1. A game set during the 17th Century wars of religion? Ideas that occur to me are a houseruled WFRP (and if so 1e or 2e) or maybe Flashing Blades, but there must be options I'm missing.
2. A game set during the Renaissance in the early to mid 16th Century? Maelstrom (the original one from way back in the day) could work I guess, or maybe WFRP again with tons of houserules, but neither is quite right I suspect.
3. What about a game set in Britain in the 14th Century? Mongoose Runequest maybe? Other?
In each case, if you have a choice, why that choice and not something else?
Thanks all :)
I was going to break apart your post and quote each choice. But this way is easier : Look at my subtitle near my avatar. Everything except the Warhammer Fantasy , I would choose to use GURPS4th edition. (At least I'm consistent and somewhat predictable.)
Hell, if I knew more about the background universe of WARHAMMER - I bet GURPS could adapt that as well. I've seen threads over on the SJG forums where people were doing just that.
Other reason I say GURPS?
A lot of those setting or ideas you list are basically historical campaigns. GURPS has always been good at doing historical settings. Lots of gamers have bought their historical settiung books just for use as reference even tho they were running other game systems.
- Ed C.
Until I learn more about the tone and playstyle you're shooting for I will recommend Wushu.
OK, and En Garde for the 17th c.
Hey Koltar, I've amended the OP to be clearer, I'm only asking about the three historical periods, the systems I mentioned were just thoughts I had that might fit but weren't necessarily great.
Gurps would indeed do them all, but it's not presently my cup of tea, fine as it is and happily as I would play it were you to run it.
Quote from: Pierce InverarityUntil I learn more about the tone and playstyle you're shooting for I will recommend Wushu.
OK, and En Garde for the 17th c.
History, politics, religious and civil conflict, rise of the merchant classes and eclipse of the aristocracy, gritty tone, the usual.
Flashing Blades incidentally is basically En Garde with extra stuff, I mean they never admitted it but it's way obvious if you own both.
If you're playing soldiery or others involved in smash-'em-up action: GURPS
If you're doing courtly/political/religious shennanigans: The Dying Earth.
No, really. Its got excellent "social interaction" rules and glosses over combat (aside from duelling and such). It would be really good for talky intrigue RPing.
Quote from: WerekoalaIf you're playing soldiery or others involved in smash-'em-up action: GURPS
If you're doing courtly/political/religious shennanigans: The Dying Earth.
No, really. Its got excellent "social interaction" rules and glosses over combat (aside from duelling and such). It would be really good for talky intrigue RPing.
TDE is an interesting suggestion actually, that could be worth looking at, though I wonder if the tone would end up too comic.
I had thought of making the following houserule next time I run TDE:
"no health pool.
If you lose a fight, which is a contest of attack versus defence, then you are slightly wounded if the attacker wins with a marginal victory, incapacitated if they win with a solid victory and dying if they win with a overwhelming victory.
I don't have the book to hand, so the success levels aren't correctly named there, but you get the idea.
For non-combat threats to health I'd have you roll an appropriate skill like Survival or Athletics, if no skill you get one die as usual.
And that's it. Robin Laws has a tendency to make PCs unkillable or near as in his games, which I think directly works against his goal of having combat less of a feature. Make combat deadly, but persuasion effective, and combat will not happen much.
As the game is currently written you go through a ton of rolls until the fight is decided, then a ton of health rolls until the PC takes a wound, and that wound is then the lightest possible. I don't think it works that well, but I think it can be fixed fairly easily.
"
Okay I'm amending my answer based on anecdotal evidence and play report testimony I've heard from LOTS of customers over the past years ....
I could also recommend maybe SAVAGE WORLDS for doing those historicals - I just haven't had enough practice with the system. Am at the verge of trying it stage with that set of rules.
It all depends on how 'tight' and regimented you want your rules system.
I don't recommend the Mongoose Runequest for ANYTHING. Customers have been unhappy with it at the store....what copies we have of it at the store now - just sit there on the shelf. There was also a recent flamewar over on the SJG forums about the Mongoose RUNEQUEST and the upshot of it all was that there was a ton of typos, mistakes and pages of errata related to it. (also longterm Runequest were very unhappy with it for various reasons)
Short version: Its got "issues" as a game system - okay ?
The more I think about it..... TRUE20 might work out as well. The Pundit may know much more about that system than I would. A couple of the store customers were doing a Musketeers game using TRUE20.
Hope thats somewhat helpful.
Guess it also depends on whats available and easy for you to get in Italy.
- Ed C.
Thanks Koltar, particularly for the MRQ feedback, that's useful.
FYI, I'm located in Britain, not Italy (though I do go there fairly often).
I'd probably go with Savage Worlds for all three. Though for 14th century Britain I could see making D&D or Pendragon stretch to fit.
Quote from: Balbinus"no health pool.
If you lose a fight, which is a contest of attack versus defence, then you are slightly wounded if the attacker wins with a marginal victory, incapacitated if they win with a solid victory and dying if they win with a overwhelming victory.
Robin Laws has a tendency to make PCs unkillable or near as in his games, which I think directly works against his goal of having combat less of a feature. Make combat deadly, but persuasion effective, and combat will not happen much.
Yeah, the combat part is kinda klunky, but the flavor of the language and the social combat is more what I had in mind for the courtly intrigue style of game. I'd never use TDE for anything like The Three Musketeers, for example, but it'd be great for a BBC drawing-room drama - or some spunky Bishop trying to take down the Pope via deciet and intrigue.
Hi Balbinus!
1: I'd use my own Blood Games II, with no Path characters and Ancient Chargen. It's what I actually used when running this, along with A Mighty Fortress for reference, and it worked very, very well.
2: TDE, with your health pool idea. I like it!
3: Pendragon.
-clash
I noticed you posted the same question on the Big and Purpley.
GURPS is getting some positive support from names I don't even recognize.
Cool!!
- Ed C.
I don't have any good suggestions for 1&2 that haven't already been mentioned...well, maybe Lace & Steel based on pure hearsay...although personally the "weird" elements of the game, and their choice of illustrator, are factors that kept me away.
Quote from: Balbinus3. What about a game set in Britain in the 14th Century? Mongoose Runequest maybe?
Harnmaster, I'd go for 1e because I know it best and have qualms about HMC and 3e, and I don't know HM Gold at all. Although HM is based more specifically on the 11th century, it would still probably be the quickest BRP-like game to adapt (including Elric/Stormbringer), except possibly Pendragon.
For more mechanical support of high-level stuff like politics and economics, I understand there's a Harnmaster manors book, not sure how good it is.
All that said if you can figure out Burning Wheel, the Lifepaths, Resources/Circles/Reputation, and other elements offer at least the
promise of a built-in campaign framework. E.g. I remember reading somewhere that the income/expenditure rolls (I really forget how they work) for a beginning knight basically lead to a net expected loss, thus urging the character to seek employment/"adventure".
Well, you know what I'd suggest.
But I'll do it anyway. EABA. Handles the specific genres fine, and I could adapt some of the ideas and equipment from the Ythrek sourcebook, which is semi-Renaissance in feel.
Me I'm a bit different. I don't match the system to the setting, but to the players.
I mean, if you've got a bunch of players who never read rules, have short attention spans and don't enjoy combat, then it's a bit pointless shoving GURPS at them. And if you've got rules lawyers who painstakingly document every ounce of encumbrance and treat every violent encounter as something worth planning like the D-Day invasion, then probably you should not give them Risus.
I say, match the system to the players. Anything else is just asking for a headache.
MRQ isn't so bad. It has had issues--no argument. The rules have been wrangled and the books themselves had some quality issues as MG switched to their own press. But I do like the system and I find that with the same patience and practice I put into other systems, it responds just fine. I would consider it for the time periods, along with all my favorite generics.
I would also look at Lace and Steel. It has a nice 17th century flavor.
I would use some variant of d20 system for all of those. Reason is simple, my players know the system, no need to learn new rules and we can quickly start playing.
Now for number one I would probably tweak Call of Ctulhu d20 with some things form Past d20. It sounds like it could live well with some horor elements.
For Reneisance I am tempted to go for d20 Modern with Past supplement, especially if I don't know what kind of game it should be. On the other hand I can see make it a bit more postapocalyptical with Monte Cook's WoD. Seriously, this sounds to me really like interesting and viable option.
For the 14th Century Britain? Dungeons & Dragons without races option and some minor tweaks here and there.
I'd use True20, but with a modified feat list. I would also use the rules in the companion to create new heroic roles, or I might let the plyers go straight into point buy.
Why?
Because its what I use for everything these days.
Quote from: BalbinusMaelstrom (the original one from way back in the day) could work I guess...
Crikey, I'd forgotten all about that little gem of 80's gaming. IIRC the author was 16 at the time of publication, and showed an incredible amount of maturity and knowledge when presenting the 16th/17th century world.
For anyone interested in tracking down a copy it's well worth a look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maelstrom_%28role_playing_game%29
Quote from: AosI'd use True20, but with a modified feat list. I would also use the rules in the companion to create new heroic roles, or I might let the plyers go straight into point buy.
Why?
Because its what I use for everything these days.
It's increasingly become my system of choice lately too, although I agree that the Feat lists at least would need remodelling. Fascinate and Suggestion are just a little
too broad for a game that centres on diplomacy, and things like Great Cleave are way too much for an historically accurate setting. I'd probably chuck out the minion rules too. Great for heroic fantasy, not so good for 17th century Europe.
That said, there's plenty of scope within the rules to run a cracking historically inspired game. I imagine most characters would end taking a number of levels in Expert, just because it's so damn useful to have that level of skill in a milieu where knowledge is power.
Quote from: DrewIt's increasingly become my system of choice lately too, although I agree that the Feat lists at least would need remodelling. Fascinate and Suggestion are just a little too broad for a game that centres on diplomacy, and things like Great Cleave are way too much for an historically accurate setting. I'd probably chuck out the minion rules too. Great for heroic fantasy, not so good for 17th century Europe.
That said, there's plenty of scope within the rules to run a cracking historically inspired game. I imagine most characters would end taking a number of levels in Expert, just because it's so damn useful to have that level of skill in a milieu where knowledge is power.
Yeah, I've actually been thinking of using it for an historically inspired frpg. I want to focus on a period of exploration/discovery with guys like this- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Russel_Wallace as the PCs. I think "Naturalist" would be a great heroic role.
Quote from: AosYeah, I've actually been thinking of using it for an historically inspired frpg. I want to focus on a period of exploration/discovery with guys like this- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Russel_Wallace as the PCs. I think "Naturalist" would be a great heroic role.
I think that's an excellent idea for a game, although the gonzo GM that lives in my skull would be fighting the urge to ambush Wallace with giant carnivorous apes at every turn...
Quote from: DrewI think that's an excellent idea for a game, although the gonzo GM that lives in my skull would be fighting the urge to ambush Wallace with giant carnivorous apes at every turn...
I've got the same problem. actually.
The Riddle of Steel would capture a fully gritty combat system. The innate class-system built into the char-gen would be interesting as well (higher-class characters have innately fewer skill points).
I mean, not perfect ... but it'll make people think twice before crossing swords.
-Marco
Quote from: Balbinus1. A game set during the 17th Century wars of religion? Ideas that occur to me are a houseruled WFRP (and if so 1e or 2e) or maybe Flashing Blades, but there must be options I'm missing.
2. A game set during the Renaissance in the early to mid 16th Century? Maelstrom (the original one from way back in the day) could work I guess, or maybe WFRP again with tons of houserules, but neither is quite right I suspect.
3. What about a game set in Britain in the 14th Century? Mongoose Runequest maybe? Other?
In each case, if you have a choice, why that choice and not something else?
Thanks all :)
I dunno -- probably GURPS or -- since it's you -- BRP. But I'm interested to know what aspects would be important to you in a system in those games. If I were asking, I'd want...
1) Appropriate weapons lists -- and rules that reflect the nature of period weapons with fidelity to... well, maybe "reality" but at least fiction as I understand it.
2) Appropriate skill lists to reflect both "regular" people in the era / country and adventurers
3) Traits / advantages to reflect social and economic strata (since I believe class and wealth are significant advantages in those settings)
4) Rules for whatever key fiction & settings I might want (e.g. rules for fighting on ships or mass battles, or whatever). If I was doing Renaissance Italy, maybe I'd want... I dunno... poison rules for skulldugery?)
5) Rules for drowning and falling that reflect what it was like to drown and fall back then. Given that it was a few hundred years ago, I suspect that the earth was slightly more dense (less atomic decay) and so I would expect the base falling rate (and thus base damage) to be slightly higher than I expect in my modern rules. I'd also expect the rules to account for the effect of puffy shirts and wigs (which almost everyone wore back then) on terminal velocity. I don't think drowning rules would change that much, but if the setting was Venice I'd want a system that had a special subsystem for getting trapped under a gondola.
6) What I'd really want isn't system specific -- stuff like costs of living, travel-time tables, notes about the technologies I'm *not* familiar with, etc.
What sort of system support are you looking for?
Cheers,
-E.
Hi!
Here are my thoughts:
1. A game set during the 17th Century wars of religion? Ideas that occur to me are a houseruled WFRP (and if so 1e or 2e) or maybe Flashing Blades, but there must be options I'm missing.
I will preface this with the statement, I am not a rabid ditv fanboy. But, in a setting where the characters are highly motivated to succeed, not just for them selves, but for idealistic reasons (like jedi for instance), ditv produces the right results. And to allay any fears, I played this a few times with casual gamers and it did not produce any bizarre or unusual play.
2. A game set during the Renaissance in the early to mid 16th Century? Maelstrom (the original one from way back in the day) could work I guess, or maybe WFRP again with tons of houserules, but neither is quite right I suspect.
For the swashbuckling goodness, maybe Riddle of Steel?
3. What about a game set in Britain in the 14th Century? Mongoose Runequest maybe? Other?
Perfect20 might be a great way to capture the intrigue...
actually, i'd just 2nd your choices. i'm not too familiar with a lot of these titles previously mentioned. WFRP 1st ed would be fine for 1 & 2 (i don't have 2nd edition, yet), and using MRQ for #3, well, your players wouldn't need to buy anything--just use the SRD.
Yeah...Id say Gurps too and I don't even really like Gurps :P
Gurps does historical and gritty very well!
Mate, you will end using BRP and you know it :D
Anyway, the system you choose it should be valid for the three settings, as they're quite familiar.
Quote from: ImperatorMate, you will end using BRP and you know it :D
Yeah. That's why I said what I would use, not what I think Balbinus should use. He knows very well it will be BRP, and so do I.
-clash
Quote from: Balbinus1. A game set during the 17th Century wars of religion? Ideas that occur to me are a houseruled WFRP (and if so 1e or 2e) or maybe Flashing Blades, but there must be options I'm missing.
AD&D 2nd ed historical supplement 'A Mightly Fortress'. Whether I use it with 2nd ed or not... Yes, I probably would. Not the soundest edition of the game, but good enough, and 'Mighty Fortress' (detailing more or less to that era) is an excellent product.
Quote2. A game set during the Renaissance in the early to mid 16th Century? Maelstrom (the original one from way back in the day) could work I guess, or maybe WFRP again with tons of houserules, but neither is quite right I suspect.
Would depend rather on what the focus of the game is. Either Whitewolf WoD or Chthulu (BFRPG) would work.
Quote3. What about a game set in Britain in the 14th Century? Mongoose Runequest maybe? Other?
Ars magica. Perfect for it really. Or perhaps another of the historical supplements for 2nd ed (that era for Britain I'd use a mix of Charlemagnes Paladins and The Celts, but you'd have to modify both to get the flavour right).
The problem with this question for me is that it could mean a couple of things. One is "what system would you use?" and the other is "what system do you suggest I use?"
Now, I, for one, never pay the slightest attention to other people's suggestions for games I'm intending to run. I suspect Balbinus is the same. So my comments will stay away from suggesting a system for his use--he's big enough and ugly enough to work that out for himself.
I still have the problem of which system I might pick for the various settings outlined. To review:
1. A game set during the 17th Century wars of religion.
2. A game set during the Renaissance in the early to mid 16th Century.
3. A game set in Britain in the 14th Century.
It seems to me that every one boils down to the same question: what exactly do you want the system to be doing in play? For example, I could run every option there using HeroQuest if what I wanted was a game with no dedicated combat rules but with the option to go to the system for all and any conflict. The 'rules-lite' option in a sense.
Similarly, it seems to me that Burning Wheel could also handle all the given settings if I wanted more systemic focus on keynote fights and debates.
If I wanted a broad-brush, fictional approach with the setting providing mainly background colour for the characters, I might consider using Primetime Adventures. The ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) channel shows lots of costume dramas.
Then there's the thought that any of those eras would make a fascinating setting for a game of Sorcerer--but here you're starting to get into more esoteric territory....