Savage Worlds

[yoshi67]

I was in my local bookstore and a guy was talking about how he really liked Savage Worlds because of it's flexibility. I started reading about it online and even got the free rules set, but I still feel like I don't fully grasp what it is or exactly how it works. I've only played DnD 3.5 and this seems pretty different. I'm definitely considering buying the actual rulebook but thought I'd get some opinions first. Do you like/not like it? What does it do well/poorly? Any settings or extra books you would recommend?

It seems like it could be something to do other than another high fantasy adventure.

Thanks, and sorry for the openness of the question!

[LibraryOgre]

I enjoy it, as mentioned, for its flexibility. With a bit of work, it can do most anything. I haven't found any major weaknesses, though I also haven't run a long game or tried to redline the system. I think that, in most cases, there's a system that will do any given setting better, but it does everything pretty well.

[sktarq]

I like it. One of the only non DND or WoD systems I've run more than token amounts in the last decade. Good for getting new players into it-especially ones who don't want tocomit to learning lots of systems.

[Knaight]

I enjoy it, as mentioned, for its flexibility. With a bit of work, it can do most anything. I haven't found any major weaknesses, though I also haven't run a long game or tried to redline the system. I think that, in most cases, there's a system that will do any given setting better, but it does everything pretty well.

Savage Worlds has one glaring weakness, and one glaring hole in what it can do - it is not cut out for anything gritty. Savage Worlds is a generic game that does pulp modern, pulp sci fi, pulp fantasy, pulp adventure, and pulp whatever else just fine. I don't particularly like it, largely because of a few weird quirks (I really hate dice result distributions with gaps in them, it feels a bit swingy), but it's one of the systems I generally recommend people look at.

As for getting it while coming from a D&D background: It's an exceptionally easy generic to get. The tactical combat is still there, the discrete abilities are still there, so on and so forth. If the absence of classes poses a difficulty (for whatever reason, some people just have a hard time getting their heads around classless systems), there's always this.

[Dizlag]

Savage Worlds has one glaring weakness, and one glaring hole in what it can do - it is not cut out for anything gritty.

That is SO not the experience I have had with Savage Worlds. It most definitely can support a gritty game. I've played a pretty gritty Zombie Apocalypse campaign about a year ago. Although, to be fair our definitions of gritty might be different. When I think gritty, it think low magic, sparse resources, and pretty deadly. How about you, Knaight?

In my opinion it's the best thing you can by in this hobby for $10, hands down. You'll have everything you need to create a campaign world in any genre (fantasy, western, modern, futuristic, sci-fi, victorian age, WWII, steampunk, cyberpunk, you name it) as pulpy or as gritty as you want.

Dizlag

[Raimun]

It's true, Savage Worlds is a pulpy action packed two-fisted game and it isn't that gritty.

However, that's mostly because of two core rules that make the game more cimematic: Bennies and Wild Die. Both make the players that much more likely to succeed in rolls (such as jumping over chasms) and Bennies can even actively negate damage. So, if you really want to run a game where the PCs are horror movie victims, just remove both of them for that game. Now you just need to find people who have always thought it would be really cool to play a horror movie victim.

Most of the time Bennies and Wild Die are integral to what makes Savage World so fun. Both kind of act as "Plot Armor" for the PCs. They are elegant solutions that capture the reality of movies to a tee.

[Saladman]

I agree Savage Worlds defaults to pulp action/adventure. You can turn some dials to adjust that, but that's where you're going to start.

Another thing its good at is swashbuckling. Tricks and Tests of Will are often better than swinging your sword or casting a spell every round, which makes swinging on chandeliers and coming up with witty put-downs mechanically beneficial.

I'm generally a fan of Savage Worlds, but I've found I don't like it for generic fantasy. Its too easy for incoming players to try to recreate their D&D characters (starting with a high Fighting or Casting die instead of a rounded character perhaps), and to take the actions their characters would take in D&D (attacking every round instead of trying Tricks), then get frustrated when they get their asses handed to them. For a trial game, I'd recommend almost anything but high fantasy. Pirates, or Robin Hood, or 20's style pulp. (Take a look at The Moscow Connection on their site for a one shot.)

Something that may not be obvious is the core book is intended more as a toolkit than an out-of-the-box universal system. That is, you're really supposed to take some options off the table and expand on others to match your setting. Come up with zeppelin pilot and steamship career edges in a steampunk game and limit casters to Weird Scientists only, for instance, instead of just putting the core book on the table and saying "we're doing steampunk." The published settings do this, but for a homebrew a simple setting document is enough.

[Yora]

Swashbuckling really is simply the daddy of pulp.

[Knaight]

I'm generally a fan of Savage Worlds, but I've found I don't like it for generic fantasy. Its too easy for incoming players to try to recreate their D&D characters (starting with a high Fighting or Casting die instead of a rounded character perhaps), and to take the actions their characters would take in D&D (attacking every round instead of trying Tricks), then get frustrated when they get their asses handed to them. For a trial game, I'd recommend almost anything but high fantasy. Pirates, or Robin Hood, or 20's style pulp. (Take a look at The Moscow Connection on their site for a one shot.)

I wouldn't consider this an issue unless you're starting with an existing group of D&D players with minimal non-D&D experience, and it's an issue that will come up with generic fantasy in just about every system. Start with a group that doesn't favor D&D, and Savage Worlds works as well as it does for everything else.

That is SO not the experience I have had with Savage Worlds. It most definitely can support a gritty game. I've played a pretty gritty Zombie Apocalypse campaign about a year ago. Although, to be fair our definitions of gritty might be different. When I think gritty, it think low magic, sparse resources, and pretty deadly. How about you, Knaight?

It's essentially the same characteristic traits on my end, though I also generally find that more petty human failings having particularly disastrous consequences is major. Someone gets greedy, and it causes a conflict that leaves people dead; someone is a bit shortsighted, and it ends up causing a famine. That sort of thing. Then there's the matter of doom and hopelessness.

[Saladman]

I wouldn't consider this an issue unless you're starting with an existing group of D&D players with minimal non-D&D experience...

You mean like the OP, who's only played 3.5? But I'd consider it worth mentioning even if he hadn't posted that; D&D + Pathfinder are still a large part of the hobby, so its not like reaching SW from D&D is so rare as to not be worth considering.

[Knaight]

You mean like the OP, who's only played 3.5? But I'd consider it worth mentioning even if he hadn't posted that; D&D + Pathfinder are still a large part of the hobby, so its not like reaching SW from D&D is so rare as to not be worth considering.

Fair enough. Still, it's worth noting that if your players are out of that subset (e.g. new people being introduced to role playing games through SW), you'll probably be fine.

[obryn]

I like Savage Worlds a lot, but I really don't like the Flaws system. I'm not a fan of mixing roleplay restrictions with major mechanical disadvantages, throwing them into the same pot, and pretending they're equal.

[Kaun]

SW is now my default generic system.

I recommend using the Adventure deck, i think it really add some spice to any game.


The game is far from perfect and i wouldn't use it for everything... but it does action adventure well and for most of my games that's what im looking for.


Also, the dog fight rules in the Sci-fi companion. Check them out (its a small mod of the standard SW chase rules). They managed to come up with a neat little system, that plays easy and makes a dog fight really feel like movie style air combat.


I don't mind the shaken rules, but i can see how they get tedious at times.

The thing i like most about the system is the fact it can be rules lite for the GM but still have a decent level of customization for the players.

[Cealocanth]

Savage Worlds is a good system for those who are attempting to do an action/adventure campaign. Normal fantasy settings work in it, but I find it excels in a variety of situations. The reason for this is that the system is so adaptable and very accepting of homebrewed rules. Its simplicity means adding something semi-complex will not overwhelm the players. For pretty much anything, you could probably run a Savage Worlds version of it that would work out okay (though there is probably a better system out there for those who like more complex things.)

The system works okay for gritty settings if they aren't too focused on the grit and more focused on other things. If done right, I find it also works well for the horror genre, something a lot of RPGs not specifically designed to do that usually fail at. I have also noticed that Pinnacle seems to love making horror settings for the game, my favorite being Deadlands, which does horror quite well if you are expecting the kind of horror you would get from a 'slasher' movie, and does horror reasonably well if played for the psychological kind of horror you get when the monster is creeping up on you and you get paranoid about it (but this mostly relies on a good GM, the system doesn't add much for psychological stuff.)

One problem I have encountered with the system is that everything is awfully generic, and some of their generic stuff doesn't fit most settings well. If you want a spell or power that allows you to 'Suggest' an action to a target, you will have to make one for yourself, for example. Furthermore, while you can 'trap' (or flavor text) powers however you like, your acid spray will do the same stuff that fire does that lightning does in the end because all powers are generic things like 'Bolt' or 'Blast'. Everything to diversify the game must be homebrewed.