Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

About the future Fantasy companion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Grave Knight
    Registered Member

  • Grave Knight
    replied
    I hope we get Deadlands style archetypes instead of classes.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ndreare
    Registered Member

  • Ndreare
    replied
    I would love a book of Arcane Backgrounds. It would be really cool to see one with a dozen example Arcane Backgrounds in it. So some game masters (me) could pick from and introduce in there games without doing so much ground work themselves.

    Leave a comment:

  • GilDashard
    Registered Member

  • GilDashard
    commented on 's reply
    I'd rather the armor restriction be added as general rule for the setting that applies to anyone that uses magic. Like an in world explanation like you can't channel magical energy effectively thru metal / thick clothing or it restricts any spells that require movement and adds a penalty for those while verbal only are unaffected. Classes just another level of complications to the system, just use archetypes to create paths to follow if the intent is to make it easy for players to follow a class concept.
  • Oneiros
    Registered Member

  • Oneiros
    replied
    There was a comment about the upcoming FC, either early this year or late last year, that it would include rules for Strongholds, which sounds very interesting.

    I also think it won't include class Edges. It will, though, probably bring in a lot of the power modifiers from SWPF (and the new SPC).

    One of things I would like to see is the idea of minor/major items and potions, based on whether the item mimics a power with or without a Raise. Just make the rules explaining that easier to find than in SWPF.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ndreare
    Registered Member

  • Ndreare
    replied
    Originally posted by GilDashard View Post
    I just don't see why classes are needed for fantasy but not other genres. Maybe just a few lightweight professional edges to cover the abilities that these tropes usually have.
    I like the idea of classes as long as they are balanced so you do not need them. I think Pathfinder is almost there, though the classes are more powerful than a single edge (I think basically as powerful as two), they are not so powerful that your character would be useless without them. Rifts does this by having the MARS which includes a Personal Character Concept so if you do not feel like playing one of the boxed text characters you can go free form.

    What I do dislike is the idea of being shoe horned into an idea because of something like "wizards do not wear armor" or other trope from D&D that is not representative of either balance or the fiction the games are inspired by.

    Leave a comment:

  • SeeleyOne
    Registered Member

  • SeeleyOne
    commented on 's reply
    I would like them for all genres. Some are easy to use in others without modification, such as Fighter.
  • GilDashard
    Registered Member

  • GilDashard
    replied
    I just don't see why classes are needed for fantasy but not other genres. Maybe just a few lightweight professional edges to cover the abilities that these tropes usually have.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ndreare
    Registered Member

  • Ndreare
    replied
    I have taken the monsters from Pathfinder monster manual and incorporated them into my other fantasy and urban fantasy games and adventures.

    I even plan on using a couple of them in a low powered Rifts game. (I double Toughness and Armor, then it works great.)
    Ndreare
    Registered Member
    Last edited by Ndreare; 09-28-2021, 08:32 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • mac40k
    Registered Member

  • mac40k
    replied
    I’m going back to Shane’s comments that the FC will be useful to PFSW owners, but obviously not required, so don’t see the potential for a lot of duplication. Some things like (some) spells are probably good candidates for inclusion; however, while none of us know the terms of the licensing agreement with Paizo, I doubt that it will be possible to play PFSW with just the FC, so I would think the class edges are not likely to appear.

    Leave a comment:

  • Radecliffe
    Registered Member

  • Radecliffe
    replied
    I don't think they will do anything like class edges in the Fantasy Companion. That's something specific to a particular setting (SPF) and not something that necessarily translates to Fantasy overall in Savage Worlds. I think there will be a lot of toolkit stuff personally. The idea of the Companions is to provide resources that can be used in any setting in the genre. Copying SPF would be a huge mistake IMO and I seriously doubt they would do that.

    Leave a comment:

  • MadArchivist
    Registered Member

  • MadArchivist
    replied
    They might do something like hyper modular “classes” like a cross between Iconic Frameworks in SR and custom supers in the SPC, so you can build out unique “classes” while having defining benefits that grow with the character. Very interested to see what winds up happening.

    Leave a comment:

  • ZenFox42
    Registered Member

  • ZenFox42
    replied
    Class-less-ness was one of the main reasons I like Savage Worlds so much! It would be a pity if they presented it as part of the core system in a supplement.

    Leave a comment:

  • GilDashard
    Registered Member

  • GilDashard
    replied
    Hopefully no classes like SWPF, just loses the feel of SW IMO.

    Leave a comment:

  • SeeleyOne
    Registered Member

  • SeeleyOne
    commented on 's reply
    Why? They are EXTREMELY common in a fantasy setting.
  • paladin2019
    Registered Member

  • paladin2019
    commented on 's reply
    That would be nice, as Pathfinder took 3e in directions I didn't like (though for valid economic reasons for Paizo) which poisoned me on Golarion. I have no interest in Savage Golarion as a result.
Working...
X