The responses to my recent player survey suggest that some of them haven’t fully made the mental shift from D&D. I’ve played and enjoyed D&D for decades; but SW works better with a different play style. I wanted to explain the differences, and after some forum surfing, and reflection, this is what I came up with. Other insights welcome!
COMBAT
Ablative hit points vs sudden death: D&D characters are worn down gradually, over 4-5 encounters. In Savage Worlds, any blow in any fight can be lethal, and there’s no resurrection spell to bring you back.
Death spiral: D&D characters stay fully capable until they lose the last hit point. SW PCs see their capabilities degrade rapidly, wound by wound.
The GM effort per enemy to run an encounter is lower in SW than D&D, because of the simpler damage and condition rules, and because players control their allies, whether or not their characters do. This encourages bigger fights.
LEVELLING UP
D&D characters start off weak, and improve dramatically as they level up. SW characters are more capable to begin with, but don’t improve as much later; arguably, they level off at the equivalent of 6th-8th level. There is thus no need for the monsters to get bigger and more dangerous as PCs level up, because even goblins remain a viable threat at all levels. Therefore, the multi-level range of monsters in D&D is unnecessary in Savage Worlds.
Savage Worlds isn’t very sensitive to differences in level between party members. This means new or intermittent players don’t get left behind.
Savage Worlds has no niche protection. In D&D, only a wizard can do wizardly things, only a thief can do thievish things, and only a fighter can fight well. In SW, there is no reason why a wizard can’t also be a competent fighter, stealthy, and able to pick locks. This means that effective parties can be smaller than in D&D, and as the party grows, it becomes harder for each character to have its own unique role in the group.
Update: As Umberto Pignatelli points out in the comments trail for this post, SW PCs tend to grow horizontally (broadening their niche and overlapping into other niches, but not getting overpoweringly good at any one skill or trait) while D&D ones grow vertically (getting much better at what their niche does).
ENCOUNTERS
Random encounters and traps in D&D provide experience and treasure for level grinding, and act as a “hit point tax” for entering parts of a scenario. Those are neither necessary nor desirable in Savage Worlds, as SW PCs don’t get experience for killing monsters, and don’t have hit points in the traditional sense.
Like this:
One blogger likes this post.
This entry was posted on 21 March 2012 at 12:37 pm and is filed under Dungeons & Dragons, Reviews, Savage Worlds. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I am not a business owner and I have no expertise in this field but I would like a discussion about my observations and what other people think of the Standard RPG Business Model.
This is also probably going to be a long post, If you need a TL:DR then this isn't for you.
The first RPG I have ever played was DnD 3.5 and I think that 3.5 is an excellent example of DnDs business model. Essentially the company will produce one or one group of core rulebook(s) and then later sell peripheral books for more specified rules. This business model lends itself to a very big spike in sales in the beginning which diminishes rapidly as the players become satisfied with their games. As these sales fall the books tend to fall in quality and the sales drop further. This is the real cause of new editions such as 4e and the upcoming DnD Next.
Consumers aren't idiots and they see that these new editions are less for making the rules or setting better and more for keeping the companies wealthy. For example I think that each new edition of DnD usually introduces elements which solves some of the problems from the old session but generally the new edition is brought to introduce new sales. The transition from 3.0 to 3.5 I feel is more of a mass-errata than money pandering which is the kind of new edition I believe is needed occasionally. We see the same type of edition change in Savage Worlds to Savage Worlds Deluxe where the edition change is supposed to make the game more fun/playable.
The RPG with the best business model in my opinion is Savage Worlds where they produce one core rulebook and use their sales in settings to determine what books they should focus on. This still has the same issues as eventually exhausting their market though. I don't know of an RPG company that has a successful business model designed for sustained growth, what's worse is I can't think of one.
This makes me think that unless our hobby sees a radical change in the way we do business most RPG companies will be unsustainable in the long term without constantly producing new editions of the same game.
Tabletop is my show on Felicia Day's YouTube channel, Geek and Sundry. It's sort of like Celebrity Poker meets Dinner for Five, and we play tabletop games with interesting people. Our first episode debuts on April 2, and new episodes will run every other week after that. In season one of the show, we play games like Settlers of Catan, The Last Night on Earth, Munchkin, Small World, and Alhambra. Some of the players include Grant Imahara, Sean Plott (Better known as Day[9]), Dodger Leigh, Ryan Higa, Beth Riesgraf, Morgan Webb, Garfunkle and Oats, Veronica Belmont, and Colin Ferguson.
Kickstarter projects are all the rage in the RPG community at the moment, and many fantastic projects are getting funded. From RPG sourcebooks to dice,
After several days of voting, we have our winner for the Kobold Artistry contest! The voting public has chosen . . . Krik the Knifer by Terry Maranda Congratulations, Terry, and thank you for submitting such an excellent piece to the contest! Thanks also go out to all those who entered, our judges, and all [...]