Using a supers rpg for a tradition medieval fantasy rpg have

>>52422705
Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition actually has a supplement called "Warriors and Warlocks" exactly for that sort of thing, so that actually helps take some of the load off.

>>52422705

There's a thread somewhere on GITP where a guy tries to port D&D 3.5 in its entirety into Mutants and Masterminds, in the hope of making 3.5 less broken and gay.

I dunno how it played out though.

>>52426671
>>52422705

The thread is about trying it and being amazed at how well it works.

It works pretty well. Mostly because superhero RPGs are very often just "people with powers" RPGs, and WotC D&D is medieval superheroes anyway.

File: 1479773735437.jpg (178KB, 640x575px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 640x575px

>>52422705
Most definitely

Fun as hell and allows for a lot of customization, just make sure everyone is on the same page about the vibe of the game

I've played a game that ran in a setting similar to a mix of Eberron and Green Ronin's Freeport with a bit of Points of Light, a just getting to Age of Sail setting with Artificers and more ubiquitous magical items and an emphasis on exploration

The player characters were a fairly varied bunch we had a
Dwarven Bionic Commando with a grapple arm
A Masked Vigilante with a Shadow Controlling Cloak
A Super Strong Veteran Soldier and Adventurer
And a Mage/Artificier who was basically the "tech" guy

>>52422705
I honestly don't know why people don't take advantage of it more often. I mean, you have plenty of superhero systems which a character having martial or even just herculean strength is worth a damn and people continue to want to play the most mundane, boring embodiment of a melee combatant ever to manifest in tabletop who struggles with goddamn mooks.

God forbid a barbarian lift and actually deal damage with a boulder when he hulks out.

That was my first idea to do after I played savage worlds with the superhero companion

>>52426671
>>52426716
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279503-D-amp-D-in-M-amp-M-a-new-approach-to-rebalancing-3-5-PF here's the link if no one's posted it yet.

>>52422705
Worth noting that m&m combat can be decidedly not fun. That was the issue I head with it.

File: 1464955668175.jpg (280KB, 1261x838px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1261x838px

bump

>>52427137
Why's that? I've never played it nor looked at the system in any depth.

>>52426658
>Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition actually has a supplement called "Warriors and Warlocks" exactly for that sort of thing, so that actually helps take some of the load off.
Came in here to post this.

>>52431664
It's not very tactical, and most powers come down to being basic attacks with different mixes of power and accuracy.

You can build stuff using afflictions, but afflictions don't generally interact with anything but themselves, so it's often like you're attacking a different HP pool than the rest of the group that nobody else can target, with a different badstuff condition when you finally beat them into submission.

I personally found it, depending on the power difference between you and your enemy, and a combination of how lucky you roll and how unlucky they roll, to either be a boring slog, or 1hko.

>>52431843
Actually gave my m&m 3e book away in January 2016, after a year of play. I doubt I'll ever play it again.

If it had more tactical base combat, a less swingy HP system, and a couple different resources (like willpower points you could wear down with various psychic attacks, etc) then it might have been more fun, but as is, I would not play it again.

>>52431843
That sounds more like a failure to use the power system properly, and at any rate what you described is not that far removed from core 3.5. A simple attack linked into a limited affliction, a powerful attack with a side effect that nails you with a fatigue attack for using it, a power that is only usable in certain conditions, a reaction attack with an uncommon trigger, all of those can change the feel of battle drastically.

>>52431941
I saw all of the above, and they didn't make things better. The most interesting thing I saw was DOT effects (condition: hasn't happened this round, or condition: performs an action).

Also, the existence of inflexible caps means everyone builds to cap, and people are unlikely to throw weaknesses on there just because. If weaknesses allowed you to surpass caps (Molly Hayes style super str punch makes you sleepy), the game wouldn't punish you for attempting something interesting. Pros and cons.

Instead the system encourages more boring powers.

And none of that addresses the nontactical combat or sloppy HP system.

Great that it works for you. But after a year and a half long weekly campaign, it's not that I "misunderstood the game". I just don't like the game.

File: League Of Justice Issue 1 Cover.jpg (2MB, 1988x3126px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1988x3126px

>>52431664
It really comes down to how the GM designs the encounter
If you have too large of a gape between damage output and defense it turns into either a slog or rocket tag but that can be adjusted in subsequent encounters and after a while a good will have the game figured out enough that he won't have that problem too often

Combat in M&M depends heavily on description, if you just roll your attack against the opponents defense and don't put any effort into describing how that actually works it will get boring real fast
It isn't D&D where you can say "I make Basic Attack for 12 damage" every round and it doesn't change anything

>>52432043
>Also, the existence of inflexible caps means everyone builds to cap
Which was a direct response to the game M&M was built off of, where it was nigh fucking impossible to tell where your numbers should be without a spreadsheet of monster statistics at hand. It's pretty difficult to pull off 4E-esque free progression AND numbers standardization in a point buy game, and considering M&M predated 4E by several years...

>>52432169
I understand what it was in reaction to. That doesn't mean I enjoy it. They had 3 editions. It is what it is. And what it is, I did not enjoy at all. It wasn't just a matter of getting used to it. It wasn't a matter of not understanding. I understood it just fine.

M&M is fun to build characters and powers for, and then stops being enjoyable as soon as it's game mechanics come into play.

>>52432314
The problem is that I don't see where you're coming from with 'sloppy HP system' or 'nontactical combat' because I've played the game - ran it, in fact - and saw neither. The HP system was actually interesting in play because it could produce multiple results from the same input, although I think it would've been better on a bell curve mechanic, and whether the combat was tactical or not was entirely dependent on the GM. I would never say it was as tactical as, say, 4E or a good game of T3 3.5 or Shadowrun, but I would also say it's a hell of a lot moreso than every other experience I've ever had with D&D. And considering what the OP's looking for, I think that's relevant.

>>52432490
It's certainly relevant to the OP. Not his only option, but relevant.

I was simply letting him know what he might not like about it, if he's coming from D&D.

>>52432490
A good t3 game of 3.5, or Shadowrun, or 4e are good examples of games where the combat is actually fun in ways m&m just isn't.

>>52432632
It would have simply been a "this is a thing you may not like" followed by more details for the guy who requested them, but 5h3n of course the "nuhuh I like this game and the things you like don't exist in it well okay they do but it doesn't matter" crowd showed up.

Game has things that prevent me from enjoying it.
Other people *do* enjoy it.
If OPs interests are like what I stated about my own, he might want to look elsewhere. Otherwise m&m might work for him.

>>52426982
It also has a fantasy companion. I played it, can confirm it's fun.

>>52432770
Yes, i own that one too but i find it rather boring. I really like the superhero companion tho and will use it for some fantasy game in the future

File: League Of Justice RCO006_w_1490419232.jpg (3MB, 1988x3156px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1988x3156px

>>52432053
That particular Elseworld includes one of my all time favorite Batmobiles

>>52422705
Try Marvel Heroic Roleplaying. It's a great game and it should make a good fantasy game.
My GM is transfering from D&D to this and it was a lot easier to explain to new players.

File: 1464957057468.jpg (962KB, 2363x1280px) Image search: [Google]

962KB, 2363x1280px

Bump

So what other system besides mutants and mastermind can we use?

>>52438780
Wild Talents works fine for whatever so you could give it a shot

>>52438780
I suppose Valor is one if you're wanting a good focus on tactical, but I can't speak for certain as I haven't played it myself. There's a lot of better options to play DnD than DnD in my opinion.

>>52438780
See
>>52426982

>>52439431
Strike! is in the same "4e inspired generic RPG" box as Valor, but is more traditional with classes and stuff.

>>52443715
Stop shilling Strike!

Why does /tg/ keep shilling Strike!?

>>52443728
Sometimes, I wonder about that myself... but in the end, it is what I am.

Grass grows, wind blows, I shill Strike!

>>52432314
Would slowing characters down to generic fantasy speed help a bit with the tactical combat?

It wouldn't fix everything, you'd still need to do a major overhaul of the PL and flaw system to actually incentivize situational powers, but taking away high ranks of speed, flight, and teleport would at least force people to care about LoS and range way more than you normally do in a Supers game.

>>52445534
This might help, just as the fact that mutants has no ressource management at all, thus incentivizing you to spam a single power that does everything.

I have no idea how it would impact the game but i think introducing more enforced conditions and tradeoffs the more points there are in a single power might prevent people from just pumping up one ultimate problemsolver with no downsides.