Savage Rifts

What went wrong?

Is this a rhetorical question, or do you not actually have an opinion?

>What went wrong?
Nothing as far as I can tell, it was a long overdue revamp of a great setting sunk in a shitty system, and an excellent adaption at that

Pinnacle didn't get the IP on the cheap at a going out of business sale but instead gave Kevvy a needed cash infusion to stay afloat.

It used one of the only systems worse for the setting than Kevin's own

I am genuinely interested. I like the Rifts setting, the Savage Worlds rules seem to be less messy than the original rules and yet there are hardly any threads about it on Veeky Forums.

Do people on Veeky Forums actually play systems before they give their opinions, or do we pretend that theorycrafting tells you way more than, say, a dozen campaigns over the course of a decade?

For the most part, anons like just parrot something they've seen in another post in the past, because for some reason they think making a pointless and retarded comment like that is better than just ignoring the thread

Nobody on Veeky Forums plays the games they post about, outside of the containment generals.

Savage Worlds doesn't have much staying power on Veeky Forums. It's not like D&D, WoD, Star Wars, or GURPS which all have dedicated generals We actually tried giving it one but it never got traction.

Wish I could tell you why. My observation is most of Veeky Forums likes it but doesn't find it all that remarkable.

this is really odd because it gets recommended so often to run a setting in. same as FATE.

To be fair being mechanically better than Rifts isn't much of an accomplishment.

There just isn't much to talk about. It's not really controversial, it's universal but not anywhere near as crunchy as GURPS so it's not like we can have build or rules discussions, the settings are also pretty light so there isn't much to discuss there unless it's Deadlands, so the only real discussion to be had is arguing with trolls. Which isn't even discussing worth having. We could discuss homebrew, but the system is so easily customized that people usually don't even want to discuss that, as if you come up with an idea for something it's too easy to just play it without adding any extra rules. It's a good system. Nothing to discuss.

Not as much to bitch about in the system. The only problem I get out of SW is it's less of an RPG and more of a miniature combat game. I come from a miniature wargame background so it doesn't bother me s much.

>SW is it's less of an RPG and more of a miniature combat game
Christ, not this shit again. What rules facilitating role playing does SW lack that whatever system you call a role playing game have?

yeah but the Rifts setting is pretty big and has some interesting aspects that could be argued about. it's certainly not less interesting than 40K. coupled with a decent/uncontroversial system, it should spawn more discussion but it doesn't.

Man, it took a LOT of failed attempts to get a stable GURPS general. You just gotta keep plugging along. Eventually, you'll draw attention to the system and bring in some new players, and after that you'll hopefully have a nice mix of newbies asking questions, old hands answering them, and game runners dispensing storytimes and/or advertising for their online game.

What is good about Savage Worlds system?

Asking for a friend.

Not much is bad about it but conversely not much is great either.

The bennies annoy some people, "your attribute = funny dice" bothers some people, shotguns being overpowered bothers others, "everyone has 3 HP" bothers a few, and the surfeit of feats bothers some others. But none of them are game-breaking in any way and the system is solid overall. And easily customizable.

>bennies annoy some people
Unless we're talking about OSR gamers, I don't understand this.

I like that it's incredibly easy to homebrew stuff for and has tons of really great settings like Hellfrost and Interface Zero.

>shotguns being overpowered
But they really arent. It's just high single target damage at close range while standing still. Savage worlds is a system where you can throw 20 enemies at the players in an encounter and not get bogged down. I've found AOE and Autofire weapons are more effective overall.

I haven't seen any of the books in stores yet?

Did they just release them to KS backers or are they available on the market?

>Christ, not this shit again. What rules facilitating role playing does SW lack that whatever system you call a role playing game have?
The entire game is weighted for this. All the ranges are inches instead of feet, combat moves like a miniatures combat game. In Savage Rifts, for example, weapons range is truncated to fit on a table or map compared to other RPG's. PP's Iron Kingdoms is the same way.

>Asking what is good about a system.
>Nothing in response.

There's your problem then.

>Really like the initiative system vs rolling for it.
>Not crunchy hungry hungry hippos combat you get with other systems.
>OTT cinematic things are encouraged, Savage Rifts has a choose how you go out when your character dies.

RIFTS(tm)(c)(*) is a fun gonzo setting but the rules for it have never been strong, and Savage Worlds isn't popular enough to revitalize it.

Gamers nowadays want very strongly-single-themed games (only pirates, or only cyberpunk, or only high fantasy) with storygaming elements, and neither classic Rifts nor Savage Rifts fits that trend.

Savage Worlds is actually pretty big in the realm of notD&D. It's just that the D&D family is like three-quarters of RPGs. Fantasy Grounds has it as its biggest notD&D game, while Roll20 has it 6th.

wtf is going on in that image

...

>"your attribute = funny dice" bothers some people
People are okay with it for weapon damage dice, so I don't see why it'd be a problem for attributes. I've been use the mechanic in homebrew stuff since the early 90's, I think.

...

>Savage Worlds isn't popular enough to revitalize it.
nice trips but i am still confused by it, i thought it would be. i mean RIFTS was hugely popular in the 90s with a doubtful system (even if not as bad as it's made to be). savage rifts should have revitalized it.

>Gamers nowadays want very strongly-single-themed games
but why didnt 40K RPGs tank then? why didnt D&D's populairty decline?

>Savage Worlds is actually pretty big in the realm of notD&D.
not on Veeky Forums it seems

A lot of things were popular in the 90s that are dead now. Most of the long running franchises of tabletop RPGs survived via reinventing themselves every few years in both rules and to adapt to popular culture. Meanwhile RIFTS exists more or less as a time capsule for a bygone era. There are fans but you are rarely going to see them in numbers as you would Shadowrun or WoD, let alone D&D.

>why didnt 40K RPGs tank then?
They were based off the most famous wargame on the market and had solid enough rules.

>why didnt D&D's populairty decline?
It did though. Pre-3.0 D&D was on the ropes due to a series of poor decisions making at TSR.

>not on Veeky Forums it seems
I love Veeky Forums but it's very off from what are considered the current trends in RPGs. Never take Veeky Forums as a representative sample of the hobby.

>i mean RIFTS was hugely popular in the 90s with a doubtful system (even if not as bad as it's made to be). savage rifts should have revitalized it.
Maybe the problem is that it isn't the 90s anymore. This is a much more cynical time and I don't think the Saturday morning cartoon of RIFTS would appeal to a lot of modern gamers.

I don't like Savage Worlds but this is genuinely unfair, it is in no way close to as bad as the Palladium system.

Rifts is a shit setting and the only people who like it grew up with it.
+
Savage Worlds is a mediocre system that no one gets excited about.
=
Who cares?

Does it work well with SW? I might actually try it out if it's worth it.