I love the lore and setting, but I've never played the ttrpg. I'll have to track down Anarchy.

Thanks for the link!

Already backed ;)

Well, then here are my thoughts and you might have missed https://piefed.zip/c/rpg@ttrpg.network/p/1909546/shadowrun-anarchy-2-0-is-out

Ah that's awesome then. I haven't played shadowrun in years. I hadn't even heard of this before.

Yes, somehow. I'm not a lawyer ;) AFAIK CGL is also just a IP licensee (from Topps IIRC?). But somehow they were able to let BBE work on SRA2

On dtrpg SRA2 is being sold as a CGL product

Is this licensed through CGL? I thought they were the IP holders? Just curious how this works.

I'd definitely need to play it and see it in action to make a more meaningful opinion, but I think my original first impression of "feels bad" remains. Just my 2¢!

Either! That's typically how I've played most RPGs when it comes to determining Charisma, Dexterity, etc.

A player might say "I want to try and Force the door open," determining it themselves. They might also say "I'm gonna survey the horizon. Do I see anything of note?" and the GM might say "Sure! Roll to Engage."

Fabula Ultima is not quite the same but the two dice of variable sizes gave me vibes of it, thought maybe you were inspired.

Who ultimately decides whether an action is Force, Consort, Finesse, or Engage? The player, the GM, or hard-coded rules?

With the base dice system, yes. I'm lazy so I'm just going to copy-paste what I said to the other commentor, lol.

It’s important to note that doubling up on dice in this system is essentially min-maxing. You’re getting a 75%+ success rate on Forcing in exchange for a 0% success rate on Engaging. That is just with the base system, though. I didn’t include these sections in the post, but other systems of the game (such as Effects) meddle these numbers and can allow a double d6 character to successfully Engage.

And no, I haven't played Fabula Ultima. I'll be sure to check it out tho if it's similar!

Seems like if I take forceful and strong, I can never ever succeed at at least one categories of options?

That's exactly right. While, yes, they are unable to Engage with two d6s, that kind of tells a story with just the math. That would be the classic "strong, short-tempered jock" archetype. They may not be the brightest, and they may not be the most careful, but dang can they hit hard!

It's important to note that doubling up on dice in this system is essentially min-maxing. You're getting a 75%+ success rate on Forcing in exchange for a 0% success rate on Engaging. That is just with the base system, though. I didn't include these sections in the post, but other systems of the game (such as Effects) meddle these numbers and can allow a double d6 character to successfully Engage.

Though, my party and I understand all of this because we've been building the game together. I see now how that requires a wealth of mechanical context and isn't really all that clear to new readers.

Unclear how health and recovery work. Seems like the double d6 would have low stress, high wounds?

Essentially just two pools of hit points, but with the added complication system if you roll a marked number. Yes, a double d6 character would have a low Stress capacity (6) and a high Wound capacity (18 - 6 == 12). They can take some physical hits, but are weak to mental hits.

Again, this wasn't covered in the Markdown preview I wrote, so I apologize for that, but recovery is done entirely through storytelling, particularly during Downtime. If a character received a Wound from fracturing a bone, they'd spend a months-long Downtime in a sling. If they received a Stress from a terrifying encounter, they'd spend an hours-long Downtime coping with it. And if you have a lot of Wounds/Stress and forgot how you got each one, you can simply say "Hey I'm gonna recover during Downtime" lol.

Have you played Fate? This seems like a distant relative of Fate Accelerated.

I have! There was no direct inspiration, but I do like Fate a lot.

No meta game points or succeed at a cost?

Meta game points are covered by Effects, which were not covered in the Markdown preview.

As for succeeding at a cost, Wounds and Stresses cause "an immediate narrative complication alongside the action’s outcome", but there's no rigid system for uninjured characters. I tried to work it in, but it felt clunky for a rules-light game like this. I will say that the section on actions does give a brief blurb about "the relative ease or difficulty of the task at-hand". When I've run the game with my party, I've narrated a player barely succeeding a fairly difficult task as a success with a cost.

So a strong, forceful character can never succeed at ¼ of the things they try? That feels bad.

Was this inspired at all by Fabula Ultima?

I've got a game of vampire the requiem (2nd edition). There are dozens of fans of requiem out there.

I'm not really sure why they rebooted the wod and the re-rebooted it, but my books aren't going anywhere.

I didn't immediately get a sense of how the dice choices would impact play and options. Seems like if I take forceful and strong, I can never ever succeed at at least one categories of options? That seems limiting.

I'm not mathy enough to instantly see how the dice are going to limit me.

Unclear how health and recovery work. Seems like the double d6 would have low stress, high wounds?

Have you played Fate? This seems like a distant relative of Fate Accelerated.

No meta game points or succeed at a cost?

I support Unionization for damn near anything. WotC is like WoW. I'll play games but vacuums are not games. Same as I have completely quit video games entirely.

I discarded the entire notion of D&D by Mage:tAs because my parents thought D&D was the Devil. So, when they found the 3ft stack of Mage I nabbed off eBay, they burned 'em.

So, yeah, I'm a Maurauder, and I have more than the Book of Madness on it, to boot.

Hence my nick. It's their one primary point of error (more like intentionally missing in their definition than "mistaken"): Entropy.

I'd love to play some World of Darkness stuff. I came so close to playing in a game of V5, but it collapsed before it even began when COVID hit in 2020.

V6 looks a lot less interesting to me, mechanically.

I'm afraid the White Wolf games apart from Vampire hold much less interest to me. The themes of personal horror and the interpersonal politics are just absolutely my jam. I would be interested to try Hunter, and to increasingly lesser extents the other WoD games, but nothing is at the same level for me as VtM.

All of that said, I don't care what the company is or whether you like their products. Workers fighting to unionise is never an irrelevancy, and calling it "suicidal" is some anti-worker bullshit. I decided I was done with D&D about 6 months before the OGL crisis, and bought the PF2e CRB about 2 months before it, and that's been my main game since then. But I still care a lot about the workers rights of the workers in what is by far the largest RPG development company.

When this Wizard Worker War collapses from suicidal irrelevancy, come play old White Wolf's with D12's.

I don't take Vampires though, unless they've already drank Faerie blood.

N.B. I shared this yesterday from my aussie.zone account but noticed it had failed to federate properly. Trying again from a different instance.

Depends how collaborative you want to be. How does x work in this universe is something I often ask my players. How do we see this thing or what might that look like. Let's creation be shared and gives us all common ground to work with. If someone is more familiar with source material than me, great they can help shape things. GM always has veto, "that's not how it works in this world". I'm not getting rules lawyered out of a cool plot just because one player has read (or retained) more of the setting than I did.

Touchstone is fine. It just would not work if some players know a lot more lore than others, especially than the GM.

Worldbuilding is actually one of the elements I don't particularly enjoy, I'm here to hang out with my friends and tell cool stories. The less effort I have to put in the better from my standpoint. My preference tends towards games with their own settings or settings easily explained with a few touchstones.

My favourite game so far has been in the Dresden files RPG, which is very easy to grasp the setting of even for someone who has never read the books. I set the game in our hometown and scattered a few options for problems around for the players to encounter and just built a story from there. My worldbuilding setup was collaborative presenting aspects of the Dresden universe which I was interested in running and asking what my players were interested in.

I have also run a few Mothership games with great success and very little worldbuilding - you're basically in the Alien universe where "The Company" owns everything. If you have a common touchstone like the Alien films to give everyone a shared idea of the world it makes it so much easier to set the tone and mood of a game with very little effort on my or the players parts.

@juergen_hubert I think the real balance is between how complex the world is, and how much is exposed to the players at any single moment. Then the players can decide what matters to them. The downside is that most of the work of the DM might be lost if the players don't explicitly go looking for it.

Wait. So, every class is a warlock, then? Hunh. I guess you could call it Warlocks & Waypoints? 🤷🏼‍♂️

(just don't swap "&" for "or", unless you want Blizzard's attention.)

Those boxes look very satisfying to fill in

I hate the name, though. Nothing about that site is a Wiki. Call it TTRPG Catalog, Folio, whatever. If there's no way to directly edit anything, it's not a wiki. (And no, I don't think a wiki would be a good idea for a website of this kind.)