FLGS = Friendly local game store
ParanoidAndroid
joined 1 year ago
I wouldn't say recommended. I had tons of fun with base Rimworld, and that's how I'd encourage anyone play it first when starting out. But imo the DLCs are all really worth it and add fun/interesting things that I wouldn't wanna play without at this point.
Some of these I have/am running as a GM, so it's mostly "in what game do I want to be a player in"? Shadowrun, Traveller, Symbaroum, Rogue Trader, Warhammer Fantasy RPG, Cyberpunk RED and/or 2020, Star Trek Adventures
I can agree with that, mostly 'cause I feel like Starfinder itself was a bit "not needed"
Valid opinion, I just never had the feeling with any of the system I enjoy. What would be an example in your view?
I love crunchy/complex systems! I GMed a lot of D&D 3.5; PF 1E; Cyberpunk; and some more. Especially having a big amount of choice in character creation is essential to me. I want my character to feel and play mechanically distinct from the other players. It's one of the many reasons I despise 5E. Every Fighter I try to build plays exactly the same.
I can never get enough of new books, so that's also more of a plus to me than anything else.
The length of the 2E Corebook is mostly due to it containing basically the PHB+GM Guide. It might look intimidating, but it's really not as crunchy as it seems. So I really recommend trying to find a game in your LGS or online to join just to test out the system. Imo, Savage Worlds is a decent alternative to Pathfinder, even has a pathfinder setting. It's a bit more rules-light as 2E but still offers good amounts of depth. Plus it is a setting agnostic system, so you can play Fantasy, Horror, SciFi, Cyberpunk, pretty much anything you can think of.
Might be a bit late here, but I just started a new Volcano embark since my last one failed due to aquifier :D
Still early on, but I needed to get my lava moat set up.
I'm fairly certain it was Hogfather, which I borrowed from a friend, and then continued to get every single one as I could. Night Watch will always be my favorite, can't even count how many time I reread it and relistened to the audiobook. Men at Arms is a close second for containing my favorite quote, the "Boot theory of socioeconomic unfairness"
Normally I'm the forever GM and ran 2 and a bit 1E APs; but I'm playing in a Kingmaker game atm. We barely started and just leveled up to L2, but it's already great fun. Last combat encounter, a small bandit camp, my Swashbuckler/Wrestler just had the most incredible luck and basically 1-hit killed everything he touched. Sentry up a tree? Just athletics up the tree and dropkick the bandits sternum through his spine. Another 3 bandits met similarly brutal demises.
I tend to start with a rough concept/flavour and then look for mechanics to facilitate that. For example; for my current character I mainly wanted to build something like a pro wrestler. Looked a bit at the rules and found that Catfolk + Gymnast Swashbuckler + Wrestler dedication will do exactly what I want the character to be. Throw in some Kurgess worship and I basically had exactly the character I imagined.
For a quick one-shot to test out the system, most of my players will just skim the rules, and that'll be enough. But if I run a long-term campaign I expect my players to have a basic grasp of the rules, but most importantly know how their characters rules works.
I will happily explain and help players get started. But if they ask me for 100th time which die to roll; don't know how their character works; or similar basic things, I will get pissed at some point and ask them to please learn the game we're playing.
You don't need to know every single rule, but a basic grasp of them is just the bare minimum or I will kick them out of the game at some point. This hasn't happened to me yet, all my players are very good at picking up new systems.