I asked Werner Herzog about Jack, and he replied, "Nature is vile. I see fornication and asphyxiation and choking and fighting for survival and growing and just rotting away . . . the trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain; and Jack still owes me five bucks from when he lost to me playing split the kipper." The character creation looks like fun and flavoursome. I don't think my players would be in to playing this as a diceless game; however, I could see us playing this with a D20 roll vs a target number set by the GM. Skills could grant advantage on rolls, and maybe have disadvantage for unskilled rolls. The game provides some setting, equipment, and finance rules that I could mine for content. I'm interested in the sound of Mage Hunter, too. A simple bounty hunter game set in a fantasy world is a great idea. Jack's space bounty hunter gear and the ship interior are the bees' knees.
I remember watching the videos Guy made for making a diceless RPG when coming up with Bounty Hunter. While I do agree that the binary "have skill + AP = Success" mechanic doesn't lend itself to the twists and turns of chance in other games, it also does help facilitate that feeling of playing out an action movie that can be enjoyable instead of hoping to do something cool and the dice (or DC) telling you "no". It feels like it also makes you think, with how AP is your overall capacity to act being both action and health, that yes, you can do all sorts of cool things at the drop of a hat if you got the skills, but spend them too frequently and too frivolously and your luck runs out. You can be cool in a moment, but you can't be cool all the time. In it's own way, the action economy base can also help share the spotlight between players. Everyone in the group may have a way past a problem, but they may look at their AP pools, see who has the most, and ask them for their plan, just too keep any one person from getting too low from overuse.
The lack of dice really kills my enthusiasm for this game. Like you, I love that random chaos factor, and my most memorable RPG moments have all in one way or another come from some big upset caused by the dice, whether that be a failure or a success. Without them, it just doesn't feel as right to me. I tried playing Bubblegumshoe way back, and its lack of dice just kept me from getting into it. Even opposed skill checks don't sound like they have enough excitement here. In most systems you get really into it -- I remember my group and I being incredibly invested in a 1-on-1 duel in Vampire: The Masquerade because it was an uphill battle, but the dice meant the player could still succeed -- but here, it sounds like it's just a matter of having more points to burn than the other character. While it's strategic, it feels too mechanical.
Like you said, this does seem like it could be a good system for people new to RPGs. I know there are people who envision themselves as getting to play a super-amazing badass who does amazing things flawlessly--a Legolas, whose shots never miss, that sort of thing. And they can get really frustrated when the dice, and their starter level, tells them that they fail repeatedly. So a system where you can't fail might be better for them. Well... until they find out that the bad guys can't miss shooting them, either. The part of this that sounds the worst to me is opposed skill checks. It sounds like you either have to play a game of chicken with the other character, waiting for them to give up first or hope that they have fewer APs than you, or you just have to find a way around doing the opposed check entirely. It seems like they're kinda pointless, which is probably a flaw of a system where no-one can fail at anything. I was originally imagining an opposed skill check being a kind of loop that keeps draining your AP until someone stops it, and you'd have no idea when attempting the check whether you'd lose 1 or 20 points to succeed. After listening again and hearing each check takes one round, that seems like it wouldn't be the case (not unless you have one very stubborn, very bored character who keeps trying the same thing for 20 straight rounds). But it still sounds like the only real option for opposed skill checks is to find a way not to do them. I watched the linked video where Guy GMed you through a session of the game, but I don't think opposed skill checks came up. Did you ever play an opposed skill check, and do they work differently in practice?
We never go the chance in Guy's Game. And I agree the war of attrition for Opposed checks isn't too terribly exciting. Personally my solution would be a simple increase in cost. So if sneaking past a guard who is pointedly watching that location (I'd say a bored guard isn't spending any AP so a PC spends 1 AP and they succeed), it comes down to who spends the most AP. Maybe have the GM write down what they'll have the guard spend, then ask the player what they want to spend to sneak past, the GM opens the folded paper and shows who spent the most. The sample badguys and goons had like 10 AP, so they're going to get worn down a lot faster than a starting PC. Later on, when the PC has gained a few levels, that AP pool is going to be significantly larger. A PC with a 5 Reputation is going to have 40 AP, which means they'll be taking a lot more hits and spending the additional costs to go first more often (theoretically they should have been able to get some sweet armor and gear by then, too).
@@SSkorkowsky I was a beta tester for the system and betting AP has been suggested. For various reasons this idea was dropped. It can be an easy house rule though.
I'd probably resolve an opposed check with a coin flip. Maybe even give out extra "coins" to players as a reward from roleplay, etc so they can choose to improve their odds on specific opposed checks.
The lack of dice and random chance is the biggest turn-off for me. The second is, like skemono wrote, the nature of the opposing skill checks. I remember my very first RPG session which was Vampire: The Masquerade 2nd edition back in 2003 while studying in an art school. I had played Baldur's Gate before the first TTRPG session but I had literally no idea how the game would be played (what the PC could and would do and what the GM did and so on). I made this übercool Assamite vampire who was a bounty hunter called Doyle and at first he did some cool things as the dice were on my side. But then, later as the session progressed, the real nature of TTRPGs started to dawn on me. At one point I was trying to shoot a pistol and the dice were not having any of that. I did a critical failure/fumble which lead to me not actually shooting the gun but instead I pushed the magazine release button and the mag dropped on my feet, breaking my toes. The scene continued with the character I was trying to shoot handing me my ass. Eventually I woke up from a sewer all beaten up. At the time I was of course bummed out that my character wasn't the big badass hero but later the critical failure and the hilarious follow-up to it has been what I remember most fondly. I guess it's a bit like those hand grenade fails in Seth's group. None of those situations could happen in a diceless system Overall, I think I'm personally more numbers and chance-oriented player. I like thorough rules even though I don't always GM RAW and I like that the games feature dice rolling alongside spoken, dramatic roleplaying. The more loosey-goosey or super-streamlined systems have never really excited me much, such as Fate and I doubt that Bounty Hunter will either. But I definitely see a place for those kinds of systems: new players and those who don't want to get bogged down by percentiles and d20s but instead want to go straight into the dynamic drama and character personalities.
I've been meaning for some time to do a video about why failure most often provides our best stories. When we play, we want badass success. We want to be Hollywood cool. Sometimes that gives us some epic stories we laugh about years or decades later where our character pulled off the impossible. But the stories of failure, while in that brief moment we might be disappointed, even a little pissed, those become the most cherished memories that bring us back again and again. For every story my players and I laugh about that's about a characters being badasses with awesome rolls, we have 10 about them failing spectacularly. Even the Bonesaw's tale, which was amazing due to a perfectly-timed Natural 20, wouldn't have happened or meant as much had the player not failed every roll prior to that one.
@@SSkorkowsky I think that we only appreciate the badass success though if there is true jeopardy, the adrenline rush doesn't come if the success is assured, and there isn't the chance we'll end up blowing our own foot off...
@@SSkorkowsky There's the old saying, the reward is sour when there is no risk. This is the difference between a game and a collaborative story, and I think a lot of new gamers never learned the difference. Both can be fun, but only one is gaming.
There's certainly a large area between "unable to open a door successfully because bad dice roll" and "foremost badass of that particular gaming universe". Today's world is depressing and frustrating enough without me having to adopt a "colossal failure is really a GOOD thing!" mantra for gaming. But at the same time I shouldn't just be able to automatically do something just by having the particular skill to do it, either.
I witnessed the game and it was glorious xD I think I almost had as much as you did playing. But as much as I like the simplicity, the lack of "failure" or risk/reward inherent in the system is a big turn down for me.
I watched that game too and it was one of the seminal experiences of my life. But when a system allows someone to repair severe damage to a ship just by having the Repair skill, with no mention of exactly how they do it or if they even have access to the proper tools to do it, that to me is a fairly big flaw. I can be the world's best mechanic but if your engine needs repaired I can't do it without the right tools for the job.
Interesting, but not my cup of tea. Only diceless RPG I've really liked was Amber, which managed to retain most of the "surprise factor" randomizers (dice, cards, etc) offer by leaving the players generally unsure about their relative capabilities vs NPCs (and even each other's PCs). The setting's very heavy on intrigue, uncertainty, and schemes within schemes, which made that work where it wouldn't in something more straightforward.
Great review. This system sounds lije an adequate "beer 'n' pretzels" game but one I would not personally build a campaign around. Aside from the lack of random chance, I can see a couple of obvious issues. The static AP economy is going to become boring. The same thing often happens in random chance games, but I really see this devolving into a "I attack him with my sword, for the eighth consecutive round" sort of thing. The AP cleric. Just ugh. What would make this kind of system shine would be to add some sort of Interrupts. Spend AP to block or cause a guy to trip. Add in a dynamic AP recovery system. Defeat a Mook, get back 2 AP. Do something strategic and/or cool, gain back 4 AP. That sort of thing. AP should be an abstraction of how "heroic" you can be. If you need to have injuries that carry over between scenes, borrow the Alien RPG or FATE damage rules. Those are my biggest observations. As explained, I don't see myself using this system. The lack of randomness is going to lead to predictability. I could "house rule" it to death or I could just use the rich setting material in a system that fits my play style. EDIT: Added a missing word.
Maybe a good, and planned ahead of time, positioning on the area could give you AP benefits, like flanking an enemy could make your AP worth 2 of his, and surrounding it would make 4 people on your side just use .25 AP to counter his 1 AP, so you automatically apprehend him without it trying.. THO, to pull this off you might need items that you obtained before through good role play or past jobs, and such items could also be AP boosters. Throwing a stun granade will be just as much an single action as firing an projectile but it will be harder for your enemies to evade. This will push players to be more prepared before every fight, even trying to foresee complications that might arise, exactly because without luck variation a good sound plan is what they have to win with fewer losses.
Given the scifi setting the 12 inventory slots issue is pretty easy to bypass. Most ships with a cargo ramp and easily accessed hold should have a hover dolly or cart. Hell, watch a few episodes of Star Wars Rebels. A lot of the larger crates have built in magnet locks and hover functions. Just add cargo boxes and flat bed hover carts to the equipment list if they aren't there already. A box has half the AP that the cart has. 20 storage slots for a box. 50 to 100 storage slots for a cart depending on its size. Each hovering storage device needs to be piloted by a player at a cost of 1 AP, or magnet locked together. A player with the right tech skill can have the storage boxes or carts follow them for free like a Tenser's Floating Disk.
@@harmonlanager2670 That seems like it's just trying to break the system. The hover crate thing adds a moving target to the encounter that needs to be defended, stolen, or passed between party members. It's not meant to just let a player hold more stuff. It's a battlefield complication and an alternate victory objective. Go watch the first episode of Star Wars Rebels to see what I'm talking about. I'd for sure let a maxed out tech skills player have teleporting or digistructing weapons, but they either take up a normal inventory slot or they permanently drain 1 AP while they are in the ready to go cue.
I think unless you are trying to rob something discretely there is no limit. I mean, even if you can't hold all cargo in a cargo bay, if you have no pressure and time you just empty it and transfer to another ship.
@@robertoaguiar6230 yeah, if there's no pressure then nothing matters and you just load the ship. If your DM wants to make the loading process part of a hit and run objective during a combat encounter then adding hover crates to the equipment list opens up all sorts of possibilities.
Depositing a comment for the algorithm, for the algorithm must be sated. Always love to see you play systems I haven't heard of before though. It helps keep my mind churning with new, fresh ideas.
Want to Highlight the Equipment system: Give that a solid chance! Legend of the Dragoon took a HUGE risk by only allowing the player 32 item slots (admittedly for unequipped items.) in a JRPG. Ya know what, it worked! As someone who normally keeps 99 Potions, 99 Hi Potions, 99 Mega Potions, ect; this idea of 32 slots was a scoff in my face. But once you let go of the preconception that you SHOULD have the ability to just take all the loot. You will start acting like you see Indiana Jones, The Mandalorian, and other great bounty/treasure hunters. They do not enter a town/outpost/home and start taking everything that isn't nailed down. Other than that, house rule it up!
I've tried diceless RP before and I've never been happy with it. First of all, it doesn't actually seem to model anything and the pace of gameplay doesn't tend to follow either what would be expected from reality or what would be expected as a story trope. Secondly, not knowing whether you will succeed in a task is pretty critical to enjoyment. A pacing of a story where you don't know at what points you will fail but only that you occasionally will in my experience makes for the best story. Some of your complaints, such as the fact that the rules keep saying "No." are rooted in this problem, in as much as in a normal game you could always say, "Well, "Yes", but you have only a low probability of success." And it's telling that difficulty is actually an optional rule, because imposing difficulty breaks the games model. (Probably the only reason it's necessary to include it, it metagaming players would soon figure out the lack of difficulty also breaks the games model.) And lastly, this combination results in a game system that can only support a very limited structured sort of story. A great deal of meta-design is required by a GM in a diceless game to run the game in such a way that action points are running out only at the moment when doing so would provide tension. In short, diceless breaks down at every level of a core RPG loop of play: a) Proposition by the player break because the game can't really differentiate between different player propositions. The player can really only propose to use a skill and an action point, and all such propositions are equal. Things don't get any easier if you make smart choices. It's an action point either way. b) Fortune breaks down because you don't have nearly as much tension knowing whether a proposition will pass or fail, but also because all passes and failures are binary. There is no degree of success that can be inferred. c) Resolution breaks down because the GM has to consider the position of the scene in the desired story more than the scene itself in order to successfully run the scene. Resolution in a normal game involves the costs of the scene, but in this game the costs have basically been decided by the proposition. Fundamentally, if taking actions always impose costs, then the real trouble is making sure that the game stays on the rails, because if the players start using their agency to go off script you have a problem. You really want as a GM to ensure that each scene is always resolved by a predictable number of actions, and that involves adjusting the setting to the players chosen path through it. You end up with problems where even if the players are succeeding, they could run out of resources before they get to the end of the road if they don't take the expected road.
Although I agree with most of your analysis, I believe that many od these system are geared toward plot resolution, instead of task or scene resolution, which shift the narrative and mechanical focus quite a bit. Granted, it only shift the issue, instead of solving it.
@@Woodclaw Many of the games that consider themselves to be hyper-focused on plot resolution can only handle a single plot. I don't think it an accident that most of the successful focused plot resolution games can only handle plots that end in disaster and failure.
This really sounds like a one-shot game. If so, rules for skills and gear that don't read quite right would be fine. If used for a series of games my players would definitely question the "skill or no-skill" rule and the assault rifle that weighs as much as a clip of ammunition. In a game like this I'm surprised that ammo and expenditure wan't simply ignored. Still...I'm a huge fan of innovation; 5-stars on that front. Great review.
What I get from this is it's Fun, but not memorable. You won't get anything like 'The Bonesaw' (one of Seth's war stories) or 'The undying cult of the magic potato' (one of mine) in bounty hunter. Everything is either 'Yes' or 'No', and while that makes it easier to roleplay as Captain Genericos the Unmatched, You don't get the Character-Building Humbling failures or the unbelievable successes. If everything is a perfect, flourishing success; then it loses it's impact. And you don't have degrees of success either, if a skill works, it works, it costs 1AP, regardless if there's a smarter or better option. Seems like it would be better for a Superhero-Type game rather than Sci-Fi or Fantasy.
@@nashwinston1395 If you did, Then I'd gladly talk about it, it's my go-to for funny DnD stories. I could also mention my personal favorite 'Bombshell' moment which was in a Warhammer 40k-based RPG. Or perhaps the bizarre adventures of 'Sad Steak' the walrus man?
This channel is one of the few examples of how awesome social media is. Just amazing. I have a novelist review, explain and act out RPG's for me. For freakin' free. Awesome,
As someone who has experimented with diceless systems in the past, this is something I'll definitely pick up once it releases on DTRPG. The lack of randomness isn't a dealbreaker for me, since if I wanted dice I have Traveller, Savage Worlds, and Stars Without Number to fill that niche.
I'm also not a huge fan of the diceless systems, but as a random one off game it's a great thing to have in the collection. you get a group of friends together and just play a single run rather then making a big campaign out of it. either as a pallet cleanser between other game sessions or as a way to include friends from out of town. It fits nicely for how easy it is to learn and play.
I know this has no randomness, but hearing about the lack of ability to use a skill you don't have gave me an idea. Either take an AP penalty to attempt a skill you don't have, or flip a coin for critical success/failure. I think I just discovered a coin toss is the minimum allowance for chance I might require to play a tabletop game.
I think it's an interesting idea of not having dice rolls. I watched the video of the adventure you played in and it looked like a lot of fun. Sadly it doesn't fit the way I like to GM, twisting and bending the story based on dice rolls.
Huh. Really fascinating basic concept, the way AP works. This seems like a game that might be worth having so some of its innovative rules can be "borrowed" to enhance your homebrew...
This.... This is why I love you Seth. I didn't know this game existed and now I feel like a parent, waiting to see his kids open their Christmas presents. My players are going to go insane when they realize this is a game. We've been wanting a faster-paced space ttrpg ever since our Traveller playthrough fell to the wayside.
I backed this and am so glad you made this video. I was reading through it and had similar issues with a couple things, but your suggestions will absolutely help. Can't wait to teach this to my friends and family :)
On the topic of dice rolls creating randomness, I think I'd like to present this optional ruleset/metaskill for playtesting: Risk-Taker: This Bounty Hunter doesn't play by the Rules, as such, every action they take carries more risk than usual. Whenever they take an action out of combat, they roll a d20. On a natural 1, the action they are trying to take fumbles and they must try again. If using the Skorkowsky Untrained Action Penalty, the failure expands respective to the AP cost. (I.E. an action requires two AP, a roll of one or two results in a failure.) A natural 20, however, is a success so flawless, it looked like it took no effort at all (no AP cost incurred.) While in combat, each time the Risk-Taker would make an attack, they must make a Destiny Roll with the GM, each using a d10. Both must roll out in the open in plain view. If the sum of both dice equal 7 (1 and 6, 2 and 5, 3 and 4, or the the mirror result,) the attack is a critical hit and incurs a damage bonus (probably double damage.) If the sum results in 13 (6 and 7, 5 and 8, 4 and 9, or the mirror result) however, the attack is a fumble and missed its mark. A Karmic Balance (both dice match) restores 1 AP to the attacker. Any other result goes on as normal. Additionally, I'd propose two 'subclasses' of Risk-Taker: The Graceful and The Klutz. Graceful: This Risk-Taker manages to always have a single Ace up their sleeve. Once per session on a failure, the Risk-taker may negate the effect of the roll, succeeding as normal. Klutz: This Risk-Taker is more on the bungling side, but Karma seems to balance things out. Every out-of-combat check result is reduced by one, making Graceful Success impossible and increasing the risk of failure. However, the Klutz may lower a single die result in a Destiny Roll by one. Each of these 'subclasses' of Risk-Taker are supposed to act as level-up skills, with Graceful acting as a lesser version of the Lucky feat in other games. While Klutz incurs more out of combat risk in exchange for increasing their odds while in combat. (Think Jackie Chan or perhaps Mr. Magoo.) These are just my thoughts, and I hope someone can playtest it and say how it went.
My mind is still blown by discovering that Seth and people like Guy and M'haire Stritter are aware of each other's existence, let alone actually doing online RPGs together. I never knew any of this even a month ago 😲😲😲
I held off on picking this up to see what you'd say. The price of the PDF per page is pretty high, bit I am willing to be moved. I will update this after I watch with the results. Update: Watched this. I am a sucker for diceless games, but I am going to check out the session video before I make the call. Great review as ever! Also: I like your unskilled penalty suggestion. I would also suggest an encumbrance rule - once you exceed 12 items, those extra (reasonably portable) items get bundled with 3 of the first 12 into a 3 item "cargo" bulk that cannot be used and must be dropped in combat.
I feel like the biggest problems with is are that AP is mandatory to do anything (before the skills), and that AP is also your health. As a few others had pointed out the AP system only allows Win or Draw, and you cannot even attempt it if you do not have the skill. In other TTRPGs you could always at least attempt a skill even if you didn’t have it even if the skill has a high dc, which in turn leads to crazy memorable moments that wouldn’t come up in this game. Dying after taking a hit when you have 0 AP doesn’t make sense unless you’ve already taken damage. Think about it; someone doesn’t drop dead after a long exhausting day at work after he was just punched. Not to mention that weapons needing AP to work would only really make sense for crazy advanced melee weapons, but shooting a basic pistol damage me? Does it have the most intense recoil in the galaxy? I feel like this system could work for bounty hunting with some rewrites, but I think it’d work best as some sort of spy/espionage type game.
How about: once you carry over the 12 item max you can only move. If you choose to perform an action, you drop one item as you fumble around until you get back to 12... edit. Don't think that laser tag helmet went past us!
Two turn offs for me are diceless systems and those where you end up spending a lot of time deciphering specialty dice. Diceless systems tend be slower in feel and more argumentative. I like opposing skill check systems but they need dice to pull off well and more defined mechanics that keep the game moving along. Specialty dice makes it feel like you're dealing with a language as non native speaker. So you're spending time translating all the darn time which slows you down. (looking at you Fantasy Flight mechanics systems) Plus finding the specialty dice later tends to be a pain. So that's my two turn offs for me, but I do appreciate that such systems exist out there. I feel that over all that having various points of view on ttrpg design improves things overall for the hobby. Thanks for the review Seth, always appreciate your videos and look forward to seeing that notification that you've released a new one.
Specialty die mechanics annoy me. Ubiquity (Hollow Earth Expedition) or ALIEN I'm fine with because they can be played with normal dice with zero issue. Their specialty die are more for cool collectable factor. Ubiquity die are pretty damned cool and if I played more HEX I would pick some up. 2D20 (Conan, Star Trek) it starts getting rough for me. Thankfully we have a particularly crafty player who made us all a set of 5-6 specialty D6 for Conan. It can be played with regular D6, but it's a bit weird because the numbers on the face and the numbers the die face represents are different. I'm not a big fan of it. Couple month back I started my first game of FFG Edge of the Empire with their color-coded symbol-covered die, and I hate it. Maybe it's old dog/new tricks and decades of using dice has made me too set in my ways. Maybe it's the fact that some of those symbols look too much alike or can be hard to quickly ID since when you roll a handful they land facing all sorts of different directions and at a glance I can't automatically read them. Maybe it's that whatever cool feature the symbols enable above what numbers would do, there's just as many things numbers could do just as well or better. I've played 4 or 5 sessions with them and I feel just as lost every single time I roll as I did the first time. You comparison to being a non-native language is the very best I've heard, and I'll be stealing that description from now on. Bounty Hunter was my first diceless game that I've tried. Most of my complaints I have are easy fixes (better Opposed Mechanics, Non-Skilled Usage, etc.). The weird part is getting used to the idea that it's not about if you succeed or not, but about if you have enough to left over to continue. I was honestly surprised how effective it was at ratcheting up the tension. It's a cool way of doing it. I like seeing new ideas emerging and refining. Many of the modern and mainstream RPG mechanics we have now originated from old lesser-known games that introduced a brilliant idea that continued on long after that game died. But I just prefer the thrill of chance that dice provide. There is always a chance to fail an easy task roll. There is also always a chance of succeeding a super-difficult task (if no chance exists, then there shouldn't be a roll). The thrill of "Maybe I will," or "Maybe I won't" is fun. Some people consider dice to be a terrible way of measuring if a character succeeds at a task. They might be right. But I also find dice to be better than all of the other options.
@@SSkorkowsky I'm in he middle of watching Guy's episode that you were in with others. I'm about 50 minutes in, had to pause and go run some errands. So far I'm really enjoying it, Guy's a good GM. I'd play in a game he ran. :) I was going to use Ubiquity as another example because like you I'm fond of the system mechanics over all. At least it's playable without those dice that just make the dice pools easier to deal with, but still. heh Feel free to steal that explanation for the Genesis dice system. It's exactly how I felt when I'd try to read them. I spend a decade in Europe during the 80's and 90's and spent a lot of time out in the various countries interacting with the general population, so it just felt like a perfect example. Anyhow, keep up the excellent videos and now the podcast which I enjoy listening to as well.
This sounds hey you just said it as I was typing it. Sounds like a really great game anyone could get into. In fact this sounds like a game I could create. Using DND characters as I have players go through the entire 3.5 and Pathfinder list killing in alphabetical order. Death means nothing just means you lost round one.
Great review! Looks like the game has really good art. I love Guy's channel, btw. Two major disadvantages I see with the Action Points: 1) 20 is a really small pool, especially if you're using the optional rules to charge 3 or 5 points for tougher tasks. 2) The back-and-forth of each side spending 1 pt to get to a draw over and over again, especially for something that should be as quick and cut-and-dry as whether you can sneak by a guard or not, sound a bit tedious. Why not allow one side to spend 2 points (vs. the 1 spent by the other side) to quickly resolve the contest?
You should do a video on Twilight: 2000 since Free League is releasing 4th edition soon. I know that you like Traveller and the old T2K is linked to it (same universe but 300 years apart). Plus, you've been reviewing the new Free League Alien modules as well. I'd love to see your take on the old and new T2K.
Great review! Here's an idea for including failed attempts. If you don't have enough AP for something, instead of choosing not to do it, you can roleplay out attempting it and FAILING. If you do, the GM should have some kind of meaningful consequence take place for the failure (other than damage/AP loss). But, by choosing to do this, you get back 1AP (or 2-3AP if the roleplay and description of your attempt and/or failure was particularly in character, funny, dramatic, moving, or creative). In fact, you can take this roleplayed failure option even if you DO have enough AP for something and simply don't want to spend it.
The premise and character creation sound really cool, but unfortunately the rest goes a bit downhill from there with the exception of simultaneous turns in combat. Even as someone with a feud with dice I must say that the lack of a random element takes something out. While the lack of back luck makes failing ones plans harder, the lack of the glorious moment when the dice do land exactly right once in a while and one succeeds in the face of seemingly inevitable failure seems like a big downside. 12 items I agree is a bit small, especially if one considers utilities like binoculars and compasses exist and will probably be useful. This is something that often helps parties out and many people don't even take them along, but I consider them quite valuable to have, and being actively punished for having those is odd. Also agree with Jack on unlearned skills. I like systems with those, because everyone can do some things even without training. Making actions and health equivalent? I guess it is more complicated and you shortened it for the review, but just put like that it sounds like an odd choice. Climb a building before combat and the character starts with the equivalent of a bullet to the knee. I get that they might be out of breath, but this sounds like a bit much.
one way I'd houserule this immediately is implement something similar to weak moves from the belonging outside belonging system or GM intrusions from cypher, where players choose or agree to fail, get in trouble, or play to their PC's weaknesses in order to gain extra AP, perhaps even going above the max AP limit -- all to incentivize meaningful drama, risk, and failure, with a higher amplitude of ups & downs in the game
Thanks again Seth! As for two of your concerns, that being lack of Ship schematics and Monsters, The Star Wars Universe Fans have no doubt crafted a plethora of suitable candidates to "borrow' from. :) I think I'd like to have my group take this Game for a spin.
Seth is a man of sophistication and specific taste when it comes to how his books are stapled. 😂 I definitely have my own preferences with these finer details, myself, so I can relate.
I feel like the whole "no dice" thing actually does help push the fantasy of this game: In a game that uses dice for skill checks your hardened badass character will eventually fail a simple task in an incredibly unflattering way, and you're going to feel about as far from the fantasy of your character as humanly possible. Of course, that's more realistic, nobody succeeds at everything they do, but we always chase after the kinds of characters we see in other media, and 90% of them don't just accidentally throw their gun and look like a total moron in a critical action sequence. I feel like I'll need to see the opposed checks in action, though: it'd be kind of funny for a guard to be just on his patrol route, walk near a character who is trying to hide from him and suddenly get *monstrously tired* because he unknowingly spent every single one of his action points on spot checks.
Sure they don't flail around and drop their weapons, but you can have dice without fumbles and both sides miss plenty often and it's a rare character who just never fails.
@@Electric999999 I was using a rather extreme example, but it also applies to things like a world-class acrobat rolling poorly and failing a jump that would be easy for a normal person, or a character built like Conan the Barbarian being unable to open a pickle jar. A creative game master can work their way around it, painting a scene that makes the task look more difficult rather than making the character look incompetent, but most of the time that's just not the case. I don't consider this a huge flaw of dice-based TRPGs, but more that it's something that you as a player have be ready for, and it can absolutely shift the tone of a scene from serious to silly unintentionally.
I could see using this game being good as one-shot palette cleansers in between larger campaigns in other games. It doesn't sound like it has enough meat to it to support drawn out campaigns.
Another great video, love your breakdowns & POV, as both gamer & GM. And I just have to point out, I love how Jack displays great trigger discipline, very important even with non functioning blasters.
If I'm trying to guard and you're trying to sneak by, what does it mean to be in a "draw"? If I don't see you, that's me losing. If I do, that's you losing.
I like the idea that Action Points (AP), apparently, are tied to endurance and Hit Points. The more you do the quicker you get tired. I have never seen a realistic, yet simple to play, endurance system in a RPG. However, if AP is tied to all actions does that really make sense? So a sniper can only fire his rifle so many times before he can no longer even pull the trigger? Let alone that even the slightest touch will knock him out after he has fired a few rounds? (As always, another great review.)
I will admit that it will be a good game for newcomers to RPG or anyone who wants cooperative storytelling. I think it might be fun to have a session of it but I don't think there would be any excitement to hold a campaign of it since there's no chance to fail so to say, making it less exciting for some. But then again, it could prove to be a really fun game if a few other players and I give it a try.
Diceless games are interesting novelties to me, but I am with you on the randomness and chaos factor creating something special. There are diceless systems that still retain this, but they do rely on using something other than dice for randomisation such as cards, or in case of children of eriu and fate of the norns, runed tiles.
So while I agree that the game is missing something without the random factor of dice I feel that the game allows for a fairer over layout, especially considering that it seems to allow for pvp on equal footing with other players, the chaos could be breathed back into the game with that. Just a thought I had when mulling over the game with a friend.
Maybe a hybrid approach to the dice resolution system could be used in order to keep some of the speed but still allow for some random chance. For example don't roll for initiative or damage but roll for success when you try to use a skill. If you fail the skill maybe you get to keep the action point unless you roll a fumble. You also have an excellent hook for a stunt system like from exalted. Exalted allowed players to recover their motes(magic cool power energy resource) when they attempted something badass. You could have the same here but for ap. Or maybe allow characters to try to interrupt an action by spending ap. If an action is interrupted the character who attempts it has to roll for it if it succeeds. Otherwise it just does.
RULE CHANGE: Let me suggest the "Back Pack." Items may be stored in a Back pack. Items in the pack do not count against the 12 item max. These items may be exchanges with items in items slots only outside of Dramatic Scenes, with the 12 items in slots maximum always in effect. Every group of up to three items carried in the Back Pack cause a point of "Fatigue." Each point of fatigue reduces a characters current and maximum action points by I. The back pack counts as an item.
I agree with the review: the core design is great for a fast, streamlined experience, but it loses a notable amount of "oomph" due to the lack of randomness and true "gamey" elements. As such, it seems like some house rules are a great step - include dice (or cards?) to add both risk/reward, meaningful choices and chaos: investing AP for the chance of "criticals", creative and risky ways of regaining AP, investing extra AP into a unskilled ability... Personally, I'd love to adapt the gameplay to a fantasy setting but I feel the players I know wouldn't be too interested in a diceless "talking-only" game, so some big edits would be needed.
I kind of got turned off by the diceless style. Just, not my style, feels kinda like novel workshopping or collab writing. I like to think it could be good for new players, but, having a system that could easily lead to being unable to do anything or you'd have no health is kind of probably prone to just leave a wariness of doing anything. Seems to less encourage those "TAKE THE RISK! GO ON!" moments that can really draw new players in. I also just... Maybe it's just me but, the art makes me think of an 00s PC game? 3D art is really hard to do well, and I just would have preferred 2D art? I hope others like the system, always could do with more bounty hunter genre games as it's just cool feeling like Han Solo, Spike or The Mandalorian. Just, I feel kind of cold on this one. I'm glad you seemed to like it.
Yeah. This system lends itself well to the action movie hero fantasy but for a longer campaign it seems limited. Good for oneshot "our dm wants to play too" sessions.
Sounds like it wasn't playtested too extensively, quite a few faults with it (like you mentioned the whole 'carrying an armload of guns that you're not planning to fight with puts you over the item limit' SURELY should have come up in playtesting). I mean it looks ok, not my cup of tea admittedly for various reasons but good that he got it published.
Sounds like a very Guy system. I'm a bit torn on the no dice thing. I get that it gets a bit annoying when the expert fails at something they should be good at, and it breaks immersion when a complete ammeter with no aptitude somehow succeeds based on random chance, things falling apart because of bad luck is part of what makes RPGs fun. Maybe not so much in combat or high stakes social encounters, but definitely in things like exploration or downtime activities. It's far more fun for the pretentious cleric to fail his roll and fall in the mud when attempting to climb than to have it either go smoothly or not even be an option. I can see the advantages of not punting to random chance, but it just feels like it would be somewhat limit the long term enjoyment. That said, Guy does seem to prefer letting his players feel epic and awesome while weaving a story over mechanical blunders and mishaps (at least from what I've seen of his games), so it makes sense that this is the system he would design.
That’s where a system like luck points or fate points really shines. It lets you ensure those epic moments happen while also saving room for the occasional blunder and random happenstance
Well, I think with AP, the randomness still can exists if you find yourself burning through AP faster than expected. It is much on the onus of the GM to balance being able to recover with being in trouble. Easy now might be tough later. So while heroic randomness couldnt happen, clever alternatives from the GM plan does have an increased potential. Particularly if GM tells the cost after the action is performed.
This screams of "I heard you like crpg, so I turned your crpg into a ttrpg." It's not a bad thing, but I can definitely see how it would limit the appeal.
Most crpgs have plenty of dice rolling, random damage ranges, to hit chances (whether literal dice roll+bonus, or percentages). I'm struggling to think of a crpg that doesn't have dice rolling. Obviously there's the ttrpg based stuff like baldurs gate, pathfinder:kingmake, temple of elemental evil, neverwinter nights, shadowrun:dragonfall etc., but it's there in stuff like divinity original sin and pillars of eternity too.
This is one of the most important questions I've ever asked. That dice tower you showed at the start with the Crown Royal in the bottom. Where did you get that. ;)
My buddy Jorge made it. He's into 3D printing and made me a tower. He asked what color I'd like it felted with and I told him I wanted it to be with a Crown Royal bag. I love it.
I did give players the choice of playing with D6 to make their actions on even rolls or fails on uneven. This became much more worrying to players as they can still choose to use a point to finish the action but with a negative repercussion for the use. The fun watching their points dwindle and being forced to consider the dice is amusing.
The way I would role with this, you CAN pick up a pistol that you don't know how to use it and try to fire it. You fail automatically, your action is inconsequential to the outcome, and thus take no AP, and charge no AP from anyone. I would just discribe how your blaster rounds flow across the room, along with all the other rounds being fired by the actual shooters, which actually are well aimed and close misses, causing the enemies envolved to retreat for cover or give up.
I actually prefer saddle stapled game books and modules, because they incur less damage than a bound edition if I need/want to photocopy a map or picture out of it to make a handout.
Oh my goodness does this game drip style & I love AP being your hit points as well as your action pool, I’ll definitely check out the live stream & possibly pick up a copy as well 💜
"Disintegration" in tbe context of the film that spawned the quote, is not meant to be taken literally. It is short hand for "if you bring us proof that is not readily identifiable, it doesn't count." See "Disintegration" reference in RotJ. This of course means ignoring the SWEU, as every sensible fan should ;)
I think I have an idea how we could use dice with the system. The GM could assign a difficulty class to tasks the characters want to perform as in Dungeons & Dragons 5E. The 20 action points could function like inspiration and/or bonuses. You could spend points to reroll a die or add bonus points on. Everybody would start with a plus one for each skill that they had and that would go up as their reputation went up. So, when you roll for an action, you add your skill bonus and any action points you want to spend to the roll, or you can choose to reroll but maybe that costs more points like 2. If you are trying to do something you have no skills in, or carry more than your allotted gear, you have to roll for it without bonuses or rerolls. Would this work?
You lost me at diceless. I also prefer randomness in my games. FASA Star Trek did something like that with backgrounds for the character, rolling up your previous career as you make the character. I might have missed it but are there abilities like Strength and Intelligence? I'm not a fan of games without those either. Nice review. Thanks for sharing.
I apologize if this is the wrong place to ask, but I'd just like to say I'v really enjoyed your podcast modern mythos and I was curious when we might start seeing (hearing) more episodes?
Glad you're enjoying them. Jon tries to get them up the 3rd Monday of every month. So I think the 16th is the next one. If not it'll be the following Monday.
Hey Seth, are you going to review Avatar Legends when it comes out in February? I would love to hear it. After all, you're the reason I bought Kids on Bikes and am having a blast with it!
I kinda like it from the players perspective but I am afraid that the GM would need to constantly be aware of remaining AP of his players and spend too much brain power deciding on the proper AP meta game currency. It does says in the book that the players should take initiative when they wanna use the skill but still I am not sure how much involvement GM needs to take tracking the points of the table
I can certainly appreciate going out of the norm in terms of mechanics. Though I will admit I probably would never play it because of that. Like a lot of people have said below, I really enjoy the random chance and the possibility of failure in my games. I can understand the annoyance of battle hardened veterans messing things up when they logically shouldn't. Or a complete newbie doing something incredibly hard because luck was on their side when they rolled the dice. But this just seems like not the best way to go about it (In my personal opinion) Though I'm sure there's definitely going to be an audience for this, and I hope they enjoy it cause it certainly looked interesting enough and well thought out. Even if it's not my cup of tea.
So, to ask a slightly more specific question about combat. If I pay one action point to shoot someone, and they pay one action point to dodge, does that just mean I missed and the round is over? Can I just keep one upping him with the amount of AP that I spend? As a practical example, imagine I am in the room with one other person. He's trying to press the button that activates the security alarm, and I am trying to shoot him dead before he can. We're both full health, so 20 AP. I spend one AP to shoot him he spends one AP to dodge. That's it? My turn is over? He spends his turn to spend an AP and activate the security alarm?
They can dodge (Defend) one physical attack a round. So if you spend 1AP to hit, they spend 1AP to defend, then that's it. You missed and now the alarm is going off (hitting a button is listed as a simple action with no AP cost). Of course one of you could also spend 1 more AP to go in the first Combat Phase, but if you both do, then it's still a miss and you're both down 2 AP. If a second character was shooting at the target, the target would be unable to defend that second attack. Couple things to consider, though. First, most NPC guards/goons start with 10 AP, while First Level PCs start with 20. Now you might be going against elite super-goons who have more AP, but basic ones start at 10. Of course if the PC is higher level, due to increased Reputation, they will have a larger AP pool (+5 per level). Second, as a GM, depending on the situation, such as the previous round the PC said, "I'm camping here and protecting that alarm button and ignoring everything else," then I'd probably give them the shot (maybe at +1 AP, maybe not) because the player previously announced that's what they were setting up to do. That's where it hits special cases and the Increased Difficulty Cost optional mechanic.
I looks like they published an error on the AP table? At 12:27, it says "You are the best in six-star systems". Doesn't seem like that hyphen should be there.
A comprehensive review with your views well explained as always - thank you. My question though is why would you choose this over Traveller, say? I had a similar feeling following your Alien review in that yes, whilst these are tailored to a particular setting, it’s nothing that can’t be created under the Traveller ruleset, say, with a bit of imagination - essentially what you might have done back in the 80’s perhaps working with the Traveller or Aftermath rulesets, for example.
If there were a 3-way deathmatch between Traveller, Alien, and Bounty Hunter as being the only sci-fi RPG I could ever play again, Traveller would win without breaking a sweat. It is the king of sci-fi RPGs. Now if I wanted to play a game that feels exactly like I'm in an Alien movie, with no plans beyond it feeling exactly like an Alien movie, Alien would win. My biggest concern for Alien is how well a long-term campaign could work, or if you wanted to play something that didn't have to feel like an Alien movie. But as far as their goal of the rules making it play out just like Alien, they nailed it. The game is beautiful and fantastic, but narrowly focused. If I wanted to play with a buddy or two on a rainy Sunday and didn't want to lose half the day trying to learn/teach the rules of a full-sized RPG and make characters (especially to their 12-year old son who really just want to shoot things and live like The Mandalorian for a few hours), then I'd go with Bounty Hunter. Now, if I wanted a game to feel exactly like Star Trek and nothing more, I'd push the Star Trek RPG book out of the way to make room for Traveller.
I've run diceless games for years. I'm not saying this to say this game doesn't have any issues but to assure folks that you can definitely have long running campaigns without using dice as long as there are interesting choices and limitations built into the mechanics. I will say that it's not my current cup of tea if only because diceless games are extremely more taxing to me as a GM than more traditional games since you can offload a lot of your explicit or implicit decision-making to the middleman of random chance (even though in most traditional games this is absolutely less interesting unless you really enjoy using randomisers)
I like Guy and his channel, but a ttrpg without a chance of failure is (in my own personal opinion) terrible. I understand the concept, making choices that matter etc. but the chance of failure is what gives players (and possibly GMs) the thrill of the action. Attempting things with no guarantee of success is what gives me the most enjoyment, not balancing actions vs hp.
Yeah, as much as my dice and I hate one another (and they really do hate me), the unpredictability is what gives us great stories. I've had far to many moments of a player pulling off some near-impossible task with a great roll, or (more commonly) snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with a terrible roll. Even when a GM says, "You have a 99% chance to succeed. Roll." That teeny chance of failure still gives us the thrill as we throw the dice.
@@SSkorkowsky Like that guy with the Bonesaw and the fire giant, that couldn't happen in a diceless game! XD Still hoping I can GM a game where I can put that sword in a treasure horde.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.920 | 3 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwiW2M_kAg4/mqdefault.jpg)
I find it amazing how I automatically slip into the "understanding" that Jack is a different person, as if you hired an actor. Same with The Boys.
Jack is actually an AI that Seth made in his image. It's why he has so many different outfits depending on the video's topic.
I typically just listen to Seth, so it's such really easy to think they aren't all just Seth.
It’s how Jack’s voice is so different then Seth’s. I can’t hear Seth’s voice in Jack’s even after being a fan for years.
I asked Werner Herzog about Jack, and he replied, "Nature is vile. I see fornication and asphyxiation and choking and fighting for survival and growing and just rotting away . . . the trees here are in misery, the birds are in misery. I don't think they sing, they just screech in pain; and Jack still owes me five bucks from when he lost to me playing split the kipper."
The character creation looks like fun and flavoursome. I don't think my players would be in to playing this as a diceless game; however, I could see us playing this with a D20 roll vs a target number set by the GM. Skills could grant advantage on rolls, and maybe have disadvantage for unskilled rolls. The game provides some setting, equipment, and finance rules that I could mine for content.
I'm interested in the sound of Mage Hunter, too. A simple bounty hunter game set in a fantasy world is a great idea.
Jack's space bounty hunter gear and the ship interior are the bees' knees.
you have a skill? so you get a profiency bonus?
nice! just like DnD :D
@@Xingmey Well, when you put it that way... 😂😂😂
I remember watching the videos Guy made for making a diceless RPG when coming up with Bounty Hunter. While I do agree that the binary "have skill + AP = Success" mechanic doesn't lend itself to the twists and turns of chance in other games, it also does help facilitate that feeling of playing out an action movie that can be enjoyable instead of hoping to do something cool and the dice (or DC) telling you "no". It feels like it also makes you think, with how AP is your overall capacity to act being both action and health, that yes, you can do all sorts of cool things at the drop of a hat if you got the skills, but spend them too frequently and too frivolously and your luck runs out. You can be cool in a moment, but you can't be cool all the time.
In it's own way, the action economy base can also help share the spotlight between players. Everyone in the group may have a way past a problem, but they may look at their AP pools, see who has the most, and ask them for their plan, just too keep any one person from getting too low from overuse.
The lack of dice really kills my enthusiasm for this game.
Like you, I love that random chaos factor, and my most memorable RPG moments have all in one way or another come from some big upset caused by the dice, whether that be a failure or a success. Without them, it just doesn't feel as right to me. I tried playing Bubblegumshoe way back, and its lack of dice just kept me from getting into it.
Even opposed skill checks don't sound like they have enough excitement here. In most systems you get really into it -- I remember my group and I being incredibly invested in a 1-on-1 duel in Vampire: The Masquerade because it was an uphill battle, but the dice meant the player could still succeed -- but here, it sounds like it's just a matter of having more points to burn than the other character. While it's strategic, it feels too mechanical.
Like you said, this does seem like it could be a good system for people new to RPGs. I know there are people who envision themselves as getting to play a super-amazing badass who does amazing things flawlessly--a Legolas, whose shots never miss, that sort of thing. And they can get really frustrated when the dice, and their starter level, tells them that they fail repeatedly. So a system where you can't fail might be better for them. Well... until they find out that the bad guys can't miss shooting them, either.
The part of this that sounds the worst to me is opposed skill checks. It sounds like you either have to play a game of chicken with the other character, waiting for them to give up first or hope that they have fewer APs than you, or you just have to find a way around doing the opposed check entirely. It seems like they're kinda pointless, which is probably a flaw of a system where no-one can fail at anything.
I was originally imagining an opposed skill check being a kind of loop that keeps draining your AP until someone stops it, and you'd have no idea when attempting the check whether you'd lose 1 or 20 points to succeed. After listening again and hearing each check takes one round, that seems like it wouldn't be the case (not unless you have one very stubborn, very bored character who keeps trying the same thing for 20 straight rounds). But it still sounds like the only real option for opposed skill checks is to find a way not to do them.
I watched the linked video where Guy GMed you through a session of the game, but I don't think opposed skill checks came up. Did you ever play an opposed skill check, and do they work differently in practice?
We never go the chance in Guy's Game. And I agree the war of attrition for Opposed checks isn't too terribly exciting. Personally my solution would be a simple increase in cost. So if sneaking past a guard who is pointedly watching that location (I'd say a bored guard isn't spending any AP so a PC spends 1 AP and they succeed), it comes down to who spends the most AP. Maybe have the GM write down what they'll have the guard spend, then ask the player what they want to spend to sneak past, the GM opens the folded paper and shows who spent the most.
The sample badguys and goons had like 10 AP, so they're going to get worn down a lot faster than a starting PC. Later on, when the PC has gained a few levels, that AP pool is going to be significantly larger. A PC with a 5 Reputation is going to have 40 AP, which means they'll be taking a lot more hits and spending the additional costs to go first more often (theoretically they should have been able to get some sweet armor and gear by then, too).
@@SSkorkowsky Ooh, yes, your blind auction method for opposed checks sounds much better to me.
@@SSkorkowsky I was a beta tester for the system and betting AP has been suggested. For various reasons this idea was dropped. It can be an easy house rule though.
And now imagine you essentially spend your HP trying to win a game of cards with some random NPC in a cantina...
I'd probably resolve an opposed check with a coin flip. Maybe even give out extra "coins" to players as a reward from roleplay, etc so they can choose to improve their odds on specific opposed checks.
The lack of dice and random chance is the biggest turn-off for me. The second is, like skemono wrote, the nature of the opposing skill checks.
I remember my very first RPG session which was Vampire: The Masquerade 2nd edition back in 2003 while studying in an art school. I had played Baldur's Gate before the first TTRPG session but I had literally no idea how the game would be played (what the PC could and would do and what the GM did and so on). I made this übercool Assamite vampire who was a bounty hunter called Doyle and at first he did some cool things as the dice were on my side.
But then, later as the session progressed, the real nature of TTRPGs started to dawn on me. At one point I was trying to shoot a pistol and the dice were not having any of that. I did a critical failure/fumble which lead to me not actually shooting the gun but instead I pushed the magazine release button and the mag dropped on my feet, breaking my toes. The scene continued with the character I was trying to shoot handing me my ass. Eventually I woke up from a sewer all beaten up. At the time I was of course bummed out that my character wasn't the big badass hero but later the critical failure and the hilarious follow-up to it has been what I remember most fondly. I guess it's a bit like those hand grenade fails in Seth's group. None of those situations could happen in a diceless system
Overall, I think I'm personally more numbers and chance-oriented player. I like thorough rules even though I don't always GM RAW and I like that the games feature dice rolling alongside spoken, dramatic roleplaying. The more loosey-goosey or super-streamlined systems have never really excited me much, such as Fate and I doubt that Bounty Hunter will either. But I definitely see a place for those kinds of systems: new players and those who don't want to get bogged down by percentiles and d20s but instead want to go straight into the dynamic drama and character personalities.
I've been meaning for some time to do a video about why failure most often provides our best stories. When we play, we want badass success. We want to be Hollywood cool. Sometimes that gives us some epic stories we laugh about years or decades later where our character pulled off the impossible. But the stories of failure, while in that brief moment we might be disappointed, even a little pissed, those become the most cherished memories that bring us back again and again. For every story my players and I laugh about that's about a characters being badasses with awesome rolls, we have 10 about them failing spectacularly. Even the Bonesaw's tale, which was amazing due to a perfectly-timed Natural 20, wouldn't have happened or meant as much had the player not failed every roll prior to that one.
@@SSkorkowsky I think that we only appreciate the badass success though if there is true jeopardy, the adrenline rush doesn't come if the success is assured, and there isn't the chance we'll end up blowing our own foot off...
@@SSkorkowsky There's the old saying, the reward is sour when there is no risk. This is the difference between a game and a collaborative story, and I think a lot of new gamers never learned the difference. Both can be fun, but only one is gaming.
There's certainly a large area between "unable to open a door successfully because bad dice roll" and "foremost badass of that particular gaming universe". Today's world is depressing and frustrating enough without me having to adopt a "colossal failure is really a GOOD thing!" mantra for gaming. But at the same time I shouldn't just be able to automatically do something just by having the particular skill to do it, either.
Should have read down, what great breakdown of why I don't like diceless mechanics. Great post.
I witnessed the game and it was glorious xD I think I almost had as much as you did playing. But as much as I like the simplicity, the lack of "failure" or risk/reward inherent in the system is a big turn down for me.
I watched that game too and it was one of the seminal experiences of my life. But when a system allows someone to repair severe damage to a ship just by having the Repair skill, with no mention of exactly how they do it or if they even have access to the proper tools to do it, that to me is a fairly big flaw. I can be the world's best mechanic but if your engine needs repaired I can't do it without the right tools for the job.
Also as my good friend Werner Herzog says: "I appear to have been shot... it's not significant"
When you're doing an interview, you ain't got time to bleed.
You got time to duck?
Interesting, but not my cup of tea. Only diceless RPG I've really liked was Amber, which managed to retain most of the "surprise factor" randomizers (dice, cards, etc) offer by leaving the players generally unsure about their relative capabilities vs NPCs (and even each other's PCs). The setting's very heavy on intrigue, uncertainty, and schemes within schemes, which made that work where it wouldn't in something more straightforward.
Great review. This system sounds lije an adequate "beer 'n' pretzels" game but one I would not personally build a campaign around. Aside from the lack of random chance, I can see a couple of obvious issues.
The static AP economy is going to become boring. The same thing often happens in random chance games, but I really see this devolving into a "I attack him with my sword, for the eighth consecutive round" sort of thing.
The AP cleric. Just ugh.
What would make this kind of system shine would be to add some sort of Interrupts. Spend AP to block or cause a guy to trip.
Add in a dynamic AP recovery system. Defeat a Mook, get back 2 AP. Do something strategic and/or cool, gain back 4 AP. That sort of thing.
AP should be an abstraction of how "heroic" you can be. If you need to have injuries that carry over between scenes, borrow the Alien RPG or FATE damage rules.
Those are my biggest observations. As explained, I don't see myself using this system. The lack of randomness is going to lead to predictability. I could "house rule" it to death or I could just use the rich setting material in a system that fits my play style.
EDIT: Added a missing word.
Yeah, I think I might just use this as a lore book for a different system, shamelessly ripping settings, tech, and items for an ongoing campaign.
Maybe a good, and planned ahead of time, positioning on the area could give you AP benefits, like flanking an enemy could make your AP worth 2 of his, and surrounding it would make 4 people on your side just use .25 AP to counter his 1 AP, so you automatically apprehend him without it trying.. THO, to pull this off you might need items that you obtained before through good role play or past jobs, and such items could also be AP boosters. Throwing a stun granade will be just as much an single action as firing an projectile but it will be harder for your enemies to evade. This will push players to be more prepared before every fight, even trying to foresee complications that might arise, exactly because without luck variation a good sound plan is what they have to win with fewer losses.
It's also an issue of "resource depletion", NPCs can simply drain ALL their AP because they have nothing else to do today.
Given the scifi setting the 12 inventory slots issue is pretty easy to bypass. Most ships with a cargo ramp and easily accessed hold should have a hover dolly or cart. Hell, watch a few episodes of Star Wars Rebels. A lot of the larger crates have built in magnet locks and hover functions.
Just add cargo boxes and flat bed hover carts to the equipment list if they aren't there already. A box has half the AP that the cart has. 20 storage slots for a box. 50 to 100 storage slots for a cart depending on its size. Each hovering storage device needs to be piloted by a player at a cost of 1 AP, or magnet locked together. A player with the right tech skill can have the storage boxes or carts follow them for free like a Tenser's Floating Disk.
Another idea would be allowing players to put teleport tech on their guns. Like getting to quick draw guns from thin-air.
@@harmonlanager2670 That seems like it's just trying to break the system. The hover crate thing adds a moving target to the encounter that needs to be defended, stolen, or passed between party members. It's not meant to just let a player hold more stuff. It's a battlefield complication and an alternate victory objective.
Go watch the first episode of Star Wars Rebels to see what I'm talking about.
I'd for sure let a maxed out tech skills player have teleporting or digistructing weapons, but they either take up a normal inventory slot or they permanently drain 1 AP while they are in the ready to go cue.
I think unless you are trying to rob something discretely there is no limit. I mean, even if you can't hold all cargo in a cargo bay, if you have no pressure and time you just empty it and transfer to another ship.
@@robertoaguiar6230 yeah, if there's no pressure then nothing matters and you just load the ship. If your DM wants to make the loading process part of a hit and run objective during a combat encounter then adding hover crates to the equipment list opens up all sorts of possibilities.
Depositing a comment for the algorithm, for the algorithm must be sated. Always love to see you play systems I haven't heard of before though. It helps keep my mind churning with new, fresh ideas.
Nice Guy finally finished it! I remeber him talking about wanting to make a ttrpg with no dice rolls on his channel. Glad he got it done.
Want to Highlight the Equipment system:
Give that a solid chance! Legend of the Dragoon took a HUGE risk by only allowing the player 32 item slots (admittedly for unequipped items.) in a JRPG.
Ya know what, it worked! As someone who normally keeps 99 Potions, 99 Hi Potions, 99 Mega Potions, ect; this idea of 32 slots was a scoff in my face. But once you let go of the preconception that you SHOULD have the ability to just take all the loot. You will start acting like you see Indiana Jones, The Mandalorian, and other great bounty/treasure hunters. They do not enter a town/outpost/home and start taking everything that isn't nailed down.
Other than that, house rule it up!
I've tried diceless RP before and I've never been happy with it. First of all, it doesn't actually seem to model anything and the pace of gameplay doesn't tend to follow either what would be expected from reality or what would be expected as a story trope. Secondly, not knowing whether you will succeed in a task is pretty critical to enjoyment. A pacing of a story where you don't know at what points you will fail but only that you occasionally will in my experience makes for the best story. Some of your complaints, such as the fact that the rules keep saying "No." are rooted in this problem, in as much as in a normal game you could always say, "Well, "Yes", but you have only a low probability of success." And it's telling that difficulty is actually an optional rule, because imposing difficulty breaks the games model. (Probably the only reason it's necessary to include it, it metagaming players would soon figure out the lack of difficulty also breaks the games model.) And lastly, this combination results in a game system that can only support a very limited structured sort of story. A great deal of meta-design is required by a GM in a diceless game to run the game in such a way that action points are running out only at the moment when doing so would provide tension.
In short, diceless breaks down at every level of a core RPG loop of play:
a) Proposition by the player break because the game can't really differentiate between different player propositions. The player can really only propose to use a skill and an action point, and all such propositions are equal. Things don't get any easier if you make smart choices. It's an action point either way.
b) Fortune breaks down because you don't have nearly as much tension knowing whether a proposition will pass or fail, but also because all passes and failures are binary. There is no degree of success that can be inferred.
c) Resolution breaks down because the GM has to consider the position of the scene in the desired story more than the scene itself in order to successfully run the scene. Resolution in a normal game involves the costs of the scene, but in this game the costs have basically been decided by the proposition. Fundamentally, if taking actions always impose costs, then the real trouble is making sure that the game stays on the rails, because if the players start using their agency to go off script you have a problem. You really want as a GM to ensure that each scene is always resolved by a predictable number of actions, and that involves adjusting the setting to the players chosen path through it. You end up with problems where even if the players are succeeding, they could run out of resources before they get to the end of the road if they don't take the expected road.
Although I agree with most of your analysis, I believe that many od these system are geared toward plot resolution, instead of task or scene resolution, which shift the narrative and mechanical focus quite a bit.
Granted, it only shift the issue, instead of solving it.
@@Woodclaw Many of the games that consider themselves to be hyper-focused on plot resolution can only handle a single plot. I don't think it an accident that most of the successful focused plot resolution games can only handle plots that end in disaster and failure.
@@celebrim1 I agree.
This really sounds like a one-shot game. If so, rules for skills and gear that don't read quite right would be fine. If used for a series of games my players would definitely question the "skill or no-skill" rule and the assault rifle that weighs as much as a clip of ammunition. In a game like this I'm surprised that ammo and expenditure wan't simply ignored. Still...I'm a huge fan of innovation; 5-stars on that front. Great review.
Yes, it's very innovative!
What I get from this is it's Fun, but not memorable.
You won't get anything like 'The Bonesaw' (one of Seth's war stories) or 'The undying cult of the magic potato' (one of mine) in bounty hunter.
Everything is either 'Yes' or 'No', and while that makes it easier to roleplay as Captain Genericos the Unmatched, You don't get the Character-Building Humbling failures or the unbelievable successes.
If everything is a perfect, flourishing success; then it loses it's impact.
And you don't have degrees of success either, if a skill works, it works, it costs 1AP, regardless if there's a smarter or better option.
Seems like it would be better for a Superhero-Type game rather than Sci-Fi or Fantasy.
I never liked a lot of superhero games. I should likely just make my own or something.
do i dare ask about the potato...
@@nashwinston1395 If you did, Then I'd gladly talk about it, it's my go-to for funny DnD stories.
I could also mention my personal favorite 'Bombshell' moment which was in a Warhammer 40k-based RPG. Or perhaps the bizarre adventures of 'Sad Steak' the walrus man?
Sounds memorable to me, but admittedly could use some tweaks.
This channel is one of the few examples of how awesome social media is. Just amazing. I have a novelist review, explain and act out RPG's for me. For freakin' free. Awesome,
As someone who has experimented with diceless systems in the past, this is something I'll definitely pick up once it releases on DTRPG. The lack of randomness isn't a dealbreaker for me, since if I wanted dice I have Traveller, Savage Worlds, and Stars Without Number to fill that niche.
I'm also not a huge fan of the diceless systems, but as a random one off game it's a great thing to have in the collection. you get a group of friends together and just play a single run rather then making a big campaign out of it. either as a pallet cleanser between other game sessions or as a way to include friends from out of town. It fits nicely for how easy it is to learn and play.
No dice is no go for me.
I also find that though people often think these game easier for new people to learn, but it isn't necessarily so.
I just want to say that I appreciate Jack's trigger discipline. Finger straight and off the trigger unless firing.
I know this has no randomness, but hearing about the lack of ability to use a skill you don't have gave me an idea. Either take an AP penalty to attempt a skill you don't have, or flip a coin for critical success/failure. I think I just discovered a coin toss is the minimum allowance for chance I might require to play a tabletop game.
Flipping a coin feels very thematic for a bounty hunter, as well.
I’d also argue that an untrained character loses draws vs trained characters.
as if we were rolling dice whenever we didn't knew the outcome of a skilltask
gg - you just invented the dice RPG
@@Xingmey A coin could be considered a D2 after all.
*checks cost of PDF version*
“I’m getting this”
I think this could be fun for a few oneshots. I have some friends who like rpg-ing but don’t mind to much about dice.
I'm a big fan of light rules. Diceless is hard to pull off, but any game with brisk combat gets my attention.
I’ll take Cowboy Bebop over The Mandalorian any day of the week ...!
I see your Lazer Tag Starhelmet fits about as well as mine does! Entertaining as always.
I think it's an interesting idea of not having dice rolls. I watched the video of the adventure you played in and it looked like a lot of fun.
Sadly it doesn't fit the way I like to GM, twisting and bending the story based on dice rolls.
Huh. Really fascinating basic concept, the way AP works. This seems like a game that might be worth having so some of its innovative rules can be "borrowed" to enhance your homebrew...
This.... This is why I love you Seth. I didn't know this game existed and now I feel like a parent, waiting to see his kids open their Christmas presents. My players are going to go insane when they realize this is a game. We've been wanting a faster-paced space ttrpg ever since our Traveller playthrough fell to the wayside.
I backed this and am so glad you made this video. I was reading through it and had similar issues with a couple things, but your suggestions will absolutely help. Can't wait to teach this to my friends and family :)
On the topic of dice rolls creating randomness, I think I'd like to present this optional ruleset/metaskill for playtesting:
Risk-Taker: This Bounty Hunter doesn't play by the Rules, as such, every action they take carries more risk than usual. Whenever they take an action out of combat, they roll a d20. On a natural 1, the action they are trying to take fumbles and they must try again. If using the Skorkowsky Untrained Action Penalty, the failure expands respective to the AP cost. (I.E. an action requires two AP, a roll of one or two results in a failure.) A natural 20, however, is a success so flawless, it looked like it took no effort at all (no AP cost incurred.)
While in combat, each time the Risk-Taker would make an attack, they must make a Destiny Roll with the GM, each using a d10. Both must roll out in the open in plain view. If the sum of both dice equal 7 (1 and 6, 2 and 5, 3 and 4, or the the mirror result,) the attack is a critical hit and incurs a damage bonus (probably double damage.) If the sum results in 13 (6 and 7, 5 and 8, 4 and 9, or the mirror result) however, the attack is a fumble and missed its mark. A Karmic Balance (both dice match) restores 1 AP to the attacker. Any other result goes on as normal.
Additionally, I'd propose two 'subclasses' of Risk-Taker: The Graceful and The Klutz.
Graceful: This Risk-Taker manages to always have a single Ace up their sleeve. Once per session on a failure, the Risk-taker may negate the effect of the roll, succeeding as normal.
Klutz: This Risk-Taker is more on the bungling side, but Karma seems to balance things out. Every out-of-combat check result is reduced by one, making Graceful Success impossible and increasing the risk of failure. However, the Klutz may lower a single die result in a Destiny Roll by one.
Each of these 'subclasses' of Risk-Taker are supposed to act as level-up skills, with Graceful acting as a lesser version of the Lucky feat in other games. While Klutz incurs more out of combat risk in exchange for increasing their odds while in combat. (Think Jackie Chan or perhaps Mr. Magoo.)
These are just my thoughts, and I hope someone can playtest it and say how it went.
When I first saw this, I thought Mongoose had released a supplement for Traveller. ;)
Yalls live play of Bounty Hunter was fantastic!
My mind is still blown by discovering that Seth and people like Guy and M'haire Stritter are aware of each other's existence, let alone actually doing online RPGs together. I never knew any of this even a month ago 😲😲😲
Thanks for the Review. I was on the fence as I also like my dice but it sounds fun enough I will give it a whirl.
I held off on picking this up to see what you'd say. The price of the PDF per page is pretty high, bit I am willing to be moved. I will update this after I watch with the results. Update: Watched this. I am a sucker for diceless games, but I am going to check out the session video before I make the call. Great review as ever!
Also: I like your unskilled penalty suggestion. I would also suggest an encumbrance rule - once you exceed 12 items, those extra (reasonably portable) items get bundled with 3 of the first 12 into a 3 item "cargo" bulk that cannot be used and must be dropped in combat.
I feel like the biggest problems with is are that AP is mandatory to do anything (before the skills), and that AP is also your health.
As a few others had pointed out the AP system only allows Win or Draw, and you cannot even attempt it if you do not have the skill. In other TTRPGs you could always at least attempt a skill even if you didn’t have it even if the skill has a high dc, which in turn leads to crazy memorable moments that wouldn’t come up in this game.
Dying after taking a hit when you have 0 AP doesn’t make sense unless you’ve already taken damage. Think about it; someone doesn’t drop dead after a long exhausting day at work after he was just punched.
Not to mention that weapons needing AP to work would only really make sense for crazy advanced melee weapons, but shooting a basic pistol damage me? Does it have the most intense recoil in the galaxy?
I feel like this system could work for bounty hunting with some rewrites, but I think it’d work best as some sort of spy/espionage type game.
How about: once you carry over the 12 item max you can only move. If you choose to perform an action, you drop one item as you fumble around until you get back to 12... edit. Don't think that laser tag helmet went past us!
Two turn offs for me are diceless systems and those where you end up spending a lot of time deciphering specialty dice. Diceless systems tend be slower in feel and more argumentative. I like opposing skill check systems but they need dice to pull off well and more defined mechanics that keep the game moving along.
Specialty dice makes it feel like you're dealing with a language as non native speaker. So you're spending time translating all the darn time which slows you down. (looking at you Fantasy Flight mechanics systems) Plus finding the specialty dice later tends to be a pain.
So that's my two turn offs for me, but I do appreciate that such systems exist out there. I feel that over all that having various points of view on ttrpg design improves things overall for the hobby. Thanks for the review Seth, always appreciate your videos and look forward to seeing that notification that you've released a new one.
Specialty die mechanics annoy me. Ubiquity (Hollow Earth Expedition) or ALIEN I'm fine with because they can be played with normal dice with zero issue. Their specialty die are more for cool collectable factor. Ubiquity die are pretty damned cool and if I played more HEX I would pick some up.
2D20 (Conan, Star Trek) it starts getting rough for me. Thankfully we have a particularly crafty player who made us all a set of 5-6 specialty D6 for Conan. It can be played with regular D6, but it's a bit weird because the numbers on the face and the numbers the die face represents are different. I'm not a big fan of it.
Couple month back I started my first game of FFG Edge of the Empire with their color-coded symbol-covered die, and I hate it. Maybe it's old dog/new tricks and decades of using dice has made me too set in my ways. Maybe it's the fact that some of those symbols look too much alike or can be hard to quickly ID since when you roll a handful they land facing all sorts of different directions and at a glance I can't automatically read them. Maybe it's that whatever cool feature the symbols enable above what numbers would do, there's just as many things numbers could do just as well or better. I've played 4 or 5 sessions with them and I feel just as lost every single time I roll as I did the first time. You comparison to being a non-native language is the very best I've heard, and I'll be stealing that description from now on.
Bounty Hunter was my first diceless game that I've tried. Most of my complaints I have are easy fixes (better Opposed Mechanics, Non-Skilled Usage, etc.). The weird part is getting used to the idea that it's not about if you succeed or not, but about if you have enough to left over to continue. I was honestly surprised how effective it was at ratcheting up the tension. It's a cool way of doing it. I like seeing new ideas emerging and refining. Many of the modern and mainstream RPG mechanics we have now originated from old lesser-known games that introduced a brilliant idea that continued on long after that game died.
But I just prefer the thrill of chance that dice provide. There is always a chance to fail an easy task roll. There is also always a chance of succeeding a super-difficult task (if no chance exists, then there shouldn't be a roll). The thrill of "Maybe I will," or "Maybe I won't" is fun. Some people consider dice to be a terrible way of measuring if a character succeeds at a task. They might be right. But I also find dice to be better than all of the other options.
@@SSkorkowsky I'm in he middle of watching Guy's episode that you were in with others. I'm about 50 minutes in, had to pause and go run some errands. So far I'm really enjoying it, Guy's a good GM. I'd play in a game he ran. :)
I was going to use Ubiquity as another example because like you I'm fond of the system mechanics over all. At least it's playable without those dice that just make the dice pools easier to deal with, but still. heh
Feel free to steal that explanation for the Genesis dice system. It's exactly how I felt when I'd try to read them. I spend a decade in Europe during the 80's and 90's and spent a lot of time out in the various countries interacting with the general population, so it just felt like a perfect example.
Anyhow, keep up the excellent videos and now the podcast which I enjoy listening to as well.
This sounds hey you just said it as I was typing it. Sounds like a really great game anyone could get into. In fact this sounds like a game I could create. Using DND characters as I have players go through the entire 3.5 and Pathfinder list killing in alphabetical order. Death means nothing just means you lost round one.
Finished watching the actual play video. Really looked like a fun time and GM Guy is a solid GM. :)
Great review! Looks like the game has really good art. I love Guy's channel, btw. Two major disadvantages I see with the Action Points: 1) 20 is a really small pool, especially if you're using the optional rules to charge 3 or 5 points for tougher tasks. 2) The back-and-forth of each side spending 1 pt to get to a draw over and over again, especially for something that should be as quick and cut-and-dry as whether you can sneak by a guard or not, sound a bit tedious. Why not allow one side to spend 2 points (vs. the 1 spent by the other side) to quickly resolve the contest?
You should do a video on Twilight: 2000 since Free League is releasing 4th edition soon. I know that you like Traveller and the old T2K is linked to it (same universe but 300 years apart). Plus, you've been reviewing the new Free League Alien modules as well. I'd love to see your take on the old and new T2K.
Great review! Here's an idea for including failed attempts. If you don't have enough AP for something, instead of choosing not to do it, you can roleplay out attempting it and FAILING. If you do, the GM should have some kind of meaningful consequence take place for the failure (other than damage/AP loss). But, by choosing to do this, you get back 1AP (or 2-3AP if the roleplay and description of your attempt and/or failure was particularly in character, funny, dramatic, moving, or creative). In fact, you can take this roleplayed failure option even if you DO have enough AP for something and simply don't want to spend it.
I dig the idea of choosing to fail with consequences in return for AP.
The premise and character creation sound really cool, but unfortunately the rest goes a bit downhill from there with the exception of simultaneous turns in combat.
Even as someone with a feud with dice I must say that the lack of a random element takes something out. While the lack of back luck makes failing ones plans harder, the lack of the glorious moment when the dice do land exactly right once in a while and one succeeds in the face of seemingly inevitable failure seems like a big downside.
12 items I agree is a bit small, especially if one considers utilities like binoculars and compasses exist and will probably be useful. This is something that often helps parties out and many people don't even take them along, but I consider them quite valuable to have, and being actively punished for having those is odd.
Also agree with Jack on unlearned skills. I like systems with those, because everyone can do some things even without training.
Making actions and health equivalent? I guess it is more complicated and you shortened it for the review, but just put like that it sounds like an odd choice. Climb a building before combat and the character starts with the equivalent of a bullet to the knee. I get that they might be out of breath, but this sounds like a bit much.
Huh, this is extremely interesting. Glad I watch it and I might check out Bounty Hunter.
one way I'd houserule this immediately is implement something similar to weak moves from the belonging outside belonging system or GM intrusions from cypher, where players choose or agree to fail, get in trouble, or play to their PC's weaknesses in order to gain extra AP, perhaps even going above the max AP limit -- all to incentivize meaningful drama, risk, and failure, with a higher amplitude of ups & downs in the game
Sounds like a great game for in-between sessions when the group is missing a person or two.
Thanks again Seth!
As for two of your concerns, that being lack of Ship schematics and Monsters, The Star Wars Universe Fans have no doubt crafted a plethora of suitable candidates to "borrow' from. :)
I think I'd like to have my group take this Game for a spin.
Seth is a man of sophistication and specific taste when it comes to how his books are stapled. 😂
I definitely have my own preferences with these finer details, myself, so I can relate.
I feel like the whole "no dice" thing actually does help push the fantasy of this game: In a game that uses dice for skill checks your hardened badass character will eventually fail a simple task in an incredibly unflattering way, and you're going to feel about as far from the fantasy of your character as humanly possible. Of course, that's more realistic, nobody succeeds at everything they do, but we always chase after the kinds of characters we see in other media, and 90% of them don't just accidentally throw their gun and look like a total moron in a critical action sequence. I feel like I'll need to see the opposed checks in action, though: it'd be kind of funny for a guard to be just on his patrol route, walk near a character who is trying to hide from him and suddenly get *monstrously tired* because he unknowingly spent every single one of his action points on spot checks.
Sure they don't flail around and drop their weapons, but you can have dice without fumbles and both sides miss plenty often and it's a rare character who just never fails.
@@Electric999999 I was using a rather extreme example, but it also applies to things like a world-class acrobat rolling poorly and failing a jump that would be easy for a normal person, or a character built like Conan the Barbarian being unable to open a pickle jar. A creative game master can work their way around it, painting a scene that makes the task look more difficult rather than making the character look incompetent, but most of the time that's just not the case. I don't consider this a huge flaw of dice-based TRPGs, but more that it's something that you as a player have be ready for, and it can absolutely shift the tone of a scene from serious to silly unintentionally.
@@kevingriffith6011 And THAT is my #1 pet peeve about dice usage in RPGs.
I could see using this game being good as one-shot palette cleansers in between larger campaigns in other games.
It doesn't sound like it has enough meat to it to support drawn out campaigns.
I've got a pair of Bounty Hunter names in the book. "The Pidgeon and the Cockatoo". Based off a pair heroes that I made up in grade school.
Another great video, love your breakdowns & POV, as both gamer & GM. And I just have to point out, I love how Jack displays great trigger discipline, very important even with non functioning blasters.
As a Dungeon Crawl Classics fan, I don't know how I would handle it not having a half dozen tables to roll through . ;)
If I'm trying to guard and you're trying to sneak by, what does it mean to be in a "draw"? If I don't see you, that's me losing. If I do, that's you losing.
I like the idea that Action Points (AP), apparently, are tied to endurance and Hit Points. The more you do the quicker you get tired. I have never seen a realistic, yet simple to play, endurance system in a RPG. However, if AP is tied to all actions does that really make sense? So a sniper can only fire his rifle so many times before he can no longer even pull the trigger? Let alone that even the slightest touch will knock him out after he has fired a few rounds?
(As always, another great review.)
Sounds fun for a one-shot. Maybe for a short break between campaigns, when someone can't make session or something similar.
I will admit that it will be a good game for newcomers to RPG or anyone who wants cooperative storytelling. I think it might be fun to have a session of it but I don't think there would be any excitement to hold a campaign of it since there's no chance to fail so to say, making it less exciting for some.
But then again, it could prove to be a really fun game if a few other players and I give it a try.
For untrained skill use you could add the roll of a D6. 1-3 skill works, 5-6 skill fails.
Diceless games are interesting novelties to me, but I am with you on the randomness and chaos factor creating something special. There are diceless systems that still retain this, but they do rely on using something other than dice for randomisation such as cards, or in case of children of eriu and fate of the norns, runed tiles.
My friend wanted to play this and your review helped my desion! thanks!
So while I agree that the game is missing something without the random factor of dice I feel that the game allows for a fairer over layout, especially considering that it seems to allow for pvp on equal footing with other players, the chaos could be breathed back into the game with that. Just a thought I had when mulling over the game with a friend.
Maybe a hybrid approach to the dice resolution system could be used in order to keep some of the speed but still allow for some random chance.
For example don't roll for initiative or damage but roll for success when you try to use a skill. If you fail the skill maybe you get to keep the action point unless you roll a fumble.
You also have an excellent hook for a stunt system like from exalted. Exalted allowed players to recover their motes(magic cool power energy resource) when they attempted something badass. You could have the same here but for ap.
Or maybe allow characters to try to interrupt an action by spending ap. If an action is interrupted the character who attempts it has to roll for it if it succeeds. Otherwise it just does.
RULE CHANGE: Let me suggest the "Back Pack." Items may be stored in a Back pack. Items in the pack do not count against the 12 item max. These items may be exchanges with items in items slots only outside of Dramatic Scenes, with the 12 items in slots maximum always in effect. Every group of up to three items carried in the Back Pack cause a point of "Fatigue." Each point of fatigue reduces a characters current and maximum action points by I. The back pack counts as an item.
I dig that.
Apart from the core book cover the art is amazing
I agree with the review: the core design is great for a fast, streamlined experience, but it loses a notable amount of "oomph" due to the lack of randomness and true "gamey" elements.
As such, it seems like some house rules are a great step - include dice (or cards?) to add both risk/reward, meaningful choices and chaos: investing AP for the chance of "criticals", creative and risky ways of regaining AP, investing extra AP into a unskilled ability...
Personally, I'd love to adapt the gameplay to a fantasy setting but I feel the players I know wouldn't be too interested in a diceless "talking-only" game, so some big edits would be needed.
I'm very interested to see those supplements. Think il try it out when they come out. But first to watch that session.
I kind of got turned off by the diceless style. Just, not my style, feels kinda like novel workshopping or collab writing. I like to think it could be good for new players, but, having a system that could easily lead to being unable to do anything or you'd have no health is kind of probably prone to just leave a wariness of doing anything. Seems to less encourage those "TAKE THE RISK! GO ON!" moments that can really draw new players in. I also just... Maybe it's just me but, the art makes me think of an 00s PC game? 3D art is really hard to do well, and I just would have preferred 2D art?
I hope others like the system, always could do with more bounty hunter genre games as it's just cool feeling like Han Solo, Spike or The Mandalorian. Just, I feel kind of cold on this one. I'm glad you seemed to like it.
Yeah. This system lends itself well to the action movie hero fantasy but for a longer campaign it seems limited. Good for oneshot "our dm wants to play too" sessions.
Sounds like it wasn't playtested too extensively, quite a few faults with it (like you mentioned the whole 'carrying an armload of guns that you're not planning to fight with puts you over the item limit' SURELY should have come up in playtesting). I mean it looks ok, not my cup of tea admittedly for various reasons but good that he got it published.
So often I wanna thumbs up more than once!
Sounds like a very Guy system.
I'm a bit torn on the no dice thing. I get that it gets a bit annoying when the expert fails at something they should be good at, and it breaks immersion when a complete ammeter with no aptitude somehow succeeds based on random chance, things falling apart because of bad luck is part of what makes RPGs fun. Maybe not so much in combat or high stakes social encounters, but definitely in things like exploration or downtime activities. It's far more fun for the pretentious cleric to fail his roll and fall in the mud when attempting to climb than to have it either go smoothly or not even be an option. I can see the advantages of not punting to random chance, but it just feels like it would be somewhat limit the long term enjoyment. That said, Guy does seem to prefer letting his players feel epic and awesome while weaving a story over mechanical blunders and mishaps (at least from what I've seen of his games), so it makes sense that this is the system he would design.
That’s where a system like luck points or fate points really shines. It lets you ensure those epic moments happen while also saving room for the occasional blunder and random happenstance
Well, I think with AP, the randomness still can exists if you find yourself burning through AP faster than expected. It is much on the onus of the GM to balance being able to recover with being in trouble. Easy now might be tough later.
So while heroic randomness couldnt happen, clever alternatives from the GM plan does have an increased potential. Particularly if GM tells the cost after the action is performed.
This screams of "I heard you like crpg, so I turned your crpg into a ttrpg." It's not a bad thing, but I can definitely see how it would limit the appeal.
Most crpgs have plenty of dice rolling, random damage ranges, to hit chances (whether literal dice roll+bonus, or percentages). I'm struggling to think of a crpg that doesn't have dice rolling. Obviously there's the ttrpg based stuff like baldurs gate, pathfinder:kingmake, temple of elemental evil, neverwinter nights, shadowrun:dragonfall etc., but it's there in stuff like divinity original sin and pillars of eternity too.
This is one of the most important questions I've ever asked. That dice tower you showed at the start with the Crown Royal in the bottom. Where did you get that. ;)
My buddy Jorge made it. He's into 3D printing and made me a tower. He asked what color I'd like it felted with and I told him I wanted it to be with a Crown Royal bag. I love it.
I did give players the choice of playing with D6 to make their actions on even rolls or fails on uneven. This became much more worrying to players as they can still choose to use a point to finish the action but with a negative repercussion for the use. The fun watching their points dwindle and being forced to consider the dice is amusing.
The way I would role with this, you CAN pick up a pistol that you don't know how to use it and try to fire it. You fail automatically, your action is inconsequential to the outcome, and thus take no AP, and charge no AP from anyone. I would just discribe how your blaster rounds flow across the room, along with all the other rounds being fired by the actual shooters, which actually are well aimed and close misses, causing the enemies envolved to retreat for cover or give up.
I actually prefer saddle stapled game books and modules, because they incur less damage than a bound edition if I need/want to photocopy a map or picture out of it to make a handout.
That's why I insist on PDF copies of physical game books whenever possible.
@@SSkorkowsky Very good point!
Oh my goodness does this game drip style & I love AP being your hit points as well as your action pool, I’ll definitely check out the live stream & possibly pick up a copy as well 💜
"Disintegration" in tbe context of the film that spawned the quote, is not meant to be taken literally. It is short hand for "if you bring us proof that is not readily identifiable, it doesn't count."
See "Disintegration" reference in RotJ.
This of course means ignoring the SWEU, as every sensible fan should ;)
I think I have an idea how we could use dice with the system. The GM could assign a difficulty class to tasks the characters want to perform as in Dungeons & Dragons 5E. The 20 action points could function like inspiration and/or bonuses. You could spend points to reroll a die or add bonus points on. Everybody would start with a plus one for each skill that they had and that would go up as their reputation went up. So, when you roll for an action, you add your skill bonus and any action points you want to spend to the roll, or you can choose to reroll but maybe that costs more points like 2. If you are trying to do something you have no skills in, or carry more than your allotted gear, you have to roll for it without bonuses or rerolls. Would this work?
Hard to imagine a game without the clatter of dice! 😲😂
this sounds very interesting, id love to try that with my group
You lost me at diceless. I also prefer randomness in my games. FASA Star Trek did something like that with backgrounds for the character, rolling up your previous career as you make the character. I might have missed it but are there abilities like Strength and Intelligence? I'm not a fan of games without those either. Nice review. Thanks for sharing.
No characteristic stats, either. Some species known for being super strong or nimble might automatically get the appropriate skill to reflect that.
I apologize if this is the wrong place to ask, but I'd just like to say I'v really enjoyed your podcast modern mythos and I was curious when we might start seeing (hearing) more episodes?
Glad you're enjoying them. Jon tries to get them up the 3rd Monday of every month. So I think the 16th is the next one. If not it'll be the following Monday.
Hey Seth, are you going to review Avatar Legends when it comes out in February? I would love to hear it. After all, you're the reason I bought Kids on Bikes and am having a blast with it!
I kinda like it from the players perspective but I am afraid that the GM would need to constantly be aware of remaining AP of his players and spend too much brain power deciding on the proper AP meta game currency. It does says in the book that the players should take initiative when they wanna use the skill but still I am not sure how much involvement GM needs to take tracking the points of the table
This just seems like a new player friendly Traveller.
Awesome, a new video for me to enjoy over my lunch break
I can certainly appreciate going out of the norm in terms of mechanics. Though I will admit I probably would never play it because of that. Like a lot of people have said below, I really enjoy the random chance and the possibility of failure in my games. I can understand the annoyance of battle hardened veterans messing things up when they logically shouldn't. Or a complete newbie doing something incredibly hard because luck was on their side when they rolled the dice. But this just seems like not the best way to go about it (In my personal opinion)
Though I'm sure there's definitely going to be an audience for this, and I hope they enjoy it cause it certainly looked interesting enough and well thought out. Even if it's not my cup of tea.
Fascinating system. Not for me, like you Seth, but well worth reviewing. Like you said, this is great for newcomers to table-top rpgs.
So, to ask a slightly more specific question about combat. If I pay one action point to shoot someone, and they pay one action point to dodge, does that just mean I missed and the round is over? Can I just keep one upping him with the amount of AP that I spend?
As a practical example, imagine I am in the room with one other person. He's trying to press the button that activates the security alarm, and I am trying to shoot him dead before he can. We're both full health, so 20 AP. I spend one AP to shoot him he spends one AP to dodge. That's it? My turn is over? He spends his turn to spend an AP and activate the security alarm?
They can dodge (Defend) one physical attack a round. So if you spend 1AP to hit, they spend 1AP to defend, then that's it. You missed and now the alarm is going off (hitting a button is listed as a simple action with no AP cost). Of course one of you could also spend 1 more AP to go in the first Combat Phase, but if you both do, then it's still a miss and you're both down 2 AP.
If a second character was shooting at the target, the target would be unable to defend that second attack.
Couple things to consider, though. First, most NPC guards/goons start with 10 AP, while First Level PCs start with 20. Now you might be going against elite super-goons who have more AP, but basic ones start at 10. Of course if the PC is higher level, due to increased Reputation, they will have a larger AP pool (+5 per level).
Second, as a GM, depending on the situation, such as the previous round the PC said, "I'm camping here and protecting that alarm button and ignoring everything else," then I'd probably give them the shot (maybe at +1 AP, maybe not) because the player previously announced that's what they were setting up to do. That's where it hits special cases and the Increased Difficulty Cost optional mechanic.
I looks like they published an error on the AP table? At 12:27, it says "You are the best in six-star systems". Doesn't seem like that hyphen should be there.
Untrained could just be double or triple the ap cost per level of difficulty
A comprehensive review with your views well explained as always - thank you.
My question though is why would you choose this over Traveller, say? I had a similar feeling following your Alien review in that yes, whilst these are tailored to a particular setting, it’s nothing that can’t be created under the Traveller ruleset, say, with a bit of imagination - essentially what you might have done back in the 80’s perhaps working with the Traveller or Aftermath rulesets, for example.
If there were a 3-way deathmatch between Traveller, Alien, and Bounty Hunter as being the only sci-fi RPG I could ever play again, Traveller would win without breaking a sweat. It is the king of sci-fi RPGs.
Now if I wanted to play a game that feels exactly like I'm in an Alien movie, with no plans beyond it feeling exactly like an Alien movie, Alien would win. My biggest concern for Alien is how well a long-term campaign could work, or if you wanted to play something that didn't have to feel like an Alien movie. But as far as their goal of the rules making it play out just like Alien, they nailed it. The game is beautiful and fantastic, but narrowly focused.
If I wanted to play with a buddy or two on a rainy Sunday and didn't want to lose half the day trying to learn/teach the rules of a full-sized RPG and make characters (especially to their 12-year old son who really just want to shoot things and live like The Mandalorian for a few hours), then I'd go with Bounty Hunter.
Now, if I wanted a game to feel exactly like Star Trek and nothing more, I'd push the Star Trek RPG book out of the way to make room for Traveller.
I've run diceless games for years. I'm not saying this to say this game doesn't have any issues but to assure folks that you can definitely have long running campaigns without using dice as long as there are interesting choices and limitations built into the mechanics.
I will say that it's not my current cup of tea if only because diceless games are extremely more taxing to me as a GM than more traditional games since you can offload a lot of your explicit or implicit decision-making to the middleman of random chance (even though in most traditional games this is absolutely less interesting unless you really enjoy using randomisers)
I like your thoughts on the skills
I like Guy and his channel, but a ttrpg without a chance of failure is (in my own personal opinion) terrible.
I understand the concept, making choices that matter etc. but the chance of failure is what gives players (and possibly GMs) the thrill of the action. Attempting things with no guarantee of success is what gives me the most enjoyment, not balancing actions vs hp.
Yeah, as much as my dice and I hate one another (and they really do hate me), the unpredictability is what gives us great stories. I've had far to many moments of a player pulling off some near-impossible task with a great roll, or (more commonly) snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with a terrible roll. Even when a GM says, "You have a 99% chance to succeed. Roll." That teeny chance of failure still gives us the thrill as we throw the dice.
@@SSkorkowsky Like that guy with the Bonesaw and the fire giant, that couldn't happen in a diceless game! XD
Still hoping I can GM a game where I can put that sword in a treasure horde.
Seth, did you make Jack's helmet? That is a trippy bit of kit.
That is a 1980s Laser Tag helmet. It's much sleeker than the old Photon helmets I used for Traveller vids, but uncomfortably tight on my mellon head.
@@SSkorkowsky Comfort is key!