Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. #1

    Savage Worlds "Bare Bones"

    I think a bare-bones version of the dataset could be useful.

    Bare-bones would be a version of the data set with all effects turned off, and the system as de-automated as possible.

    Essentially the system would Roll dice pools (Trait + WD) and normal weapon damage. It would let the GM deal out initiative. But that is it.

    The rolls are raw. Modifiers are added manually in the system. Edges, Hindrances, spells, powers, etc. Are simply words on the character sheet and must be dealt with by the players.

    Essentially what SW would be like if the character sheet was simply built in Core RPG and typed in, with the exception that you can bring in the modules and drag/drop into proper places. It's intended to be a feature to to remove automation when working with modules or games where the mix of automated/not automated gets in the way more than it helps.

    This isn't how I WANT to play my games. I Love the automation in the game. However, this would be useful for using custom modules that haven't got alot of the automation built into them yet. It means that you don't have to play with half the stuff automating and half the stuff being words only. This would be a life saver in many instances.
    Last edited by robert4818; June 2nd, 2019 at 15:44.

  2. #2
    I'll second this. There are certain settings, like Seven Worlds for example, that have built in mechanics that are different than the way standard SWADE handles them. If we could turn off the automation, it would make playing settings like those easier.
    Ultimate License - Savage Worlds GM

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by :{ BK }: View Post
    I'll second this. There are certain settings, like Seven Worlds for example, that have built in mechanics that are different than the way standard SWADE handles them. If we could turn off the automation, it would make playing settings like those easier.
    I agree. I would say that there are certain minimum amount of "automation" that needs to be done.

    Primarily, handling basic dice pooling (die + wild die), and basic initiative (perhaps multi-card initiative if basic card handling doesn't do it.)

  4. #4
    I just wanted to bump this back up and see if it's possible to get this as an option.

  5. #5
    Doswelk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by robert4818 View Post
    I just wanted to bump this back up and see if it's possible to get this as an option.
    It was an option 10 years or so ago with Fantasy grounds 1.x version of Savage Worlds, considering how many requests have been done over the years to automate more and more, I am unsure you will get this to be honest.

    That said the whole idea behind automation these days in SW is to make custom modules easier, you can have gear/hindrances/edges/etc. have effects added to them the number of possible effects are being increased.

    What is missing/needed for the settings that cannot be DLC (due to licensing restrictions) maybe we could work on ways to add support even if we cannot support the settings themselves.
    My players just defeated an army, had a dogfight with aliens, machine-gunned the zombies, stormed the tower, became Legendary and died heroically

    Yours are still on combat round 6

    Get Savage
    Ultimate License Holder.
    First GM to post a game for the original FG Con!

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Doswelk View Post
    It was an option 10 years or so ago with Fantasy grounds 1.x version of Savage Worlds, considering how many requests have been done over the years to automate more and more, I am unsure you will get this to be honest.

    That said the whole idea behind automation these days in SW is to make custom modules easier, you can have gear/hindrances/edges/etc. have effects added to them the number of possible effects are being increased.

    What is missing/needed for the settings that cannot be DLC (due to licensing restrictions) maybe we could work on ways to add support even if we cannot support the settings themselves.
    It's more important for those settings where there's no module for, but there are some fairly large tweaks or systems that just aren't automated. In that case, it becomes easier to "turn off" most of the automation, and instead use the ruleset as a virtual character sheet with drag and drop items, and basic dice mechanics (wild die, etc) and deal with the rest manually like you would at an in-person session

    I would add I'm essentially looking for an option/module that lets us turn off automation if we want. Not a full blown new-ruleset.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,730
    Blog Entries
    7
    No automation == don't click all the clickies. Need to roll something? Grab the dice and roll them, and apply the results as needed. That's how it was back in the day, that's still how it is on all the non-automated rulesets.

  8. #8
    Mask_of_winter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    USA Eastern Time Zone (GMT -5/-4)
    Posts
    2,473
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yep. I miss the pre-CoreRpg days of the Savage Worlds ruleset when it reflected how it plays around a table better (FFF). Now I end up in games where the GM stubbornly tries to figure out how to do something with the automation for 10 mins instead of just rolling the dice and taking 10 seconds to resolve a situation. It also becomes difficult to teach the game to new players because I spend more time teaching FG's implementation of SW than SW itself.
    End of rant.
    Writer for Just Insert Imagination and co-host of the Wild Die Podcast.
    Find me on G+ to get in on one-shots, check out my YouTube and Twitch channel and follow me on Twitter @Mask_of_Winter

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Mask_of_winter View Post
    Yep. I miss the pre-CoreRpg days of the Savage Worlds ruleset when it reflected how it plays around a table better (FFF). Now I end up in games where the GM stubbornly tries to figure out how to do something with the automation for 10 mins instead of just rolling the dice and taking 10 seconds to resolve a situation. It also becomes difficult to teach the game to new players because I spend more time teaching FG's implementation of SW than SW itself.
    End of rant.
    I (as a GM) have the exact opposite problem... I have a player character who insists to having the FG engine do these complicated rolls, with tons of modifiers on Frenzy and Sweep. At some point, I usually just breakdown and do the rolls manually. Sometimes it gets far too complicated trying to have the automation handle everything.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Mask_of_winter View Post
    Yep. I miss the pre-CoreRpg days of the Savage Worlds ruleset when it reflected how it plays around a table better (FFF). Now I end up in games where the GM stubbornly tries to figure out how to do something with the automation for 10 mins instead of just rolling the dice and taking 10 seconds to resolve a situation. It also becomes difficult to teach the game to new players because I spend more time teaching FG's implementation of SW than SW itself.
    End of rant.
    Ok, I admit to occasionally finding myself spending too much time during a session trying to figure out how to properly add an effect, but I also quite frequently joke about the fact that I doubt I could run SW face-to-face at this point since I've gotten so spoiled by FG automation.
    Last edited by mac40k; August 7th, 2019 at 17:04.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in