May play Fastasycraft. Need some information on how the game plays

[Gundark]

My group and I (I'm the DM) have been playing 4th ed. and while some at the table (myself included) enjoy the ruleset there are others who don't and want to play a 3rd ed. variant. After shopping around for a game that has more that 3rd edition/d20 feel Fantasycraft is one of the games that I am considering (I've enjoyed Spycraft in the past) .

Fantasycraft is crunchy, reeeeal crunchy. One thing that surprised me about SC 2.0 that even though the game took some time to get up and running (char gen, etc), once it got going it ran pretty smooth. Granted that wasn't with Magic, or different races, or the like

The main concern that I have is this... How long does combat in Fantasycraft take? D&D 4e combats take a long time at any level, D&D 3.5 combats were short at low levels, and reaaaaallly long at high levels. How does FC stack up? How long is the average combat for you at low, medium and high levels(give a rough time guesstimate). I don't have an 8 hour game session to play. I have a 3-4 hour game session with lots of distractions, so I want to feel like I can cover ground in that session.

So sell me on FC

[Psion]

Combat times vary widely.

First, you have standard and special npcs. Mobs of standard npcs, like minions in 4e, tend to go down fairly quickly,  though even that varies: you give them the mook quality and theypop like soap bubbles (or 4e minions ). Tough minions stick around longer, and the randomness of the damage save makes some minions go quickly.

Standard characters stick around longer,  but even then there are no guarantees,  and it's largely on the GM how long it lasts.

I thought things were getting a bit grindy in my game with specials, but then I turned on the fragile quality and all was well.

[adrick]

From my experience the first couple sessions were longish while getting used to the rules. This isn't due to the rules being overly crunchy in my opinion it had more to do with having expectations based on regular d20/3.5 or what have you vs how fantasy craft actually does it(usually better)

After getting used to it we've found it to be much faster than 3.5. and the fights to be extremely entertaining.  
Its also easier to fudge or make ups monsters on the fly.

I'd put it somewhere in the middle between savage worlds and 3.5.  and somewhat adjustable between the two depending on how durable you make your NPC's and also by campaign qualities, (optional tweaks to the base rules)

i've only played low to mid level games however so i can't speak for extremely high level play. I don't see that it would be much slower however since wounds don't really increase all that much. And you can take feats to up your damage. So it seems like most fights would be ended from critical hits well before vitality is burnt out.

I highly recommend it.

[Coyote0273]

Battles can run as long as you want them to. I've had fights go 10 minutes, and others go 2 or 3 hours. Though, the long ones were massive epic battles vs 50+ bad guys and a boss.

But, like adrick says, the start is the roughest. If you have hardcore d20 players, they'll stumble at first with assumptions. My group took about 4 sessions before they stopped turning to the war priest for healing. But, once they get it out of their head this isn't D&D, the game actually runs quite smooth and free.

NPCs are what really sold the system for me, since you can make fights as hard or as easy as you want, and design the opponents exactly how you want without being limited by a level/class/race system. Takes a little getting used to at first, but its not to hard to figure out. But, not being limited by CR ratings or levels really makes things a lot more flexible.

[Krensky]

My group and I (I'm the DM) have been playing 4th ed. and while some at the table (myself included) enjoy the ruleset there are others who don't and want to play a 3rd ed. variant. After shopping around for a game that has more that 3rd edition/d20 feel Fantasycraft is one of the games that I am considering (I've enjoyed Spycraft in the past) .

Well, I was going to comment on this over on the EN World, but you came to us.

Fantasycraft is crunchy, reeeeal crunchy. One thing that surprised me about SC 2.0 that even though the game took some time to get up and running (char gen, etc), once it got going it ran pretty smooth. Granted that wasn't with Magic, or different races, or the like

Funny, I found 4e to be more crunchy... well... more fiddly. Between the NPC creator and the sliding DC chart I can wing anything, and a few post its for the social skills or whatever catches you as tricky. However, it's objectively less crunchy then SC2.0. Magic was around in 2.0 but you had to pick up the Spellbound PDFs. IT really doesn't add much at all though. The magic rules are certainly less fiddly then indirect fire or trying to mix vehicular and non-vehicular combatants. As for different races, SC2.0 had them. Don't let the names fool you, a Species is just another name for a Talent.

Where you're likely to get the most WTF moments though is the Prize and Prudence systems.

The main concern that I have is this... How long does combat in Fantasycraft take? D&D 4e combats take a long time at any level, D&D 3.5 combats were short at low levels, and reaaaaallly long at high levels. How does FC stack up? How long is the average combat for you at low, medium and high levels(give a rough time guesstimate). I don't have an 8 hour game session to play. I have a 3-4 hour game session with lots of distractions, so I want to feel like I can cover ground in that session.

I'd agree that it's faster then 3.X, slower then Savage Worlds (assuming SW plays more or less like Deadlands Classic).

[Gundark]

As I've been reading the rules more I'm getting the sense that damage doesn't scale much as you grow in level. So while NPCs health, attacks, etc scale their damage doesn't. So I've got the NPC Bob the Swordsman armed with a Longsword (1d12+Strength). The group faces him at level one, his longsword damage is the same at this level as it would be if they faced him at level 12? Another example, the Trample damage of Big Nasty Brute is the same at low levels as it is at high levels.

Is this correct? What am I missing?

[Crafty_Alex]

As I've been reading the rules more I'm getting the sense that damage doesn't scale much as you grow in level. So while NPCs health, attacks, etc scale their damage doesn't. So I've got the NPC Bob the Swordsman armed with a Longsword (1d12+Strength). The group faces him at level one, his longsword damage is the same at this level as it would be if they faced him at level 12? Another example, the Trample damage of Big Nasty Brute is the same at low levels as it is at high levels.

Is this correct? What am I missing?

That's correct - but that's in no way different from any other game in its genre. Every d20 game AFAIK increases HP over time, but no d20 game scales damage by level (maybe M&M?). The difference, just like every other d20 game, is the players' access to damage-increasing feats, class abilities, magic items and the like increases as they grow in level.

[Krensky]

It's not hard to boost NPC damage per hit output. Boost strength, add on some feats or class abilities, etc. Same route as the PCs use. It's not really been an issue in my experience though.

Now, what you want to do for Special NPCs, especially at higher TLs, is look at Frenzy and Swift Attack. Having a NPC drop a pile of damage on a PC in a single hit makes the players cautious. Having a monster suddenly gain an extra 11 attacks for a single round, or wail away on them while full moving or grappling... that will make them sweat.

[Gundark]

As I've been reading the rules more I'm getting the sense that damage doesn't scale much as you grow in level. So while NPCs health, attacks, etc scale their damage doesn't. So I've got the NPC Bob the Swordsman armed with a Longsword (1d12+Strength). The group faces him at level one, his longsword damage is the same at this level as it would be if they faced him at level 12? Another example, the Trample damage of Big Nasty Brute is the same at low levels as it is at high levels.

Is this correct? What am I missing?

That's correct - but that's in no way different from any other game in its genre. Every d20 game AFAIK increases HP over time, but no d20 game scales damage by level (maybe M&M?). The difference, just like every other d20 game, is the players' access to damage-increasing feats, class abilities, magic items and the like increases as they grow in level.

Obviously your not counting D&D 4e as a d20 game  (Granted not full level to damage). So then combats do take longer at higher levels, better than 3.5 , but still similiar....

[Crafty_Alex]

Obviously your not counting D&D 4e as a d20 game  (Granted not full level to damage). So then combats do take longer at higher levels, better than 3.5 , but still similiar....

You're right - I barely know anything about 4E, actually, as we branched off a long time ago.

I don't think we're in a position to be compared just to 3.5, as we shortcut the length of combats, by other means those games don't have. Frex, we have feats and tricks that outright kill standard NPCs in a single hit in many cases, Damage saves which greatly accelerate the fall of standard NPCs, streamlined conditions which reduce at-the-table tracking of stuff to a minimum, no Attacks of Opportunity, etc. etc.

[ArawnNox]

Keep a couple simple facts in mind.
If I remember right, in 4E, you've got minions who have 1 hp or more depending on the abilities of their leader.

FC is not like that.
NPCs come in 2 flavors: Standard and Special.

Standard NPCs do not have HP (or in this case, Vitality Points/Wound Points). They take damage and roll a save to see if they die.

A Special NPC has VP/WP and VP do increase pretty fast. However, that said, their WPs do not change. Once they run out of WPs, they're dead. So a good critical hit can take them down in one shot. This is similar to the Star Wars d20 (not the Saga Edition, but then, I don't know what it's mechanics are).

Also, at higher levels, as many will point out, its a better idea to use attacks/abilities that inflict stress or subdual damage on Special NPCs as that will take them down faster than whittling through their pool of VPs.

Another thing that helps combat move fast is that, generally, you're not going to have too many special NPCs on the field as one is a challenge for a full party, where as Standard NPCs are a challenge when in equal number to the PCs.

When I first picked up FC I was daunted by the amount of crunch (I'm someone who thrives on fluff) but once I sat down and actually ran it, I was amazed at how fast and how smoothly the game ran. You have to unlearn a lot of habits and rules from DnD, but it played much faster and was a lot more fun. I can't speak from experience with 4E (as I gave up when it was announced) but I played a lot of 3.5 and had a very love-hate relationship with it. FC fixed it.


(Alex ninja'd me on some of that)

[Krensky]

Obviously your not counting D&D 4e as a d20 game  (Granted not full level to damage). So then combats do take longer at higher levels, better than 3.5 , but still similiar....

Well I wouldn't, since the term typically refers to games derived from the 3.X SRD using the OGL.

That said, high level combat can take longer, but high level PCs do do more damage via feats and tricks and better gear. They also have abilities that make damage irrelevant. Look at the Soldier's gamebreaker (14th level ability) On in a Million. Then look back at the Weapon Specialist ability choice, Most Deadly. There are similar things at the end of a lot of weapon chains.

Also since PC numbers, generally speaking, rise higher then NPC numbers at high level the extra attack feats (Two Hit Combo, Sword and Fist, Angry Hornet, Two Weapon Fighting) become much more viable against Special NPCs.

If you're really concerned (or just like cool options) allow Morgenstern's Simple Combat feats

[Morfedel]

Also, at higher levels, as many will point out, its a better idea to use attacks/abilities that inflict stress or subdual damage on Special NPCs as that will take them down faster than whittling through their pool of VPs.

Actually, this kind of disturbs me a little. I've seen discussion of this before, where people were concerned that subdual damage and stress damage sucked. But when I see arguments that it's actually BETTER than lethal damage, well... uh... that's just wrong. Being more afraid of being knocked out by, oh, being argued unconscious or something similar, than being stabbed to death by a sword, seems wrong to me.

Stress and subdual do need their place, but they shouldn't be BETTER than lethal attacks either.  And that kinda bothers me just a tad.

[Morfedel]

But, like adrick says, the start is the roughest. If you have hardcore d20 players, they'll stumble at first with assumptions. My group took about 4 sessions before they stopped turning to the war priest for healing. But, once they get it out of their head this isn't D&D, the game actually runs quite smooth and free.

Because the warpriest doesn't heal? Or because healing isn't as necessary, or... ?

[Krensky]

Actually, this kind of disturbs me a little. I've seen discussion of this before, where people were concerned that subdual damage and stress damage sucked. But when I see arguments that it's actually BETTER than lethal damage, well... uh... that's just wrong. Being more afraid of being knocked out by, oh, being argued unconscious or something similar, than being stabbed to death by a sword, seems wrong to me.

Stress and subdual do need their place, but they shouldn't be BETTER than lethal attacks either.  And that kinda bothers me just a tad.

They aren't always better, and even if they are, so what?

Remember that NPCs an PCs work differently. Against Standard NPCs lethal, subdual, and stress are all the same.

Against Specail Characters (PCs and NPCs) at higher levels, with their large vitality pools, knocking your opponent out via subdual or stress is often faster. This is a good thing. It means that non-lethal combat remains viable against the PCs. It give your players incentive to capture villains rather then just hacking them to bits.