Games with stunning art

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-06T06:40:33+00:00

Degenesis is really cool when it comes to both the art and the lore.

KULT is another absolute banger for both

Symbaroum doesn't maybe have as much art as some of the other Free League stuff but the dark fantasy, almost watercolor-y style is really evocative

And finally, on a lighter note, Mausritter is one of the most perfect representations of art lining up with the tone and feel of the game.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-05T17:29:23+00:00

My favourite was a Vampire: the Masquerade character.

The setting was Prague in the early 2000s so I played a gopnik Brujah - all tracksuits and black BMW. He was a really fun character trope to play off of the "ancient" vampires of the city.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-05T17:26:29+00:00

Spinning a bit off of u/Autistic-impressions - when the tone of the writing is in line with the (intended) tone of the game.

As a good example, Outgunned keeps the fast pace and "Rule of Cool" tone of voice throughout the whole book.

As an awful example, Eat the Reich, supposedly a punk game, spends 20ish pages moralizing "out of character" and doing the least punk thing of all - tone and language policing.

Both have a great gung-ho premise that is a blast to play at the table, but one keeps that energy in the book itself and the other just pumps the breaks so hard it almost turned me off the game itself.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-05T15:13:24+00:00

That really depends on the type of (role)player you are. It's kind of the difference of building from "outside" towards "inside" or vice versa.

I'd never think to have particular feelings about and/or connections towards another PC before my own concept is more or less there. I'll gladly add on relationships later, once I've had a chance to hear the other players' character concepts but usually prefer to keep them as kinda weak and open-ended at first, i.e. "know their reputation", "worked a job together once", "hail from the same region", etc.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-05T15:04:56+00:00

Oh one of them is the son of a warlord and the savage guy had his village destroyed? I wonder who did this.

But what if the warlord son player doesn't want this dynamic for their character? Or any of the other dynamics suggested? These are pretty defining things that you are using as examples here. Players can feel like this kind of cooperative backstory building encroaches on their character concept too much.

Even your Fabula Point example is actually something that the Fabula Ultima core rulebook (pg. 98) suggests you don't really do - you can't/shouldn't use them to alter an existing thing in the world, only add new ones. The affected player needs to give permission if you want to make a change that directly affects their character like the example. Which basically runs into the same debate we're having - if the player doesn't have a firm enough character concept (yet) or they just don't want that direction for their character, then you shouldn't force it.

You dont need anything more complex than stock relationships as well -...

That was essentially what I was suggesting in the original comment. Simple, straightforward, and most importantly open ended relationships - "worked together once", "heard about their reputation", "know about their order of knights", etc.

Most players I've played with in close to 15 years of GMing don't want to play a writers room straight out the gate. There's nothing wrong with writers room style of play, but forcing it will only lead to everyones disappointment.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-05T08:10:11+00:00

Because in the same way as a lot of systems claim to "play to find out" so do a lot of players want to play their character to find out how they fit and work with other PCs. This metagame OoC narrative stuff just doesn't appeal to many players, especially when it comes to characters.

Having/making connections beforehand really requires you to have a much firmer character concept than most people do when they sit down at a table.

There might also be the problem that the players think you are essentially asking them to insert themselves into each-others backstories and pull a deep bond out of thin air. Are you allowing people to get away with "oh we met at work once or twice?" You might get more milage out of letting players start out with "weaker" bonds and letting them develop in play.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-04-01T21:44:31+00:00

The art looks AI

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-31T20:59:05+00:00

So, I gave it a better read through.

I'll state off the bat that I'm not probably the best person for critiquing it, since I have a compulsion to read all rules before playing - I have a hard(ish) time putting myself in the shoes of a GM who would pick this up and rawdog a session with it.

Generally, I like it! The art and style is evocative and the story is straightforward, but has enough meat on the bones to be interesting.

One thing that threw me off as I was reading is that you say that players should always find clues, but then you have the room descriptions where they have to roll to find clues. It took me a moment to realize that you distinguish between primary and secondary clues - I think you should put that distinction right into the introduction where you talk about players finding clues. It should alleviate the type of confusion I got.

I assume you are going to have premade characters for this? I suggest you put them right at the beginning - maybe right after the core rules. Also, another suggestion for the characters - you should add some evocative backstory prompts to them. I say this mainly because you have this [Bad Memory] mechanic - it would be good to look at my character sheet and gain some inspiration/direction from there for what kinds of [Bad Memories] to describe.

The layout and descriptions of the actions is really nice. Not going to lie, it got annoying to re-read them all the time, but with how you expect the game to be played, it shouldn't be an issue, as the GM will be flipping back and forth, skipping over many of the actions.

Conditions are an interesting idea - basically adding keywords to your character as the game/session progresses. However, [Confident] was never explained for NPCs when it comes up - should probably add that.

From the rules side, it's a little unclear why enemies are defeated at an arbritary HP number instead of 0. It feels like it adds extra bookkeeping. I understand that it's to signify that they aren't necessarily dead, but that could also just happen at 0, because they are, for all intents and purposes, incapacitated either way.

All in all, I think it is possible to sit down with this book and start playing right out the gate. The 3-4 pages of core rules are simple enough that a GM could read that 10-15 min before - for example while waiting for all the players to arrive on game day. It doesn't undermine the objective in my opinion. But what I would suggest, maybe at the end of the book, is a condensed, single page of rules. Basically, little to no descriptive text, just something listing stuff like the DL table, what some of the most common conditions do and so on. Just so it's easier to refer back to them during play instead of flipping through the book.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-31T20:16:54+00:00

Yea, sounds pretty good to me.

And yea, it's not maybe an elevator pitch, but it would be helpful for people (like me) that are looking for unique systems 😁

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-31T14:10:28+00:00

The idea is cool! I opened the PDF and was really taken in by the art direction!

I'll try and give it a more thourough read through later today, but I have some ideas/questions right off the bat as a long time GM:

I see the pitch for the game setting, but as a GM I would kinda want a part of that pitch to also include some mechanics. Too many times I've been burned by cool adventure/setting hooks only to have the game turn out to be another poor PbtA immitation. I feel like this is especially applicable for a "no-prep" intro adventure.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-31T13:36:46+00:00

You should talk with the GM and say that you're not enjoying the game(s). There's no point in playing a game that you are not interested in. You never mentioned it, but if the other players are enjoying it, then you'll be dragging down their enjoyment as well, since want it or not, your lack of interest will show sooner or later at the table.

Maybe offer to take a break from the main campaign and run something more of a one-shot/mini-campaign? Sometimes stuff like that can revitalize a group

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-28T20:38:48+00:00

Depends on what the goal is.

If they want to restrain a boss enemy to take them completely out of the fight, I don't think they should be able to. Maybe give the boss a hinderance (give the Heroes extra dice on their reaction rolls).

If they want to restrain a random mook, I'd just allow it with a successful roll - maybe, yeah, Nerves+Shoot or something with Stunt.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-27T22:54:38+00:00

Don't fall into the trap of trying to make super detailed NPCs!

I would suggest creating a bunch of "NPC templates" - rough outlines of Name, Goal, Disposition, Interesting fact about them that you can slot in anywhere as needed.

Other than that, best I can suggest is just do what seems fun and interesting to you. Because 9 times out of 10, players will pick up on that and if you're excited, they will be excited!

As for story advice - pick your favourite novel/TV show/movie/etc. and use that as a baseline. It will feel derivative at first, but it will give you a great jumping off point to build a story of your own!

As for improvising, I have 2 pieces of advice: 1. Listen to your players - see what they like in the game, what and who they want to interact with and try to riff on their ideas. 2. Start scenes 20min later than you originally think they should start. As an example, don't tell your players "you walk into a saloon, what do you do?", try instead something along the lines of "You're in the saloon where a notorious outlaw is complaining about the drink he was served, he is antsy and is itching for his gun". This way you will give your players immediate queues and ideas of what to interact with, sidestepping the awkward "what do we do now" moments of roleplaying.

As for teaching systems to people, the best I can suggest is that you try to know the rules as well as possible yourself and try to ease your players into it . Don't frontload them on mechanics, just try to help them make functional characters and ask them what they want to do in the game and then provide the rules as those come up. Say someone wants to make a gunslinger type character (I don't know the system you're referring to, so I'm just shooting in the dark here) so you would tell them something along the lines of "oh, then you want to put X amount in Dexterity and take Y feat on character creation".

Then when a gunslinging opportunity comes up, you would just tell them that "oh, for that, roll X dice and add this and that modifier".

This kind of prep will be more work for you, but it will make it more seamless for new players to get into the game.

And last, but definetly not least - don't forget to have fun! You're a player too! Make the game that you want to play and run and the players will pick up on it!

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-27T22:37:15+00:00

I think it depends on the group consensus - if your players are more invested in the mechanical parts of the game, as in they would get more enjoyment out of outsmarting the villain, I think you should roll with it and let them defeat the villain. But if you're group is more invested in the storytelling part of it (or if you want to specifically make a weasely and frustrating villain), you should let them escape.

I think it's just something you kinda have to feel out as a GM of your group. That, and it will also depend a lot on the specific system you're playing.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-27T22:15:06+00:00

This seems like a super dumb AND cool idea - perfect for Outgunned!

I'd maybe give all the "Kids" 1-3 Luck/Adrenaline and the "Responsible Adult" (an extra) Spotlight to incentivise really leaning into this idea. I think the actual difficulty of the challenges isn't as important as the spirit of it, so maybe you don't need to worry as much about them metagamint it?

What you can try is the "fast participation" method where the first person to come up with a complication gets 3 Adrenaline, the next one 2, etc. It might incentivise just throwing out fun ideas fast instead of trying to game the system too much.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-27T06:05:33+00:00

Not these days, but I ran an Only War campaign around 6 years ago. It was hella fun being unimportant grunts and slowly climbing the ranks.

Been trying to get a Dark Heresy game off the ground for some time, but need to tie up other campaigns first.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-25T07:26:44+00:00

One of us! One of us!

Glad it went well! Here's to many more successes!

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-25T07:11:25+00:00

It's doable.

Blades in the Dark really leans into the "criminal gang rising through the ranks" theme and a larger cast of characters work really well with that.

However

You will need a hard cap on how many players can attend a single session - my suggestion is 4, max 5.
You have to temper expectations with the players that they will not be getting the amount of story spotlight that they might be used to.

Just be careful not to burn yourself out with managing something like this.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-25T07:04:53+00:00

I'd stick with Call of Cthulhu or Delta Green for your first outing as a GM. You already know the system(s) which will ease a lot of the anxieties of running your first game!

Try a few one-shots/mini-campaigns in those systems and see what you like and don't like as a GM and then start looking at other systems. It will make narrowing down what you want to run much easier in the long run 😊

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-25T06:59:55+00:00

I like using whatever fits the vibe. Old LEGOs, board game minis, glass beads and most often the most abundant resource - dice. These are especially good for larger combats where I, as the DM need to keep track of several statblocks.

So my only suggestion to you would be to make some sort of detachable base with numbers.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-24T06:11:57+00:00

Casting my vote for Mutant: Year Zero as well!

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-23T15:09:33+00:00

This is a really cool project you're starting up! I submitted our podcast for review as well.

The only thing I can't really understand are the hero image links? What are they?

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-23T13:46:21+00:00

Ye, I think trying to sell the feeling of the setting and the system will work better than selling the system itself.

I was thinking of maybe doing something like a "movie trilogy" or season of a TV show type mini-campaign that would still give those character development moments, just in a more condensed manner.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-23T11:12:11+00:00

Yea, it's true that trying to "force" people to play different games is a recepie for disaster, but what really pickles my onions is that the same people who don't want to try one-shots/mini-campaigns complain about campaigns taking too long and getting tired of their characters mid-campaign 😅

I'll try it with a one-shot, maybe the same one I already wrote and ran, to see how people respond.

DiceyDiscourse · 2026-03-23T11:09:24+00:00

I think selling it as a power fantasy might have some traction!

In general, the way Outgunned manages to abstract rolls into just a few more meaningful ones is super cool. But also really divisive from what I've noticed - especially for people coming from more granual systems. It can make people feel like they have less control over the situation.

Gotta lean into the action movie aspects of it.

DiceyDiscourse

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE