This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Author Topic: Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?  (Read 6066 times)

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4705
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« on: March 17, 2016, 02:47:14 PM »
Savage Worlds was on my list of games to sniff out back when I got this idea of looking for a good universal system that was not GURPS. I wanted something lighter than GURPS (so - no, I'm not a GURPS hater.)

I finally got around to actually playing in Deadlands. I was shocked at how much fun it was. But the game petered out quickly because the GM sucked, but the game left a mechanical impression on me (enough of an impression that I bought a bunch of the books plus all the Deadlands Reloaded material). I think it has a lot of potential.

Flashforward to all the recent cyberpunk discussions... I decided to pick up the Interface Zero 2.0 book for Savage Worlds. Without hyperbole, I can say - this book is stunning. The production on this book is almost on par with FFG's Edge of the Empire (regardless of what you think of the rules) - the art, the layout, is just bonkers.

The setting itself I found to be extremely well thought out and covers more "cyberpunk" than anything I've read in the last few years. In fact I'd say it's really cyberpunk+. I don't have enough experience with Shadowrun to make a good comparison in terms of setting conceits. But Interface Zero obviously has no magic or anything, but the technological development is pretty advanced, going from gutterpunk street-tech salvaged from production parts, to spaceships just shy of FTL. Plus mechs!

So who here has used it and run it? How does it stack up against Cyberpunk 2020/Shadowrun? I'm open to anyone that has opinions pro/con on Savage Worlds in general about what you like or dislike, as I'm still learning my way around the mechanics.

Thoughts?

slayride35

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • s
  • Posts: 820
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2016, 05:22:24 PM »
GURPS is a fine system, I just didn't like rolling low (I know it makes no actual difference but I prefer my high results = good and low results = bad) and the plodding advancement. I like Savage Worlds as its a roll high system with no cap due to acing and bonus dice. Similar to Earthdawn but runs a lot smoother. Specifically I like that Savage Worlds has a way to resolve just about everything in the core book. One thing that I don't like is that the chase rules are awful compared to normal combat and don't work well as a chase. I'm at the point that I almost feel like throwing them out and adapting the Earthdawn chase rules that I made. The abstract chase rules just don't work because distance is constantly determined by card draw and attacks are determined by who has advantage, the highest card draw with lower cards unable to attack the high card in the round. So the chase is a chase combat and ignores the distance between foes and movement rates that are part of the combat system. When your spaceship that has 20/60 movement is chasing guys with a pace of 6 and 18 and you are at long range from a card, it just feels broken because it doesn't make sense.

Deadlands Reloaded: The Flood was a lot of fun, we got through the whole campaign. The Player's Guide is really good for Deadlands as it has a lot of mechanics that are useful in not just Deadlands but other games.

My co-GM Ted is working on running exactly this type of game. He is making an Interface Zero Shadowrun kind of game. I've heard the book is stunning as well as the rules but as Ted isn't ready to run yet, I haven't got to see it in action.

The Science Fiction Companion does a great job of savaging scifi too. I've read that one and used it for pieces of Necessary Evil. What I really like about it is its a toolkit that allows you to also create new races (I find the SciFi Companion rules to do a better job of this than core), vehicles, spaceships, and mechs by using the system in the book.



I found this on the Savage Worlds GM G+ Community. This might be very helpful if you decide to run a Shadowrun kind of game. It takes Second Edition Shadowrun and Savages it.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B9ilRupFha7zaWhyWVRTSmVJeDA&usp=drive_web

jan paparazzi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2016, 06:33:41 PM »
What I like about it:
  • the rules are simple
  • it's easy to read
  • the layout of most books is very clear
  • a lot of cool settings (which are just a little different)
  • the settings usually have the right amount of detail for me
  • random quest generators, savage tales and plot point campaigns


What I don't like about it:
  • the system can be a little gimmicky


I really like it, although I can understand some people don't like the gimmicks of the card drawing for initiative, bennies, dice for skills/attributes etc. It's also a bit lite on the social and mental skills.

Savage Worlds also has a ton of settings in all kinds of genres.
May I say that? Yes, I may say that!

Brander

  • Lunar A.I.
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 445
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2016, 07:01:38 PM »
Quote from: tenbones;885592
Savage Worlds was on my list of games to sniff out back when I got this idea of looking for a good universal system that was not GURPS. I wanted something lighter than GURPS (so - no, I'm not a GURPS hater.)

...

Thoughts?


I realize you aren't all that into or familiar with it but I ran my last Shadowrun game using Savage Worlds and my go to system prior to Savage Worlds was Gurps (which I ran from 1st to 4th edition).

I do own Interface Zero, but it's still in my vast "to read" pile.  It was recommended to me by one of my players.  As well, Interface Zero is recommended in the Sci-Fi Companion for those wanting more detailed hacking rules.

What I like about Savage Worlds is that it plays fast, but it's very tactically oriented.  So, without being much at all like Gurps, the end result  gives that tactical feel of Gurps where combat is dangerous (especially with the right setting rules) and what you do is often as important as how well you can do it.  At least it does to me.

I had no major problems converting SR to Savage Worlds, though I did have some interpersonal issues with the group dynamics, those had nothing to do with the system.  In actual play I felt it ran well and gave the desired feel.
Insert Witty Commentary and/or Quote Here

Christopher Brady

  • The Voice of Raisin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • C
  • Posts: 4733
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2016, 08:38:11 PM »
I wanted to pick up Interface Zero.  Was never able to.
"And now, my friends, a Dragon's toast!  To life's little blessings:  wars, plagues and all forms of evil.  Their presence keeps us alert --- and their absence makes us grateful." -T.A. Barron[/SIZE]

CRKrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12464
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2016, 08:51:32 PM »
It's as awesome a Cyberpunk setting as Totems of the Dead is a S&S setting.  Which is to say, hella awesome.

For me, Savage Worlds was always "Deadland's Braindead Little Brother" until Solomon Kane and Interface Zero proved you can make a setting with it that isn't just a different coat of paint splashed over the same exact rules.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

Brand55

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 900
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2016, 09:24:26 PM »
Interface Zero is just one of many Savage Worlds games I really want to play but just haven't had a chance to try out yet. Reading the book was a breath of fresh air after I looked at the new edition of Shadowrun and decided it definitely wasn't for me.

For anyone interested, the official IZ character sheet is pretty bad. Or, at least it was the last time I looked in on it. Thankfully, that's where the fandom can step in. There are some great sheets on the PEG forums for those interested: http://www.pegforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=47715. These are the ones I'll be using if I ever get an opportunity to do something with the game.

jux

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2016, 05:23:35 AM »
Quote from: CRKrueger;885648
It's as awesome a Cyberpunk setting as Totems of the Dead is a S&S setting.  Which is to say, hella awesome.

For me, Savage Worlds was always "Deadland's Braindead Little Brother" until Solomon Kane and Interface Zero proved you can make a setting with it that isn't just a different coat of paint splashed over the same exact rules.


For SW there are other options to consider as well. For S&S there is Beasts & Barbarians.

For cyberpunk there is Nova Praxis. I have only skimmed Nova Praxis, but to me it is more believable than Interface Zero. I dont't like the genetic mutations - it's too much fantasy for me. I've never got into Shadowrun too. NP is darker and is also focusing on space exploration, which I like.

But unfortunately I am totally tired of SW system. I may return to it one day but I need a long rest.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2016, 05:26:42 AM by jux »

Christopher Brady

  • The Voice of Raisin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • C
  • Posts: 4733
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2016, 05:31:58 AM »
You know, Cyberpunk would be the only thing I'd consider 'hard' science fiction.  Which puts Nova Praxis out because of space travel.  It's highly unrealistic.

There's a reason we don't have any men on Mars.  And why the moon landings were done at night.  Our sun.  A single solar flare would kill every astronaut in seconds.  Cook 'em like bacon.

Why?  Humanity right now, doesn't have the knowledge to make any radiation shielding as strong as to block enough to survive the 150 days to almost year it would take to get there.

So no, Nova Praxis is about as realistic as Interface Zero.  Pick your fantasy, mutations or survivable space travel.
"And now, my friends, a Dragon's toast!  To life's little blessings:  wars, plagues and all forms of evil.  Their presence keeps us alert --- and their absence makes us grateful." -T.A. Barron[/SIZE]

MrHurst

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • M
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2016, 09:47:24 AM »
Own just about all of it at this point. It's all worth it. The one sheets make for a good series of intro adventures and let you seed all kinds of hooks of your own. The locations books generally have good information and a relevant sub system if you wish to use it. And the best part, you can ignore any bit of it if you wish and you aren't missing much. While the rules are largely consistent in resolution, they're packaged in easily contained subsets that you can toss or add to.

As for how cyberpunk it is... well, I'm intending to run the one shots as a way of introducing shadowrun players who have been fed nothing but runs to the punk half of the genre.

Rules wise, far easier to deal with than most. You're rolling two dice for resolution, both of which are fixed size per character and rolling against pretty standard numbers. If you can count to ten you can handle savage worlds. Generally the most difficult thing about running it is remember the order of card suits if initiative cards over lap. Cyberware as written in this or the sci-fi companion does not make things that much more complicated, generally alters a value on a permanent basis.

Compared to shadowrun it's a cake walk. Burst fire rules are mildly complicated to track ammo for, simple to resolve. Suppressing fire is almost blind simple. And that's about the limit of the built in tactical options. Building a character the difference is nearly laughable. I've made characters in ten minutes for people. Resolution mechanics are far simpler and faster to read.

Compared to cyberpunk... probably simpler? It's no harder, the hacking rules are far lighter, and I'm going to say you could get a character together faster for a wider range of intended options. What is missing a bit is the risk in cyberware, or the extent you can be cyber. But that is also part of why making a character is simpler. In play there's more dice involved, but the resolution of those dice is considerably simpler.

You can get the same feeling of cyberpunk easily, it does not have the granularity of shadowrun, but that isn't exactly a bad thing. You'll have a pulpish feel to how resilient your characters are so long as their enemies aren't carrying military grade weaponry, but if they are then you get to see how quickly the system can get lethal.

Cyberpunk is the kind of game that savage worlds actually handles pretty well. It strips out the weakest system in the game(magic) and focuses on things where it makes a whole lot of sense for there to be a relatively thin power band to work with. Interface Zero 2.0 does all of this quite well, then tacks on big mechs and limited psionics if you want them(or just want to scare players with them). Both of which manage to work surprisingly well within savage worlds compared to most implementations I've seen.

Imaginos

  • The One you warned me of
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #10 on: March 18, 2016, 10:41:10 AM »
I've got Interface Zero 2.0, but I don't know if I'll ever get it to the table.  One of the players in my group had a falling out with peeps on the PEG forums years back and he refuses to play anything Savage Worlds.

After my pending divorce, depending on how custody and such works out, I may end up getting another group going to fill up time.  If I do, I will try to get Savage Worlds to the table, as I have wanted to give it a shot for a long while. There are so many settings that I enjoy tied to the system.

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4705
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #11 on: March 18, 2016, 11:37:56 AM »
Having not run SW *yet*... but having played it. I kinda like my cyberpunk high-octane and lethal. My Deadlands game kinda hinted that SW can make that happen in spades.

Casual review of the weaponry and armor in Interface Zero kinda tells me that it's definitely looking potentially nasty.

I played a renegade Shaolin Monk in Deadlands, I liked how they handled the "magic" stuff. While on paper the bonuses didn't look like much (I had Bullet-Time) in mechanical play? It really worked. And my character really felt effective. So I'm thinking Interface Zero will allow all the Matrix-type shit with little effort.

I'm also eyeballing Last Parsec in case I want to expand to full blown space-opera. Anyone use that?

Brand55

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 900
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2016, 12:22:19 PM »
TLP just uses the Science Fiction Companion for its rules and adds in a few extras here and there, so the Companion would be your best bet if you wanted to take your IZ game into space. My group has only done a few one-shots with those rules and they've worked well, though we haven't tried full ship combat using the bigger vessels. Generally anything more than a fight between a couple of fighters or small freighters gets turned into a narrative scene so we can keep things moving.

The one part of the SFC that I really would like to do more with sometime is the mech rules. Those look particularly interesting, and I've always wanted to run some type of mech game. The rules in the SFC look good to my untrained eye but I haven't tested them out yet.

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4705
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2016, 12:27:43 PM »
Quote from: Brand55;885761
TLP just uses the Science Fiction Companion for its rules and adds in a few extras here and there, so the Companion would be your best bet if you wanted to take your IZ game into space. My group has only done a few one-shots with those rules and they've worked well, though we haven't tried full ship combat using the bigger vessels. Generally anything more than a fight between a couple of fighters or small freighters gets turned into a narrative scene so we can keep things moving.

The one part of the SFC that I really would like to do more with sometime is the mech rules. Those look particularly interesting, and I've always wanted to run some type of mech game. The rules in the SFC look good to my untrained eye but I haven't tested them out yet.


Yeah I was perusing the ship-combat rules last night. I like getting into the nitty-gritty of those kindsa things - and these rules don't look bad. My group *really* enjoyed the Edge of the Empire ship-combat rules, and SW looks a LOT simpler and cleaner.

I'm getting all chubbed thinking about running this system now...

Luca

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • L
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
Savage Worlds: Interface Zero 2.0 - Yea or Nay?
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2016, 02:43:27 PM »
Quote from: Christopher Brady;885700
You know, Cyberpunk would be the only thing I'd consider 'hard' science fiction.  Which puts Nova Praxis out because of space travel.  It's highly unrealistic.


Slightly off topic, but there's the theoretical possibility of FTL travel without violation of general relativity by using Alcubierre drives. It's contentious but it hasn't been disproven yet, one of the biggest sticking points (the sheer magnitude of the energy requirements) has been apparently solved by the improvements of den Broeck and White and the other big one (creating an energy field with negative density) might be possible depending how you interpret the Casimir effect.