, who is partially behind some light cover. Map is not to scale with the icons.

The bandit is 19m away from the stalker, perfect range for an assault rifle. Rolling 2D6 to hit. need an 8 to hit. Get a +1 for stalkers dex, and a further +1 for his gun combat skill, which is cancelled out by the cover. So 2D6+1, need an 8 to hit.

If someone has been around long enough to get sick of seeing GURPS as a reply to "game about [X] wat do," they've been around long enough that they should at least vaguely know of a variety of systems and not need to ask entry-level questions.

Alternatively, they can just say "not GURPS" in the OP like and use basic communication skills.

End of the first turn of combat. The Stalker moves back into cover after his shot, while the bandit he shot at sprints over open ground.
The bandit with the pistol and the leadership skill moves and yells at his comrade, trying to give him a heads up and an advantage. His orders help, but not enough to go before the stalker.

The bandits could elect to act hastily, gaining a bonus to initiative, but getting negatives to anything they try to do...

Rolled 3, 2 + 1 = 6 (2d6 + 1)

Neither bandit acted hastily, but the stalker did in order to counter the recoil from his AK firing last turn (lowers his initiative by 1 next turn only because he is a weak stalker and can't handle the recoil). Stalker peeks out from behind cover and fires a burst from his AK-74. Acting hastily gives a -1, but he's usually +2 to the roll to hit, so makes him only +1.
Need an 8 to hit. Since its a burst rather than a single shot, if he does hit, it will do more damage. It will also chew up ammo quicker and lose him initiative next round due to recoil.

Rolled 2, 3 + 2 = 7 (2d6 + 2)

The stalker misses again! damn bandits moving too fast...

The bandit being targeted hits the deck - going prone and fires at our stalker friend. Meanwhile his buddy quietly runs around to flank this pesky stalker.

The bandit fires. He usually has a +1, but since stalker is behind cover, this is negated. at 18m away, the shotgun is -2 to hit, so he rolls 2D6-2, needing an 8 to hit.

Rolled 5, 6 + 3 = 14 (2d6 + 3)

The stalker acts hastily again, allowing him to act first. The bandits seem to be slow-witted. He holds his position, using a minor action to aim and squeezes off another burst at the prone bandit. Usually being prone would give a bonus to cover, but the bandit is not in cover so its still a pretty easy shot at this range. +1 for his dex modifier, +1 for his gun combat, and +1 for aiming

The Stalker fires again! 2D6+3 needs an 8 to hit

No negatives for acting hastily?

Looks good but it won't work on my potato of a PC so meh.

ah shit you're right. its -1 for that.
Its still a very solid hit. Rolling 13. Anything above 8 is considered "effect" and is added to damage. usual Assault rifle damage is 3D6, which is applied directly to a characters physical stats - STR, DEX and END (CON).

Stalker rolls 12 for damage, and adds 5 for the effect, total of 17 damage.
Even with his leather jacket (-1 damage) the Bandit is unconscious, his END is 0 as well as his DEX. With 2 stats at 0 he is out for the count. His STR is at 5 (from 10) so with 5 more damage he would have been dead.

Will the other bandit get the drop on the stalker though?

Rolled 6, 6 = 12 (2d6)

End of turn 3, bandits turn. The one remaining bandit moves out from behind cover, perfectly flanking the pesky stalker. The words "a nu cheeky breeky i v damke" slip past his lips as he aims the snub pistol and fires. The Stalker attempts to dodge, rolling out of the way!
His dodge will make the shot -1, but he will be -2 to his initiative next turn. Due to the recoil, he will likely be going second next round either way, so he's not too worried about this. Traveller initiative can be very dynamic - often changing every turn.

So the bandit fires. he has basic gun combat, so +1 to his roll. He's at close range, good range for a pistol. The stalker attempts to dodge, so -1. Total is 2D6, needing an 8 to hit

Rolled 2, 1 = 3 (2d6)

The pistol shot rips through the stalkers arm, with a perfect shot from the bandit. bandit rolled a 12, anything above 8 is "effect" - which is an effect of 4. he rolls damage, which is 3D6-3. He rolls pretty well, causing 17 damage in total including the effect.
The Stalker has a flak jacket which absorbs 6 worth of damage, but he's still hit pretty bad. His Endurance is now 0 (so -3 to any checks involving endurance), and his dex goes from 9 to 5. He is now -1 to all dex based skills (like shooting...).

Next round, the bandit goes first, as the stalker has a much lower initiative due to dodging (le epic combat roll isn't always that effective...)

The bandit fires again! The stalker tries to dodge in vain...
2D6 again, need an 8

Rolled 2, 2 + 1 = 5 (2d6 + 1)

The bandit misses - thankfully!
Now the Stalker's turn, this is the end of turn 4 of the combat.

The stalker, slumped against the wall of the compound flicks his AK to fully automatic and sneers at the looming bandit. He pulls the trigger.

Full auto allows the stalker to roll 4 dice and group them into attacks. It chews up more ammo, but it could be just what he needs for the situation...

He still has his +1 for gun combat, but his dex is now -1, so he has no bonus. The bandit tried to dodge, slipping to one side to attempt to avoid the prowling barrel of the AK!
So 2D6-1, need an 8 to hit

Rolled 3, 6 = 9 (2d6)

The extra shots (should have rolled 2 more D6 - I rolled them the old fashioned way) were still not enough to get a hit. The AK sprays as the bandit dodges to the side.

Next turn the bandit is still recovering from the dodge, getting his footing back. The stalker, while slightly dazed from the fully automatic firing, hastily fires off another burst, able to get in some shots before the bandit is fully back in the fight.
The stalker is getting low on ammo, he fires one last burst, then reloads with his minor action. Stalker needs an 8, rolling 2D6
The bandit elects not to dodge this turn.

Rolled 4, 3 = 7 (2d6)

Bullets rip through the bandit, but he's still in he fight. His END is 0 and his Dex is down to 3 (from 6). So he's now -2 to all dex based actions (which includes shooting...)

The bandit wearily aims his pistol, trying to focus though the pain - aware this close range slug fest with no cover is somewhat suicidal...

He's -1 in total for his damaged dex, and -1 for dodging last turn. Means he's -2 in total. 2D6-2 to hit.

"na kaleni, suka..."
the stalker elects not to dodge..

Rolled 4, 5, 4, 5 = 18 (4d6)

The bandit, in a haze of pain and with his hand badly damaged, misses!

The stalker knows better than to stick around, he moves back behind cover and fires again - tactical withdrawal!

he has no bonus to hit, -1 for his injured arm (his -1 dex), +1 for gun combat, cancel each other out. He fires fully automatic! fuck this bandit cyka!
needs that 8 to hit! The bandit doesn't dodge..

The stalker hits with multiple rounds, blazing away from behind the compound wall. For full auto he rolls 4 dice and can group them into attacks on targets within 6m of each other. He groups them all on the bandit, riddling his body with 7.62x39mm AK rounds. Essentially he gets 2 hits, grouping the 4s and 5s together to make 9s.
Both hits have an effect of 1, so he rolls damage.
3D6+1 for each attack, he rolls a total of 23 damage!
The bandit can only take 9 more damage before he's dead, so its somewhat overkill, but this stalker doesn't have time to mess around.

The bandit flies back 3 or 4 metres and hits the ground with the silence of death. The stalker quickly checks the bodies, puts a bullet in the head of the unconscious stalker and limps away to try to find a medkit for his arm.

Thankfully one of the bandits had a bandage so he could stop the bleeding... He narrowly avoids a patch of radiation and makes his way out of the area, hoping the gunfire doesn't attract wild dogs...

Its been fun, you can see roughly how Traveller combat plays out. Its pretty dynamic and quick, with plenty of tactical options. Simple rules, allowing for all sorts of fun stuff like firing fully automatic, giving orders, and a wounding system that has immediate implications on your PCs ability to do things.

I would love to run a STALKER campaign with Traveller some day. Maybe I'll convince my group after our current campaign...

I personally would probably use Call of the Void: Ballad of the Laser Whales (from over at the Song of Swords general thread) to build upon.
Started homebrewing a STALKER supplement for that some time ago, haven't made much progress lately though. I guess I'm procrastinating on actually starting to make the crunch, since I have zero experience in homebrewing.
GURPS probably is a good option, never got warm with the system myself though.
Also there is a kind of "fantasy STALKER" called Symbaroum.

never played it but its in my folder, cheers

Thanks I've been looking for this, do you happen to have the savage worlds pdf as well?

GURPS is best

just go to Ukraine

...

Cyberpunk 2020
Homebrew tne role special abilities
Gunfights are deadly
Hightech equipment and sradiation already supported

What's the consensus on Twilight 2000 v2.2 or 2013?

What did you use for making these pictures?

That's a screenshot of the in-game map. You can find them online.

Use Ops and Tactics

O.R.E. Nemesis

I used paint.net to layer some random top-down sprites I found with google image search. search for "top down soldier sprite" or "top down bandit sprite"

Then I used stalker maps for the background. Google image search "Stalker Maps"
The one I used is the actual in-game map of yantar.

Not him, but it should be in the sharethreads, or potentially just google "Savage worlds PDF" and see what comes up.

Would Myfarog's The Coming work? Don't care about it's lore just ruels. Radioactivity and firearms sounded interesting but I'm not sure if it's worth 5 euros lol. Anyone have pdf?

I've heard of people using GURPS, Savage Worlds, and the official STALKER rpg from Finland (diceless) to good effect. Maybe mutant year zero could have a good base for some homebrew.

TTRPGs are notoriously shit at turning navigating a field of anomalies into gameplay, though. So right now stalker RPG is mostly limited to emulating tactical gunplay and story beats.

Stay away from any Veeky Forums homebrew stalker systems, they're almost all just d20 modern with vodka memes stuck on and are quite useless for actually running a game.

Static anomaly fields, unless special ones, are merely obstacles the players have to plan to get around. Think of them as funky chasms and cliffs in a typical fantasy game. Moving anomaly fields might have a set path, but you're typically forced to cross it. Weird ones like the space anomaly can be puzzle sessions, or excuses for advancing the story in an unexpected direction.

All of the above are enhanced greatly when you add in a firefight.

I agree with your characterization, but that doesn't do anything to change the fact that navigating funky chasms and cliffs in a typical fantasy game is pretty bad gameplay. And characters in the STALKER-verse spend a significant portion of their time doing that, so if the gameplay for that is bad that's kind of a problem.

Depends entirely on how funky the chasms and cliffs are. I agree that, typically, it's boring to make a few skill rolls to climb any old cliff, which is why the GM really needs to flex their imagination, which can get exhausting after a while. That Finnish Stalker RPG has an anomaly generator you can pilfer for ideas, though, so that's nice.

For example, in a good fantasy game, you aren't just climbing a cliff -- you're climbing a cliff and being assaulted by cliff racers/harpies in the middle of it. You aren't just traversing a chasm -- you're diving down into it when the strong gusts from it give you enough lift to reach the griffon's nest built onto the opposite side. Every obstacle has to be properly utilized, otherwise it's just a boring roll to overcome.

For example, the Springboard anomaly obviously won't serve the same purpose it did in the video games, as the video games were working with limitations and a Ukrainian budget. A Springboard in the video game is an introduction to anomalies, one of the first ones you encounter to show you that there are invisible dangers, but without hurting you too badly. If a Springboard lived up to its name, you could use it to reach advantageous positions. At the rookie village, for instance, there was a Springboard anomaly not too far from a large tree that would have been an advantageous position in a firefight with the military patrol coming up the road. Since this is a tabletop game and the only limit is your imagination, the GM could allow the players to devise a way to carefully launch themselves into the tree for an ambush.

Of course, you can also climb the tree, but this is for the sake of example. The point is to expand on anomalies, not keep them inflexibly rigid. That's not what Stalker or the Zone is about.

Can you give a good example of an anomaly obstacle course that has some good gameplay going on without introducing simultaneous combat? 'cause that's what I'm really interested in since it's how the zone excursions went in Roadside Picnic.

Hmm... an anomaly obstacle course. I can think of a few mono-anomaly obstacle courses, like the Burners under the bridge, but that had the threat of combat with it. The electric anomaly tunnel at the start of the game had a fight with dogs leading up to it, Pripyat was chok-ful of Monolith and snorks and anomalies... was there ever a pure anomaly obstacle course? I can't think of any, but I have a terrible memory.

This is where OSR can actually be a good thing. You need to get your players to approach this problem as a real-life problem, not a game problem. This means having a system light enough or extensive enough to handle any sort of action the players throw at it. This also means you need to put extra effort into the anomaly obstacle courses themselves, and disallow a "skill roll to solve" solutions. Skill rolls for hints should definitely be allowed.

Either way, what I would do is use one anomaly in an interesting way, or two that interact interestingly with each other. To use the two I've already mentioned, Springboard and Burner, you could have a sort of "Ring of Fire" anomaly space, sort of like that one with the scientists in CoP. In the center of it is an artifact cache that nobody's been able to get at. It's surrounded by Burner anomalies and awkwardly angled springboards that will either launch you into the burners, catching you on fire, or launch you away from the anomaly down the hill this artifact cache is on.

The solution could be that there's a specific combination of springboards that the characters can angle themselves towards to be thrown into the center, which they can find by throwing bolts or the like. They might find fire-retardant materials and take a springboard that launches them into the center. They might try digging into the hill and emerging at the top. The point is to offer an interesting situation with no obvious solution, allow the characters to try anything. All you need to know is how the obstacle course works.

Neuroshima

bump

I wondered this myself too. The answer was to make my own with blackjack and hookers
I also made a cheeky hype website for my players
stlk.mysupertech.org

>D20 E6 STALKER is an unofficial supplement for the D20 modern system, ai
I've read enough to know where this is going.

>TTRPGs are notoriously shit at turning navigating a field of anomalies into gameplay
They can do it pretty well. Mark areas of anomaly or radiation on the DMs map, have players roll checks to see if they spot anomalies, if not, have them test if they walk near or into it, reflex check to get out without being sucked in. With radiation, reflex check to see if they avoid walking right into the radioactive area.

If they do walk in, apply the damage or radiation. if they fuck up real bad, have them torn apart or given so many rads they die a few days later...
Or if you're a nice DM have an NPC torn apart instead so the PCs see how dangerous anomalies can be and start throwing bolts whenever they see something blurry in the air.

But user rolling dice and praying isn't good gameplay. There's no decisions involved.

...

If PCs spot the anomaly in the distance they can choose to avoid it. if PCs pick up radiation they can choose not to advance.
Its all about how the DM plays it - perhaps they have to make it through the radiation to get somewhere, perhaps they can find a map of the areas of radiation to help them out, perhaps they need to find an artifact and therefor head right into an anomaly.

It isn't very different from detecting traps - it can be as boring as rolling some dice and praying, or it can be as in-depth as spotting something out of the ordinary, trying to find information, spending days planning or plotting out how the trap works and how to bypass it.

Most parties wouldn't leave a dungeon to research how a trap works, likewise most stalker won't leave an area to research which areas are radioactive and where anomalies are, they would just rely on their equipment. Detectors warn of nearby anomalies, Geiger counters warn of nearby radiation. There are plenty of decisions to be made. Failures don't usually just happen, but are a chain of bad decisions.

Yeah but you can interact with mechanical traps, it's hard to interact with "this 5 foot radius sphere turns you into goo and nobody knows how or why." It would be nice if there was something more to "I avoid the anomaly" than either "OK you do it/that won't work" or "roll these dice."

Well you can't really "interact" with anomalies in stalker anyway so I don't understand why you would want to. You wear protective suits, use artifacts, manage your radiation and either go around them or into them if you're looking for artifacts.

Anomalies are the equivalent of a pool of lava or something. You don't really want to "interact" with it, you just have to work out a way to get past it, or go through it to get that shiny diamond sitting on a piece of rock in the center.

Anomalies are not the focus of Stalker, they are just an element of the environment.

>You don't really want to "interact" with it, you just have to work out a way to get past it,

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. "I walk around it" isn't very interesting as a gameplay element, and figuring out how to shimmy past anomalies over the course of hours was something the book spent pages and pages on. Unless the player feels that tension of walking around it without being horribly mangled it's really dropping a big chunk of the source material.

> Anomalies are not the focus of Stalker, they are just an element of the environment.

I think you're kind of underselling how important they are. A Stalker is a person who trespasses in a deadly scifi obstacle course to retrieve magic doodads at great risk to life and limb. If you remove the deadly scifi obstacle course as a focus of gameplay it's hard to say you're playing stalker at all, or at least roadside picnic.

>"I walk around it" isn't very interesting as a gameplay element
That's what you did it the games, dude. You walked around them. Sometimes you got caught in one in the middle of a firefight and wound up in an even worse position, or died. Sometimes they ran into you. That's the extent of anomalies, outside of shit like the space anomaly, in the games. They were just something to walk around. Yes, they matter a lot to the feeling of the setting and lend quite a lot to the atmosphere of the games, but that is window dressing to their gameplay element.

I don't know about Roadside Picnic. I've watched the Stalker movie and played all three of the games. The movie was much more a slow-burning cerebral piece and the games were much more about caution and planning and analyzing than Ninja Warrior: Anomaly Edition. If Roadside Picnic is the latter, I already spitballed ideas earlier in the thread about adapting OSR philosophy to anomalies. It's up to the GM to be able to implement that.

>"I walk around it" isn't very interesting as a gameplay element
"I walk around it" is as boring as it gets. A Good DM can and will make it much more exciting than that. You just have to use your imagination.

>I think you're kind of underselling how important they are
I said they were an element of the environment. They could be as important or unimportant as the DM wants to make them at any time.
The DM could make it like the film where the environment is the only element, save for some avoiding the military trying to get into the zone, or the DM could make it like the games where there's plenty of gun-fighting and other politics going on. He could mix between the two, having anomalies and gun-fighting both feature equally.

Do you really want a game like the film where you have a few PCs vs an environment with invisible "anomalies" where any wrong step can kill you? I don't think that would be enough to keep a group satisfied. They would get bored. The film relied on banter between the protagonists to be interesting. A PC group isn't going to provide that, the DM has to provide more interest than that. Anomalies can still provide a lot of interest, but you will need other aspects for a group. Namely, fighting with guns and some inter-group politics a la the games.

Yes, and walking around them is not a gameplay element in a ttrpg the way it is in a video game. There's nothing doing when you say "I walk around it" as a player but there's a lot you're doing to walk around it in a video game or in the reality the stories are based on. That's what I'm saying.

Like, think about this scenario for a second. There's a magic stalker goodie at the end of this hallway, but there's a ball lightning anomaly going around. That shows up in CoC and CoP I think at least once a piece.

In a ttrpg you convey your intention ("I walk past it") and then either it either happens or doesn't arbitrarily (either by the whim of the GM or by the whim of the dice).

In the video game you can convey your intent all you want, but there's still the GAMEPLAY of ACTUALLY walking around it. You can't "play" GM whim or rolling d20s - those aren't skills you can have as a player. But you can be good at pushing buttons so your digital avatar doesn't get zapped to death.

You see what I'm getting at?

My dude has a decent DX, so he's pretty likely to be able to navigate it. Oh, no, the floor is slippery, the GM says, from rainwater leaking into the hallway from the downpour we found shelter for earlier. There's a penalty to my roll. My chances aren't as good as they were before. Do I risk venturing forth, or do I play it safe? I can get a bonus to my roll for throwing a bolt at it to give myself a wider window to run past it, but I have Unluckiness and it hasn't been used this session. Do I try to find another way to get past the anomaly, say, using a long stick that won't conduct the ball lightning's electricity or whatever? There's your tension.

>In a ttrpg you convey your intention ("I walk past it") and then either it either happens or doesn't arbitrarily (either by the whim of the GM or by the whim of the dice).
A good DM would know how to handle this with
much more interest.

The PC gets closer to the area of the lightning, feels the hairs on the back of his neck stand up, he rolls to spot. If he does well he notices something on the floor - an area not electrified. He watches the ball lightning moving - tries to anticipate where it will be, or waits until its on one side of the room - makes a dash for the safe spot. The lightning moves randomly, the PC gets a wisdom or suchlike check to know if he's safe or should dash out. The lightning moves towards him, he rolls a reflex to avoid it. He narrowly misses the lightning, and dashes out, but steps in an electrified area just before his goal - taking some damage from electricity.

Now he's passed the anomaly, but he still has to get back. On the other side he rolls a good spot check an notices a pipe hanging from the ceiling - perhaps that will help him get past? It will require a jump check to make it though...

See? you just have to use your imagination and any area can be as interesting or as boring as you like. If the PCs are trying to get somewhere, anomalies are more of a chore to get past, so the DM should gleam over them, roll a few checks to pass safely. If the PCs need to retrieve something from near an anomaly, the DM should make it more interesting - have an entire session of trying to get into an area past multiple anomalies and radiation.

Its all up to the DM. It sound like you've just had some shitty DMs

>The PC gets closer to the area of the lightning, feels the hairs on the back of his neck stand up, he rolls to spot. If he does well he notices something on the floor - an area not electrified. He watches the ball lightning moving - tries to anticipate where it will be, or waits until its on one side of the room - makes a dash for the safe spot. The lightning moves randomly, the PC gets a wisdom or suchlike check to know if he's safe or should dash out. The lightning moves towards him, he rolls a reflex to avoid it. He narrowly misses the lightning, and dashes out, but steps in an electrified area just before his goal - taking some damage from electricity. ... It sound like you've just had some shitty DMs

I think this is a good characterization of how descriptions can dress gameplay up, but I think the other guy did a better job suggesting gameplay. I think you can reduce this example to "PC wants to spot trap, PC wants to bypass trap, PC rolls dice a lot." It's interesting as a narrative but I'm not sure it's interesting from a gameplay perspective, at least not to me.

> Do I risk venturing forth, or do I play it safe?

I dunno, I guess I just wish there was more play in doing and less play in deciding to do or not and how. Maybe I just want to adhesive tape Dread's jenga bullshit for anomaly ninja warrioring onto another game or something.

>I think you can reduce this example to "PC wants to spot trap, PC wants to bypass trap, PC rolls dice a lot." It's interesting as a narrative but I'm not sure it's interesting from a gameplay perspective

TTRPGs are a combination of gameplay and narrative. They aren't usually purely gameplay. If your RPG games are pure gameplay I feel bad for you, as the fun of RPGs are in the descriptions from the DM, the roleplaying, the setting and environment. This is why stalker suits RPGs because you need a DM to really set the scene and build up the atmosphere, and make anomalies more than just "I roll to pass".

Essentially anything can be done, and made to be exciting in an RPG. Its down to the DM. Telling us here on Veeky Forums that RPGs cannot do 'x' is never going to get you anywhere. RPGs can do anything, your imagination is the only limitation.

>I dunno, I guess I just wish there was more play in doing and less play in deciding to do or not and how.
I feel that most anomalies can be boiled down to one or two skill rolls each way. TTRPGs aren't really skill-based outside of knowing the mechanics of the system you're playing and the probabilities of the actions you're taking. A platforming video game just isn't going to be good as anything other than a video game. It's a unique experience that doesn't translate. I think anomalies do translate well when you "free" them from a video game's necessary restrictions and allow truly inventive uses for what should be, by all means, a "patch of lava" that exists solely to be avoided. You can weigh the odds for your dice rolls, but in the end the driving gameplay mechanic of most TTRPGs is a dice roll (or cards, if you're Tokyo Nova).

I'm not sure how well jenga-based resolution would work. It's good for building, well, dread, but I don't think it's such a great idea for navigating anomaly fields. It's too easy at the beginning and too hard at the end (assuming it's normal jenga and not some variant -- never read Dread).

>If your RPG games are pure gameplay I feel bad for you, as the fun of RPGs are in the descriptions from the DM, the roleplaying, the setting and environment.

The fun is not EXCLUSIVELY in the descriptions from the DM and other narrative bits and pieces in my opinion. It is also in the gameplay. Your example had nice narrative, and that's fun in its own way, but I don't think the gameplay elements in your example would be fun. Rolling saving throws isn't interesting gameplay to me because the player isn't actually deciding or executing anything challenging, although it does make for a good story.

> TTRPGs aren't really skill-based outside of knowing the mechanics of the system you're playing and the probabilities of the actions you're taking.

Yeah, that's kind of my beef here and what I originally meant by "TTRPGs don't do anomalies well." I totally agree you can get pretty far using an OSR trap interaction shtick. But they don't do them well in terms of making the player feel like they are actually doing the spotting and shimmying and crawling because those parts are almost always abstracted out somehow by nature of the medium.

> I'm not sure how well jenga-based resolution would work.

It doesn't work perfectly for the reasons you give, but I just mean the specific task of pulling a block slowly and carefully being fairly analogous to the in-universe task of slowly and carefully shimmying past a pit of lava or whatever. There are some other good gimmicks I've thought of in that sense, like that game Mastermind where you guess the hidden combination of colored pegs through process of elimination (emulates throwing bolts and piecing together a safe path after several tries), but none of them really function as a core mechanic for a game that involves talking or gunplay or whatever in addition to physical obstacle courses.

Second half of that post was meant for you sry forgot to quote.

no problems b.

>But they don't do them well in terms of making the player feel like they are actually doing the spotting and shimmying and crawling because those parts are almost always abstracted out somehow by nature of the medium.
>I just mean the specific task of pulling a block slowly and carefully being fairly analogous to the in-universe task of slowly and carefully shimmying past a pit of lava or whatever.
It sounds to me like you have a personal block here, not that TTRPGs can't handle it. To begin with, players aren't on trial, the characters are (although this is blurred heavily with OSR). The characters have attributes, skills, advantages, and disadvantages that allow them to interact with and influence this world. Spotting, shimmying, and crawling all can be, and should be, relevant gameplay choices. If you don't spot an anomaly, you don't get a roll to avoid it. If you're shimmying along a ledge, that should have relevant modifiers in play compared to crawling underneath it, if either even require rolls. Mind you that all of this comes from a GURPS perspective, so racking up positive modifiers to counteract negative ones is a major focus, where the narrative has mechanical heft to it.

I question how you feel about other aspects of TTRPGs. Do you not feel like your character is a great combatant, heroically competent with a sword and shield as they block, parry, and cut down hordes of fodder with a few dice rolls based upon the stats on their sheet? It isn't the same thing as cutting down hordes in a hack & slash dungeon crawling video game.

> I think you can reduce this example to "PC wants to spot trap, PC wants to bypass trap, PC rolls dice a lot." It's interesting as a narrative but I'm not sure it's interesting from a gameplay perspective, at least not to me.
I'm gonna jump in here and say that if that sort of gameplay doesn't appeal to you, then you shouldn't be playing ttrpgs.

The game is in the role-playing aspect of it. Your "gameplay" in this hypothetical is putting yourself in your characters shoes, imagining what the character is seeing, and trying to choose what the character would choose. Boiling things down to "spot/roll/proceed" is boiling away the gameplay, and if you want to roll dice or you want to give players meaningful decisions with respect to their characters' stats, then you're playing the wrong sort of game. In other words, if you think the "game" of ttrpgs has much to do with successes/failures, you're barking up the wrong tree.

This isn't to say that that sort of thing is wrong, only that you'd be better off choosing a different type of game. What you're saying is like complaining that there's not enough athletics in bowling... if you want to be running around all game you should be playing basketball or soccer or something.

In RPGs the fun is derived from the experience. No one ever said "The Gameplay of that last 3 minutes wasn't fun enough compared to the narrative".

>The fun is not EXCLUSIVELY in the descriptions from the DM
I never suggested that. My post specifically says RPGS are a combination of gameplay and narrative. Both are important to have a good time. With no narrative, its a wargame. With no gameplay its just a roleplay conversation.

Is ops and tacics any good? Even for just the tactical gunplay side of things?

>racking up positive modifiers to counteract negative ones is a major focus

This is another thing I've considered. Games with lots of attainable modifiers can make "I roll dice at it" into a sort of skill where you try to accumulate a lot of plusses by making series of decisions, and I think that could be a viable approach, too. I haven't played GURPS myself, but I haven't run into any other game that actually makes that system robust enough. Like, Advantage is great and all, but "I crawl past it instead of walking so I gain advantage" just doesn't feel quite deep enough as a gameplay system for a thing characters are going to be doing as one of three or four core activities. Does GURPS have enough depth to it for that? Are any supplements for it particularly devoted to athletics of this type?

> Do you not feel like your character is a great combatant, heroically competent ... with a few dice rolls based upon the stats on their sheet?

Of course I do. But - at the risk of splitting hairs - that's not really the kind of experience I'm talking about here. The problem I'm having is that lots of systems treat movement as a highly abstract, linear system the same way old school D&D blow-for-blow combat does.

Like, nothing stops you from feeling like your fighter is great at fighting in 1e when you say "I attack the goblins" roll a bunch of 18s and cleave them into sashimi. Nothing stops you from feeling like your character is great at obstacle courses when you say "I avoid the obstacles" and roll a bunch of 18s, either. But I don't just want to feel like my character is good at something, I want to feel like I am somehow involved in that something. Games with combat options can make sword fighting a dude in a hallway really interesting for a player, but I haven't seen any systems that make jumping over a pit trap in a hallway or walking through a minefield interesting in the same or a better way.

Do you agree that good narrative and good gameplay are better than good narrative and bad gameplay? If you do, then I am saying in my opinion your example had good narrative and bad gameplay and I would prefer a game that had good narrative and good gameplay.

> Your "gameplay" in this hypothetical is putting yourself in your characters shoes, imagining what the character is seeing, and trying to choose what the character would choose.

I am saying the choices available to the character in that example weren't interesting choices. Is it really a choice to NOT spot? Maybe rarely. Is it really a choice to NOT roll a saving throw? Never. That's why I think they were bad examples of gameplay. The other guy had more interesting decisions, which I thought was good gameplay but still didn't perfectly replicate the experience of obstacle-navigating that would ideally be conveyed.

>Does GURPS have enough depth to it for that? Are any supplements for it particularly devoted to athletics of this type?
If there is one thing GURPS loves, it is modifiers (you can tone them down with quality of life rules in Action, but it sounds like you want to embrace them). You roll 3d6, at or under your skill. Task Difficulty Modifiers can go from -10 to +10, so there's no shortage of granularity for actions. As for athletics, there's more than enough, from parkour to typical dungeon crawling to exploring crumbling structures across quite a few supplements (Martial Arts/Action 2, Dungeon Fantasy Dungeons/Wilderness Adventures, and the definitive post-apoc line After the End). You can accumulate modifiers for environment, light level, whether you're using your dominant hand or not, the quality of your tools, other people assisting via complimentary skill checks, taking extra time or rushing, etc.

>Games with combat options can make sword fighting a dude in a hallway really interesting for a player, but I haven't seen any systems that make jumping over a pit trap in a hallway or walking through a minefield interesting in the same or a better way.
GURPS is definitely for you, then, although it's still somewhat on the GM to utilize the tools available. Crawling through a minefield can be as simple as making a Soldier skill roll, or you can make it a series of rolls that all give a bonus or penalty to your Soldier skill roll, or you can make it a minefield clearing mission to both detect and disarm, etc.

If you do decide to give GURPS a spin, pick up GURPS Lite here (warehouse23.com/products/gurps-lite-fourth-edition) to understand how the core mechanics work, then you can move on to Basic Set and pick up After the End for all of the Stalker-specific stuff.

Cool. I feel like there might be a more associated mechanic than accumulating bonuses to dice rolls somewhere out there but so far my quest to find it has been a bunch of dead ends involving puzzles and dexterity tricks that don't function as a core mechanic at all.

So I'm not sure I can definitively agree yet sight unseen that GURPS is GOOD at physical obstacle gameplay, but it certainly sounds better than lots of other games just because it devotes more system space and player options to it.

It's what you make of it. GURPS is the perfect system for my style of GMing and playing (high crunch/granularity, high verisimilitude), so I have little desire to play/run most RPGs I come across. I've yet to find one that's as satisfactory as GURPS is when it comes to athletics and acrobatics, either in terms of playstyle or sheer devotion to the subject. The situations still have to be interesting (a pit in a hallway is never interesting if it's just a hallway with a pit), but it has mechanics to support and detail interesting situations beyond "roll with (dis)advantage".

>Do you agree that good narrative and good gameplay are better than good narrative and bad gameplay
of course? who wouldn't? Bit of a silly question.

In the end anomalies are only one facet of a stalker RPG. As a whole a good RPG will have both good narrative and good gameplay. The balance between gameplay and narrative will change constantly during the game, as it does in all TTRPGs.

You're looking too deeply at a quickly whipped-up example on an image forum. In a real game no one is judging an encounter based on the quality of gameplay vs the quality of the narrative. They are not as separate in TTRPGs as you probably think. The gameplay includes narrative and role-playing.

sorta related, have any of you considered doing a stalker quest on /qst/?
It seems like most of you are more interested in the detail stuff, rather than the dice stuff, so it might be worth a shot idk.

Anyone got the Stalker Global Edition pdf?

Just curious, which version of traveller are you using for this? I've been digging into classic traveller lately, but this seems better. A little crunchier, but not too crunch.

I personally love both. 2013 has more in-depth rules but the world of 2000 is more interesting for that Cold War nostalgia. I would personally recommend 2013 for a STALKER-based game.

It's a /k/-inspired gear autism simulator based on d20 Modern so no.

Its mongoose traveller, 1st edition. It will be in the OP of the traveller general

In my opinion, not really. It's based off d20 modern, and while it does a lot to try to improve the system I'm still not overly fond of it. It's most useful for pillaging it's fun lists. There's like 1200 or so with all the stats you'd need to transplant them to a different system if you cared.

And even that doesn't really mean anything if you have 3G3, and thus access to infinite highly detailed guns.

Gun, not fun. Though gun lists are fun

I would rather run stalker on something like roll20 if I was to run it. I don't think forums give you enough response time to successfully run a tabletop game - It can be done, but its painfully slow and for something like gun combat you want it to be quick and over in a few minutes.

Real life would be ideal for Stalker, as the descriptions and setting the atmosphere by the GM is vital imo. I would love to run it, just a matter of convincing our group. I'm not even sure if any of the guys have played stalker or seen the film, so I doubt they would be in.