Ran across these gems recently as I was diving into systems that build upon BECMI and they both look awesome. A lot of games focus entirely on a restatement of the original rules or BECMI but reading the design behind things like Castles and Crusades got me thinking to give games a look that would be an evolution of the classic D&D rules.
Any thoughts on these systems? Or any others with a similar approach of not reinventing the wheel but not just reformatting of another game.
I only know ACKS, it's kind of BECMI with a sword and sorcery skin, and more effort into the economics framework. If you liked the BECMI Companion Set dominion and war machine rules, and the trade systems in the GAZes, you'll see them here more detailed and developed.
It uses a slightly odd variant on ascending AC, combined with very trad saving throw system and race as class, more or less (there are variant race classes). I like the presentation but I don't have a great desire to run it as-is, I prefer regular ascending AC and a unified save number. But it is very accessible and full of good tools for a GM who likes world building for open world play.
One thing to keep in mind is that there is a 2nd edition of ACKS in the works. Mostly just getting a lot of material across books combined, as well as updating rules and balancing through years of play.
Not sure if the plan is still the same, but when I was active on the Discord, Alexander seemed to like my idea of sorting all the material into 3 volumes (he was looking for ideas on how to sort about 900 pages worth of content across the books, the Axiom issues, supplements, etc).
I believe it was decided to go with:
Player's handbook (with everything you need to play)
Judge's handbook (everything to run the game, with monsters, treasure, the domain stuff)
And a third book that would be everything a Judge needs to CREATE a game.
I suggested keeping it so that (unlike D&D)... the Judge really only needs one book to run a game if needed. And keeping a separate book that is used for between sessions that allows the Judge to create worlds, characters, monsters, classes, etc. All stuff that isn't critical at the table.
The 2nd edition is meant to still be compatible, from what I understand. And is still in the design and testing phase.
Just adding my 2 cp.
When is ACKs 2.0 coming out?
Quote from: Snowman0147 on December 25, 2021, 06:40:32 PM
When is ACKs 2.0 coming out?
No idea. I don't think Alexander is in a rush. If you join the Discord, there is a beta rules version that lists changes as well as replacements for some of the rules. Considering the playtesters are just regular groups (as far as I am aware) it takes time to get feedback. I think he wants this to be the last changes for the rules.
Probably not 2022.
I mean, if you enjoy the game, no reason not to support them. I bought some of the books already, knowing a new edition would eventually come out.
ACKS has now been out for ten years so there's a lot of material for it. World_Warrior isn't exaggerating when he says there's 900 pages -- it's probably even more than that if you plug in all the expansion material that has so far only been shared with Patreons.
So, yes, at some point it would make sense to unify it all into a more comprehensible format. Whether that comes as a new edition, or simply as a consolidated set of rulebooks, is still to be determined. I can't imagine any such products would come out before 2024, though.
I have a number of other projects that will come out first, for ACKS and for Ascendant. In 2022 I'll be launching "BY THIS AXE", a supplement for dwarves, for instance.
Both games are solid but ACKS is much closer to BECMI than WWN in design, primarily in how they utilize classes. ACKS has a lot of classes across its game material that are focused on what the class niche does. It also uses class as race but uses this in a hybridized way.
ACKS does have an Elf class, but an Elf Courtier class, and an Elf Ranger class, and the same for Dwarves like the Dwarf Delver class, and the Dwarf Machinist class, If an ACKS class has no race in the title, it's a human class. ACKS also has a good Proficiency system which come in both General and Class types.
WWN has super broad classes... Warrior, Expert, Magic User, and Adventurer. That's it. The Adventurer is a hybrid class where you take two others and use them each as a half class, like you could be a Half Warrior and Half Mage, for example. WWN has a lot of its variety in it's many Magic User options. A lot of these options can only be taken as a Half Class option, and how you mix and match these is partly how you get more classic class options like clerics and assassins and etc.
Both games deeper customization, IMHO, comes from ACKS' Proficiencies and WWN's Foci, which function identically within their respective designs.
Both also have great, functional rules sets and have good tools for GMs.
These are two of the better OSR games, designed by two great designers. Personally, I think Stars Without Number Revised is Crawford's best work, and the best sci-fi OSR game available.
Since we have the ACKS creator here, I would love some kind of compendium that combines all the classes & proficiencies from the various books. I bought several of the books to bolt onto our OSE game so now we have over 50 class options! But having to continually flip through multiple books to find the details on the one you want gets a little frustrating. Just my two cents.
By the way, I love the take on demi-human classes. More variety and flavor but preserves the spirit of the older race classes from B/X.
Persimmon - thanks for the feedback and for the kind words!
Quote from: S'mon on December 25, 2021, 04:12:58 PM
I only know ACKS, it's kind of BECMI with a sword and sorcery skin, and more effort into the economics framework. If you liked the BECMI Companion Set dominion and war machine rules, and the trade systems in the GAZes, you'll see them here more detailed and developed.
..
A viable quasi-wargame engine that is workable to run alongside PC's in something like a castle siege is something that I really want to bring to my table.
Right now I just use a lot of handwavium when my PC's are doing things in the middle of pitched battles.
Quote from: RebelSky on December 26, 2021, 02:50:46 AM
.. It also uses class as race but uses this in a hybridized way.
ACKS does have an Elf class, but an Elf Courtier class, and an Elf Ranger class, and the same for Dwarves like the Dwarf Delver class, and the Dwarf Machinist class, If an ACKS class has no race in the title, it's a human class. ACKS also has a good Proficiency system which come in both General and Class types.
...
Now this I really like - and is the way I thought races and classes should have always been done.
Is there some kind of conversion chart to use standard ascending AC?
Basically ACKS starts unarmored AC at 0 rather than 10. So Chain & shield would be AC 6. Just add 10 for the requisite ascending value.
ACKS has several mass combat systems to suit different needs, it gets a lot of attention.
I think you can just add 10 to ACKS AC to get regular ascending AC, I recall doing this for my ACKS copy of Dwimmermount.
Quote from: Persimmon on December 26, 2021, 07:23:19 PM
Basically ACKS starts unarmored AC at 0 rather than 10. So Chain & shield would be AC 6. Just add 10 for the requisite ascending value.
Quote from: S'mon on December 26, 2021, 07:23:19 PM
ACKS has several mass combat systems to suit different needs, it gets a lot of attention.
I think you can just add 10 to ACKS AC to get regular ascending AC, I recall doing this for my ACKS copy of Dwimmermount.
Sweet, so the ACKS AC thing is no big deal at all then.
The different mass combat systems seems right what I am looking for.
But you lot are on your own when it comes to collecting your commissions from amacris on the sale you just made...
Worlds without Number is more 'Lets somewhat simulate some faction building to get you into adventure scenarious'
While ACKS is more 'Hard' economics simulation.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on December 26, 2021, 09:28:38 PM
Worlds without Number is more 'Lets somewhat simulate some faction building to get you into adventure scenarious'
While ACKS is more 'Hard' economics simulation.
The WWN Faction system could be a great complement to ACKS, especially if an ACKS campaign ever gets to the Kingdom stage.
Read both games. Go with the one that feels right.
I'm currently reading Worlds Without Number and I'm getting a StarSiege vibe. If you don't know StarSiege, it's Castles & Crusades in Space that for whatever reason, Troll Lords never pushed. Perhaps because in their eagerness to create an everything-scifi game, they instead created a toolkit instead of a game. I haven't yet decided if WWN is a toolkit or a game. SWN, at least 1e, was very much a game of its own with its own implied setting. Haven't read SWN 2e yet.
I'd love for Troll Lords to revisit StarSiege and give it the love they've given C&C.
I wouldn't mind a new version of ACKS
Quote from: Spinachcat on December 27, 2021, 03:48:51 AM
Read both games. Go with the one that feels right.
I'm currently reading Worlds Without Number and I'm getting a StarSiege vibe. If you don't know StarSiege, it's Castles & Crusades in Space that for whatever reason, Troll Lords never pushed. Perhaps because in their eagerness to create an everything-scifi game, they instead created a toolkit instead of a game. I haven't yet decided if WWN is a toolkit or a game. SWN, at least 1e, was very much a game of its own with its own implied setting. Haven't read SWN 2e yet.
I'd love for Troll Lords to revisit StarSiege and give it the love they've given C&C.
Have you seen their version of Starship Warden? Pretty impressive and you can play it with C&C if you're looking for a "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" type experience. They still have Star Siege stuff listed on the website, or you could use amazing adventures. I've adapted some of the creatures & robots straight from the book for a C&C adventure I wrote.
Quote from: Persimmon on December 27, 2021, 01:27:37 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat on December 27, 2021, 03:48:51 AM
Read both games. Go with the one that feels right.
I'm currently reading Worlds Without Number and I'm getting a StarSiege vibe. If you don't know StarSiege, it's Castles & Crusades in Space that for whatever reason, Troll Lords never pushed. Perhaps because in their eagerness to create an everything-scifi game, they instead created a toolkit instead of a game. I haven't yet decided if WWN is a toolkit or a game. SWN, at least 1e, was very much a game of its own with its own implied setting. Haven't read SWN 2e yet.
I'd love for Troll Lords to revisit StarSiege and give it the love they've given C&C.
Have you seen their version of Starship Warden? Pretty impressive and you can play it with C&C if you're looking for a "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" type experience. They still have Star Siege stuff listed on the website, or you could use amazing adventures. I've adapted some of the creatures & robots straight from the book for a C&C adventure I wrote.
I've seen it though I always got the impression that it came off as incomplete. I haven't read it in detail but i got the impression of "how to use amazing adventures to run scifi" than a complete setting
Quote from: Ocule on December 27, 2021, 01:32:45 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on December 27, 2021, 01:27:37 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat on December 27, 2021, 03:48:51 AM
Read both games. Go with the one that feels right.
I'm currently reading Worlds Without Number and I'm getting a StarSiege vibe. If you don't know StarSiege, it's Castles & Crusades in Space that for whatever reason, Troll Lords never pushed. Perhaps because in their eagerness to create an everything-scifi game, they instead created a toolkit instead of a game. I haven't yet decided if WWN is a toolkit or a game. SWN, at least 1e, was very much a game of its own with its own implied setting. Haven't read SWN 2e yet.
I'd love for Troll Lords to revisit StarSiege and give it the love they've given C&C.
Have you seen their version of Starship Warden? Pretty impressive and you can play it with C&C if you're looking for a "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" type experience. They still have Star Siege stuff listed on the website, or you could use amazing adventures. I've adapted some of the creatures & robots straight from the book for a C&C adventure I wrote.
I've seen it though I always got the impression that it came off as incomplete. I haven't read it in detail but i got the impression of "how to use amazing adventures to run scifi" than a complete setting
I'm talking about the new 600 page plus supermodule they published earlier this year. It's basically a sandbox on a massive spaceship. So the framework is there, but you do what you want. For an upcoming campaign I'm having the party retrieve part of an artifact from the ship.
Quote from: Persimmon on December 27, 2021, 01:27:37 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat on December 27, 2021, 03:48:51 AM
Read both games. Go with the one that feels right.
I'm currently reading Worlds Without Number and I'm getting a StarSiege vibe. If you don't know StarSiege, it's Castles & Crusades in Space that for whatever reason, Troll Lords never pushed. Perhaps because in their eagerness to create an everything-scifi game, they instead created a toolkit instead of a game. I haven't yet decided if WWN is a toolkit or a game. SWN, at least 1e, was very much a game of its own with its own implied setting. Haven't read SWN 2e yet.
I'd love for Troll Lords to revisit StarSiege and give it the love they've given C&C.
Have you seen their version of Starship Warden? Pretty impressive and you can play it with C&C if you're looking for a "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks" type experience. They still have Star Siege stuff listed on the website, or you could use amazing adventures. I've adapted some of the creatures & robots straight from the book for a C&C adventure I wrote.
Starship Warden is a really cool book but IMO it's mislabeled as a Siege Engine product as all the stats in the book for everything are Metamorphosis Alpha stats, not Siege Engine stats. Even all the treasure is aimed at MA.
Better to take the Warden and just use it with a different OSR game of your choice, since you have to redo all the stats for everything anyways.
There is a really short ACKS sci-fi document somewhere on the interwebs, but you'd get more out of combining WWN and SWN for Starship Warden.
Not true; you can play it siege engine pretty much as is. I pulled stuff right from it and dropped it into C&C without conversion, at least for the creatures & robots.
I backed Amazing Adventures 1e and I'm very happy with the game. It's my goto for Raiders of the Lost Ark meets Rocketeer style pulp games.
I'm surprised AA hasn't gotten more love since it plays VERY well at the table. Fans of C&C who want a "modern" game should check it out. You could easily do Steampunk to Cyberpunk with the rules.
Quote from: Ocule on December 25, 2021, 02:34:10 PM
Ran across these gems recently as I was diving into systems that build upon BECMI and they both look awesome. A lot of games focus entirely on a restatement of the original rules or BECMI but reading the design behind things like Castles and Crusades got me thinking to give games a look that would be an evolution of the classic D&D rules.
Any thoughts on these systems? Or any others with a similar approach of not reinventing the wheel but not just reformatting of another game.
Worlds Without Number is awesome.
It is a 5e killer for me. It has a level of simplicity + complexity when needed that just makes it a good fit for new players and veterans alike.
If you want simple, just go with default picks for backgrounds and pick a standard class. If you want detailed complex character building, choose skills based on background, go Adventurer and mix and max your character. The point is Worlds Without Number provides both Basic D&D level simplicity and near Pathfinder level customization in the same game.
The faction system in WWN gives you enough domain level action to make it meaningful but without getting bogged down in spreadsheets. ACKS has a great domain system but it is so detailed that I found the effort / reward ratio to be not worthwhile.
Worlds Without Number also presents a different default setting (which isn't really all that baked in, except for spells) that is interesting and different than standard fantasy fare. The spell system is steeped deep in Dying Earth Vancian spell naming and the feel that creates.
WWN also has a number of small but impactful variations from standard D&D fare. For example, shields on their own grant AC's comparable to armor. So you can recreate your '300' style spartan warriors. Shock damage on miss combined with the right focus choices make fighter types WAY powerful and on par with anything Mages can do. Mages get ultra powerful spells but limited castings (WWN is even more limited than Basic D&D in this regard, so magic users can be uber powerful but don't overshadow other classes).
Experts are awesome. You can play a skill only style character and be balanced against other character types. Unique feature and Origin foci (feats) allow you to adapt to any setting and include different races and ancestries.
WWN just hits all the sweet spots of Role Playing... it has a mechanical depth that can satisfy rules savy players, while also being open enough to allow beginner/casual players to thrive.
Quote from: fixable on December 29, 2021, 03:28:46 AM
WWN also has a number of small but impactful variations from standard D&D fare. For example, shields on their own grant AC's comparable to armor. So you can recreate your '300' style spartan warriors. Shock damage on miss combined with the right focus choices make fighter types WAY powerful and on par with anything Mages can do. Mages get ultra powerful spells but limited castings (WWN is even more limited than Basic D&D in this regard, so magic users can be uber powerful but don't overshadow other classes).
I really like WWN but my players had some huge issues with Shock. They didn't like that it was a melee only thing.
The level 1 fighter of the group had an 18 Str, Stab 1, was using a short sword and had the foci Armsmaster. That meant he was doing 1d6+4 damage with a Shock 6/15. So on a successful hit he was dealing out a minimum of 6 damage because you can't do less than your Shock value and 6hp on a miss (vs AC15 or lower).
Meanwhile the Elementalist had to hit to do a minimum of 4 damage (1d6+level+Magic) with his Elemental Blast art. The guy using a bow had the same issue. He had to hit to be useful while the fighter could miss every attack and still kill things fairly easily.
Quote from: rgalex on December 29, 2021, 08:27:22 AM
I really like WWN but my players had some huge issues with Shock. They didn't like that it was a melee only thing.
The level 1 fighter of the group had an 18 Str, Stab 1, was using a short sword and had the foci Armsmaster. That meant he was doing 1d6+4 damage with a Shock 6/15. So on a successful hit he was dealing out a minimum of 6 damage because you can't do less than your Shock value and 6hp on a miss (vs AC15 or lower).
Meanwhile the Elementalist had to hit to do a minimum of 4 damage (1d6+level+Magic) with his Elemental Blast art. The guy using a bow had the same issue. He had to hit to be useful while the fighter could miss every attack and still kill things fairly easily.
Unless I sorely miss my guess; the fact that both of them were using ranged attacks, and would not be in the thick of things like the fighter did not factor into their calculations...
Quote from: rgalex on December 29, 2021, 08:27:22 AM
Quote from: fixable on December 29, 2021, 03:28:46 AM
WWN also has a number of small but impactful variations from standard D&D fare. For example, shields on their own grant AC's comparable to armor. So you can recreate your '300' style spartan warriors. Shock damage on miss combined with the right focus choices make fighter types WAY powerful and on par with anything Mages can do. Mages get ultra powerful spells but limited castings (WWN is even more limited than Basic D&D in this regard, so magic users can be uber powerful but don't overshadow other classes).
I really like WWN but my players had some huge issues with Shock. They didn't like that it was a melee only thing.
The level 1 fighter of the group had an 18 Str, Stab 1, was using a short sword and had the foci Armsmaster. That meant he was doing 1d6+4 damage with a Shock 6/15. So on a successful hit he was dealing out a minimum of 6 damage because you can't do less than your Shock value and 6hp on a miss (vs AC15 or lower).
Meanwhile the Elementalist had to hit to do a minimum of 4 damage (1d6+level+Magic) with his Elemental Blast art. The guy using a bow had the same issue. He had to hit to be useful while the fighter could miss every attack and still kill things fairly easily.
Shock is a new mechanic that is definitely controversial. I remember the craziness on damage on a miss in early 5e betas, lol. But I don't think it is as big a deal in Worlds Without Number.
Firstly, Shock works both ways. Monsters apply shock as well. So that warrior that is doing 6 shock every round is subjected to shock damage as well. In the long run shock works against PCs.
Secondly, Elemental Blast and bow allows attacks without risk of opposing shock. Elemental Blast also has the added benefit of overcoming 'only hit by magic' as well as the element used can be extremely effective against appropriate foes.
Thirdly, WWN does assume that magic is useful but not the end all be all of power. It is appropriate that a skilled Warrior be flat out superior to a Mage in most situations. In WWN, magic is a tool that is incredibly effective in overcoming specific situations, but it is not a 'cure-all'