I've seen different levels of realism in different P-A games. Certainly Redline is more "grounded" than Omega World.

In some campaigns I've seen people having to try to keep track of food and fuel, their stuff breaking down, etc.
In others, its about adventurers walking through a post-apocalyptic wilderness with nary a concern about details like food or fuel.

Which style do you tend to prefer?

RPGPundit

I think everything has it's place. If you spend every adventure counting beans and bullets you don't often find time for anything else. I like to mix it up-a few games about getting to "something" essential for survival, and then maybe a few games where they deal with other things.

I do think it's important to keep them on edge, and worrying about where they'll get new beans and bullets from.

If I were to run a PA campaign it would probably combine "post-post-apocalyptic" with "howling wasteland." Some pockets would be partially re-civilized by settlements with a wide range of tech levels on the Gamma World model (think Pitz Burke and environs from GW 2e).  But many places would be scorched earth deserts roved by barbarian hordes in the vein of Road Warrior, or wildlands and swamp overgrown with mutant plants and beasties.

The importance of resource management would depend on where the PCs were.  Tone-wise, though, I'm not a big fan of bleak, bare survival unto death PA settings.  I prefer gonzo science fantasy adventuring and slapstick ultraviolence; the sometimes comedic tone of Gamma World has always appealed to me more than realistically simulating the end of humanity.  Thundarr, not On the Beach (or on The Road, from what I gather.  Haven't read it yet.).

I'm a huge fan of "small" games, in which resource management and other very practical concerns take dominance over everyday life, in which adventure goals are as simple and practical as "find diesel and take it." I like for those practical concerns to be dealt with as realistically as possible; you shouldn't plant crops one week and get food from them the next. Every day should be a constant struggle to obtain even the most basic survival needs, from fresh water to edible food; even when the adventures start getting "big," there should continue to be reminders about the essentials: in theory, by that point, the players should have set up some self-sustaining system, so they're not thinking about it all day every day, but it should still be a consideration. [Pace the ever-present blue-tarp water troughs in Lost, for instance.]

That said, if your games are always "small," which is to say local, practical, and mundane, the players are going to get bored in a hurry. While several members of my group - myself included - could probably roleplay out crop planning and water-maintenance for months, many players would quickly tire of having nothing "happen." Other people should come along, wanting your stuff; this should be handled realistically, as well.

But what about elements of the fantastic? Should mutants - created by the decay of a nearby nuclear reactor, or by the bombs that caused the apocalypse, or whatever - attack the party for seemingly no reason? Well, elements of the fantastic can certainly be fun, but I personally do prefer for these elements to at least seem reasonable. Radioactive mutants are not, in my mind, reasonable. Formerly civilized citizens made feral by deprivation certainly are, though, and you don't have to be a mutant to be an exciting challenge, or a most terrible foe. These bigger elements have their place in breaking the pacing of "just trying to stay alive in a world where that's hard."

The more global the game gets - maybe you're trying to make or break the makeshift army that's taking control of your region - the more tolerant I am of unrealism; here's where your "big bad" can be, and while I don't recommend should pads made from semi tires, the big bad can certainly be a little more fantastic than "a former politician" or whatever.

Ultimately, I think there are a couple of different considerations: the realism of your experience - how in accord with reality the events of the game are - and the scale/scope of the game, which runs from "trying to find fresh water" to "keeping the apocalypse from happening again." And I think how desirable [for me] one axis is depends largely on where it rests against the other axis.

I generally prefer gonzo science fantasy to Twilight: 2000 grim realism, though I can certainly enjoy both.  Old Gamma World & Mutant Future can go a bit too far with the silliness, with intelligent walking cactus PCs and such.  I like something on the level of 'Heavy Metal post apocalypse', Den and Taarna from the HM movie are perfect in their different ways.  I don't get a thrill out of tracking bullets, unless they're presented as equivalent to magic items - eg the scene in Mad Max 2 where The Humungous unleashes his pistol works well, because the non-existence of functional firearms has been previously established.

Quote from: S'mon;258992I generally prefer gonzo science fantasy to Twilight: 2000 grim realism, though I can certainly enjoy both.

Pffft.  It took us something like three sessions to figure out how to shoot things.

However, the re-print might be interesting.

Quote from: RPGPundit;258978In some campaigns I've seen people having to try to keep track of food and fuel, their stuff breaking down, etc.
In others, its about adventurers walking through a post-apocalyptic wilderness with nary a concern about details like food or fuel.

Which style do you tend to prefer?

To me verisimilitude is extremely important for PA settings, even though there may be fantastical elements in some them. Resource managment is a good way to establish the "survivalist" nature of the genre.

Regards,
David R

I am big fan of Waste World which has some good mechanics for scarcity.  Guarding a water caravan becomes a good job in some places while other places have you scrounging for ammo.

I think scarcity and scavenging are fun parts of post-apocalypse games, but not when taken to extremes, aka use those themes as a part of some stories, but not every adventure.

I think balance should be the key in most PA type games.  Depending on the GM, your treasure for the day could be the resources your team needs badly, such as food, or fire.  One thing to remember in any RPG is survival is the means for success.  You need to evaluate what is most coveted in the game, and once established you could sell/trade excess provisions to further your quest, and gain information.    Personally I feel that items such as food and water help support the ability to maintain your existence.

I suppose it really depends on the game you playing or going for. I’ve ran more “grim” or “realistic” post-apocalyptic games than “fantasy”. T2K was probably the longest one, where the players were mainly concerned with fuel, ammo, spare parts and other day-to-day things. Keeping the truck running and distilling fuel was usually the biggest concern.

I've never gotten to run a PA game, much as I've wanted to.  Gamma World has an immense appeal to me, but I get more excited thinking about a PA game whose tone falls somewhere between the CRPGs Wasteland/Fallout and the Aftermath! RPG.  Fairly gritty, with some moderate gonzy thrown in for good measure.  The survivalist aspect is very much in tune with my tastes of late.

Now that I think about it, the only post-apocalyptic game I've played is Earthdawn, which is about 100 percent "fantastic." Well, there's also the series of post-zombiepocalypse games Paul ran, but those were also primarily fantastic. Paranoia, too. Damn. Apparently, I need to run a post-apocalyptic game that has something to do with the ideals I espouse!

My vision of post-apocalyptic games and the ramifications of the collapse of civilization is strongly informed by the first quarter-hour or so of the first episode of the original Connections series, and its BBC companion volume, both of which I highly recommend, and not just as game inspiration, but as general information everyone ought to possess if they want to live in civilization, or survive beyond it.

Here's an example of a PA setting I ran powered by Savage Worlds and Car Wars. It's called Burning Honor.

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=5420

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;259021Here's an example of a PA setting I ran powered by Savage Worlds and Car Wars. It's called Burning Honor.

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=5420

Regards,
David R

Groovy.

Talk about synchronicity, I was just thinking about this last night before I went to bed and thought that I would post something about it today.  

I was thinking about Gamma World, its various editions, and how science-fantasy was viewed by most gamers.  Was it more gonzo or more gritty?

I prefer grim-and-gritty games, and this definitely applies to PA settings.  My gateway into roleplaying was through 2nd Gamma World and the GM played and portrayed the world as grim, and not gonzo.  In my GW games, I have always portrayed the world, its inhabitants, and setting as grim rather than gonzo.  

One of the tools that I used to give the campaigns a give a grim-and-gritty feel was the use resource management.   I limited access to serious technological devices, and their power sources.  I focused on the need for the characters finding clean food and water.  Also, I focused on the environment and its impact on the safety and health of the characters.