I played it for around 3 months fortnightly. I didn't like it because the combat system sucked, the game slowed to a crawl every time a fight started . It never felt very threatening, just incredibly tedious - in the end we would avoid combat just to avoid the boring time sink.
Outside of combat I thought the task resolution system worked fine, though. But the game seems to think of itself as a "fast, fun" combat-centric design, which is about opposite from my experience.

I never much cared for the system, and in the early edition at least I found the presentation really annoying.

Quote from: RPGPundit;666952I found the presentation really annoying.

Thank you.  The clowns everywhere. barf

Quote from: RPGPundit;666952I never much cared for the system, and in the early edition at least I found the presentation really annoying.

I'm not familiar with earlier editions but I think the presentation of the most recent edition of the rulebook is OK. And Solomon Kane, which includes the rules, is presented really nicely.

Quote from: Kuroth;666953Thank you.  The clowns everywhere. barf

AFAIK that fucking clown/jester avatar/logo is not as ubiquitous anymore in the books but they really need to burn that thing all together.

Played one campaign of Savage Worlds. It was fun. I mean the system itself was fun to use, so whatever criticisms I have a largely just based on the difference from what I want from an RPGs system vs the intentions of the designers & otherwise recommend it whole heartedly. Initiative system was one of my fav parts. Quick unobtrusive and easy to reference.

I found the game too 'whiffy' for my likes. The dice results are very random and unimaginarive combatants can soon find themselves in a revolving door of back and firths. Bennies were too 'gamey' basically just 'awesome' points. At least msh's karma points seemed to have some basis on the game's reality. Would have liked either a more comprehensive list of traits, or advice on players creating their own. Like the funky dice and appreciate any system that makes use of them but didn't feel there was enough distinction between characters. Minis definitely not needed anymore than in whfrp1e despite the rules as written assuming their use. We never used them and did no house-ruling.

I picked it up (1st ed.) because I greatly enjoyed a historical miniatures rules set (Fields of Honor) by the same author, but SW just didn't seem to offer much. There was too much attention to making basic "mechanics" baroque, too little to providing material that fleshed out a game. The lists of powers and equipment, for instance, were too rudimentary.

The (apparent) point-buy balancing seemed to be the main draw, but if I wanted that I'd go for the more flexible Champions. There just wasn't enough flavor -- a big draw of Fields of Honor -- apart from the system that was desperately clamoring for attention to its supposed cleverness at every turn.

If that's "fast and furious," then by comparison with what?

Quote from: jadrax;6663836+ on an exploding d4 is a roll of a 4 plus the roll of a 2+.
6+ on an exploding d4 is a 0.25 X 0.75...

I will let you do the rest.

Or in fact; Graphs!

You are right , apologies and I was really smug about it... teach me to write here and do conference calls at the same time ...

Mea culpa maxima mea culpa.

Quote from: Phillip;667067The (apparent) point-buy balancing seemed to be the main draw, but if I wanted that I'd go for the more flexible Champions. There just wasn't enough flavor -- a big draw of Fields of Honor -- apart from the system that was desperately clamoring for attention to its supposed cleverness at every turn.

The main draw of Savage Worlds is that it is dirt simple to GM, especially making up NPCs on the fly.  

The point buy is not particularly balanced with vast disproportions between Edges and Hindrances depending upon the genre.

Quote from: Old One Eye;667145The main draw of Savage Worlds is that it is dirt simple to GM, especially making up NPCs on the fly.  

The point buy is not particularly balanced with vast disproportions between Edges and Hindrances depending upon the genre.

In a lot of ways, the best parts of Savage Worlds are similar to the best parts of the original Cortex rules -- the ones used for Serenity and BSG.  I think that the simplicity to GM is a major point and one that can be really under appreciated.  It's true that an adept GM can improvise in any system but there is a benefit to allowing a mediocre GM to still pull together an enjoyable system by minimizing the mechanical overhead and permitting focus on the story.

Quote from: jibbajibba;667128You are right , apologies and I was really smug about it... teach me to write here and do conference calls at the same time ...

Mea culpa maxima mea culpa.

No worries.