Savage Worlds - Adventure Edition

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Another thing that was revised from the previous edition is the Mass Battles rules. I haven't used either version, but based purely on reading them, the SWADE Mass Battles rules seem more streamlined to me.
 
Since you asked for opinions . . .

I've played SW as a con one-shot and in two "campaigns" and honestly it's never done anything for me. I can't think of anything specific at this remove except it just seemed to fall flat, nothing about the system stood out for me.
 
Another change that I like: they made Double Tap an Edge, rather than a property that some weapons have.
i never noticed that. Good catch. Most of the time, I was just allowing DT as a player thing.

I've got a couple of gun users in my games. And although they are willing to subsume some of their knowledge for the enjoyment of the Pulp aesthetic, the Mack Bolan the Destroyer one-shot game I ran back when we had the first Edition, it came up and it was pointed out that with training you can double top most automatic pistols.

I should do something with that 'setting' some time...
 
I've got a couple of gun users in my games. And although they are willing to subsume some of their knowledge for the enjoyment of the Pulp aesthetic, the Mack Bolan the Destroyer one-shot game I ran back when we had the first Edition, it came up and it was pointed out that with training you can double top most automatic pistols.

One of my players has target shooting as a real-life hobby, but she does a really good job of playing a character who is clueless about guns. It amuses me.
 
Savage RIFTS coming to Fantasy Grounds!

 
One of my players has target shooting as a real-life hobby, but she does a really good job of playing a character who is clueless about guns. It amuses me.
That is bro-tier roleplaying right there. In my 20's and early 30's about half of the people I played with were former military and roughly half of them had combat experience. At a certain point you kinda roll your eyes when every goddamn character is an expert on small unit tactics regardless of background. I admire someone who can go the extra mile and deliberately ignore some of their own knowledge.
 
The big difference between this one and previous versions is that heroes have more options for influencing the battle. Just like non-combat characters got more useful in general in this edition.
That's good to hear. My biggest concern about the weakening of the Shaken condition in recent editions was that shaking an opponent with tricks was one of the best tactics for non-combat-skilled characters. I'm glad they have found ways to balance that.
 
When SWADE came out, I was initially rather put off by PEG publishing a $40 core book vs. the SWDEE $10 core book. That $10 price tag was a not-insignificant factor in choosing SW as my go-to game for my first campaign. However, the quality of the $40 SWADE book as a physical item is quite good. Nice binding, durable cover, good color, etc. And the SWADE core rules are $10 in pdf format, so one can still get started with the game for ten bucks. Just not in dead-tree format.
 
One thing I find a bit odd about SWADE is that there's a sidebar on p. 34 talking about how they left out the charts of comprehensive modifiers in favor of more GM discretion; however nearly all the modifiers from the previous edition are still there in the text of the book.

I'm okay with either approach, but to me it feels like they said they're taking a new approach, but didn't really commit to it.
 
One thing I find a bit odd about SWADE is that there's a sidebar on p. 34 talking about how they left out the charts of comprehensive modifiers in favor of more GM discretion; however nearly all the modifiers from the previous edition are still there in the text of the book.

I'm okay with either approach, but to me it feels like they said they're taking a new approach, but didn't really commit to it.

Eh, not really. It specifically called out Stealth and Tracking (now Survival) and the tracking modifier text was distilled down to a +4 and -4 example. The Stealth text added a few of the examples from the old table, but wasn't comprehensive.

This was the middle ground. Because if i know anything about the vocal Savage Worlds fanbase, it's that they like to badmouth D&D, but then demand hard coded situational clarity on the level of 3.5.
 
SW has more modifiers than I really desire, but I try to run the game as RAW as possible.
 
When it comes to modifiers, I always think back to the advice in Unknown Armies to just come up with one comprehensive modifier for the situation, not to stack a whole bunch of modifiers. If a PC is brawling on a steep, muddy hillside at night while a little drunk, just come up with one big negative modifier that encapsulates all of that. Don't bother spending time to calculate (Steep -2) + (Muddy -2) + (Dark -4) + (Mild Intoxication -1) = -9.
 
One thing @ Baulderstone Baulderstone reminded me of was how perfect SW was for managing henchmen, minions, retainers, etc. Each player could have a follower or three without slowing down gametime. Savage Worlds is king when it comes to managing a lot of NPCs.
 
Erf. If this had happened at the begnning of the month, I might have been able to swing it. Oh well.
 
Pathfinder is being converted to Savage Worlds:
 
Six books for the campaign makes me think it's going to be a little more, er, "scripted" than your typical Savage Worlds plot point campaign.

Anyone have any experience with Rise of the Rune Lords?
 
Pathfinder is being converted to Savage Worlds:
I have absolutely no idea what to make of that. Utterly baffled as to whether it's something I might be interested in. Just seems odd......like a beef trifle.
 
Six books for the campaign makes me think it's going to be a little more, er, "scripted" than your typical Savage Worlds plot point campaign.

Anyone have any experience with Rise of the Rune Lords?

I've played in a RotRL campaign, it is pretty linear.

To be honest though, I do like the Golarian setting (It is a good massive kitchen sink), and I do like Savage Worlds, so I'd be pretty interested in the rules part to see what edges they do and what they do with magic.
 
I've played in a RotRL campaign, it is pretty linear.

That's what I'm trying to suss out. Is it "linear"? Or is it a railroad? I've heard APs straight up chastised as railroads, but I don't know if that's overreacting or not.

I'm curious about the power curve. I assume the AP is built to take the PCs to level 20 in Pathfinder. A level 20 Pathfinder character is leagues beyond a Legendary Savage Worlds character, so either the Savage Worlds power curve will spike, or the power level of the late game adventures will presumably have to come DOWN.
 
I just played Pathfinder for the first time after buying a lot of material for the game to mine for ideas. It was certainly a heavy experience- the crunch was a lot more than I was expecting. But this... it hurts my brain.
 
That's what I'm trying to suss out. Is it "linear"? Or is it a railroad? I've heard APs straight up chastised as railroads, but I don't know if that's overreacting or not.

I'm curious about the power curve. I assume the AP is built to take the PCs to level 20 in Pathfinder. A level 20 Pathfinder character is leagues beyond a Legendary Savage Worlds character, so either the Savage Worlds power curve will spike, or the power level of the late game adventures will presumably have to come DOWN.

I have a hard time saying how linear it is because I just played in it and didn't run it and haven't read the books. And I'm pretty sure my GM can improvise. PF adventure paths can definitely be pretty railroady though if a GM doesn't understand that you can deviate from the situations provided.
 
Well, it will either streamline Pathfinder or repeat the mess that is Savage Rifts. I give it a 50/50 chance either way.

"mess that is Savage Rifts"? Personally I liked it (just to get away from Palladium). What were your problems with it?
 
"mess that is Savage Rifts"? Personally I liked it (just to get away from Palladium). What were your problems with it?

Broken math. Same problem that high level supers has. It's not for me. I think Savage Worlds has a very specific power curve that it does well and then shakes apart after that.
 
Yeah, when I ran Golarion in Savage Worlds it was just modeling the ideas of the characters (we converted from PF2e to Savage Worlds mid campaign).

Trying to keep the same power level is asking for trouble. What I want to see is mostly arcane backgrounds with some spell lists, some edges for some of the class concepts and stuff like that.
 
Pathfinder is being converted to Savage Worlds:

I should be surprised but I don’t think anything will ever top “official Rifts conversion with Siembieda’s blessing.”

Well, it will either streamline Pathfinder or repeat the mess that is Savage Rifts. I give it a 50/50 chance either way.

My money’s on them dragging the opposition down to something more appropriately Savage Worlds-y. (That’s how I’d do it anyway.)
 
I should be surprised but I don’t think anything will ever top “official Rifts conversion with Siembieda’s blessing.”



My money’s on them dragging the opposition down to something more appropriately Savage Worlds-y. (That’s how I’d do it anyway.)

I think they have to find a middle ground. It'll be interesting to see if they succeed.
 
I mean, they're releasing *seven* books in all with this: A "Savage Pathfinder Core Book" and six books for the Adventure Path.

There's going to be some bloat.
 
I need to get this off my chest. At a Dragonmeet convention 6 or 7 years ago I went with my son and met up with a friend and his two boys. Because of the accompanying minors we decided to play safe and got into a Pathfinder game run by the official society - in fact, we were recruited on the stairs on the way in by the GM, who was also a rep for the group. He was a nice guy, really helpful and encouraging to the kids so we signed up; it also saved one of us having to do the sharpened elbow chicken dance melee for something else at sign up.

The game started us with 1st level characters so was pretty simple for the cherubs to grasp, not that they struggle much with gaming concepts in any case. The other guy at the table was a veteran of the society and clearly old friends with the GM. It was a good game and we had a good time. All of us.

But....

But....

There was just this one moment see. That moment when the GM sang this goblin song. And his mate joined in with a cultish grin. I tried with all my might to hide my horror and not make eye contact but it was too late...I felt my mouth twisting into a an involuntary smile, I felt my lips being wrenched apart with devilish insincerity and....did I just nod encouragingly at those guys? Oh, man. The kids. What about the kids????

And that is why I can't buy this game. Because of that cover. Because of those f****** b****** c**** goblins.
 
Last edited:
I mean, they're releasing *seven* books in all with this: A "Savage Pathfinder Core Book" and six books for the Adventure Path.

There's going to be some bloat.

There needs not be any more “bloat” than, say, Shaintar or Hellfrost.
 
Well I like Savage Worlds and I like Golarion (I even like pathfinder to a point), so hopefully this will be two good things that taste good together.

APs are indeed pretty linear, but usually still have room for the gm and players to stretch their wings. They are made for people like me that don’t always have time to homebrew an extensive campaign on their own.
 
Yeah, considering 6 books are adventures I don't see how 7 books necessitates bloat.

I imagine the only added mechanics in the 6 adventure books are going to be monsters and magic items. Which I've never considered bloat in a game.

They aren't just converting the adventures, though. They are adding a whole new core book. For something that most people would go "well, why don't you run it with core rules?"
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top