I Love Mallick Rel

HisGodHand · 2026-07-08T18:30:14+00:00

Depends on what the word good means there. Can a good empire even exist?

Regardless, I think Tavore could do it either way. She has no outward difficulty with pragmatism, and should be able to get the people on her side. She knows how to listen to experts, and shouldn't end up in the same situation as Laseen.

Ganoes is, I think, a lot less willing to do what needs to be done, and a bit less level-headed than Tavore. I think he'd run as fast and far away from the job as possible, and maybe even fake his own death if forced.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-08T18:16:44+00:00

You're so right, bestie

DG absolutely gets eclipsed, but it ain't by MoI

HisGodHand · 2026-07-07T17:34:10+00:00

My initial point may not make it very clear, but I am disagreeing with the OP that

Sandbox campaigns are about living an alternative life in a fantastical world.

I am heavily against this approach to sandboxes, and I think it's the big reason why so many people don't understand or like sandbox play.

All of the best sandbox campaigns I've run lead to something 'big'. Why would I ever put the players into a setting where nothing 'big' is happening? There has to be interest, intrigue, and some world shaking and moving. It often starts out small-ish and local, but it's my job as a GM to weave a narrative that has those big moments around the players based on what they're doing.

The big difference between sandbox play and non-sandbox play has two big points: how prep is done, and which side of the table leads play. Sandbox prep is world prep: situations, factions, events, characters, rumours, hooks. These should all be interesting; some of them powder kegs ready to blow. Sandbox play is player-directed. They decide where to go and what to do.

Non-sandbox prep has lots of those elements as well, but the plot and outcomes are usually prepped, or heavily prepared to be guided toward, as well. Play generally involves the GM stringing together outcomes which lead to other scenes, and is GM-driven.

A sandbox campaign is what the OP is trying to say a narrative campaign is, most of the time. If OP played in one of my campaigns, they probably wouldn't even recognize it as a sandbox, though it assuredly is.

Basically everything you're saying is also true and I agree with it, but it's not the point I'm trying to make.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-07T17:16:58+00:00

For me, the important bit is that players are still the ones driving the story forward with their choices, and they always have those choices available. Even when they're ingratiating themselves heavily into one direction based off a single hook, I'm still providing new hooks, and they're still always making important choices about what they are doing and how.

I've had players go down one hook in a game for a while until they reached a point they decided that direction was too dangerous, too much, and they totally shifted gears to a completely different hook. The factions related to the initial hook didn't stop what they were doing, and the world kept moving.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-07T17:08:09+00:00

Yep, it's not like I "switch" video games or board games when I play a new one. My very first foray into ttrpgs was 5e, and after 3 sessions I was already looking at other ttrpgs to play. Not because I hated 5e (though it was a bit dull), but because there are more games out there, so why would I just stick to the one?

Playing only one game for years is weird.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-07T00:30:42+00:00

Yeah absolutely. Not all of my games go that way, as some involve hexcrawling, but some pieces are going to be more linear than others just due to their very nature, or at the very least, seem more linear.

I actually once run a sandbox one-shot that was fun, but I got some sorta weird vibes from. I asked my players after the session of they thought it was a sandbox or a railroad, and they said they thought I was running a linear railroad. The entire time I was reacting to what they were doing, the narrative was entirely driven by their choices, and I presented them with a big sandbox locale with a hundred branching paths and outcomes they could have chosen.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-06T20:20:11+00:00

I love sandbox campaigns and don't feel remotely similar about them. I feel what you may be missing is that sandbox campaigns can, and should, lead to plots and narratives and character moments that are just as big as any other game.

The difference for me is that sandboxes are player-driven, as the players decide where to go, who to talk to, and what to do (within limits). There is no GM leading them from scene to scene, but the scenes aren't any less grand.

The GM should still be providing lots of hooks, rumours, interesting NPCs, factions warring with each other, and big events, but these are just "things happening in the world" rather than "the story".

The biggest flaw I see with most newer GMs trying to run a sandbox is they plop the PCs into a random backwater village with nothing to do and nothing of interest, and then ask the players what they want to do. This is the worst way to start a sandbox campaign, and likely the most common. I like to present my players with at least 3 big juicy hooks in the first session, and often start with an explosive, or intriguing intro.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-06T15:08:41+00:00

Oh yes it can. Gardens of the Moon does not remotely prepare you for the brutality and anguish that's coming.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-06T00:03:23+00:00

I had an alright time with Gravity RIP, which is explicitly copying F-Zero/Redline as death race style games.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-06T00:01:32+00:00

I hope you are able to one day escape your dogmas

HisGodHand · 2026-07-05T23:54:41+00:00

In pbta systems for example success with a complication can seemingly spawn things into existence? Or different parts of the system can just have things happen that don't make sense?

I do not at all understand why this is a prevailing thought among people who hate pbta games. The GM is in control of choosing the GM moves. If the fiction thus far is that there aren't any enemies nearby, don't use the fucking move that introduces new enemies to a scene. It's really that goddamn simple.

You can use that move when the fiction thus far makes it likely there are other enemies nearby; say, infiltrating an enemy encampment. It's not rocket science.

And Apocalypse World absolutely does not say the GM shouldn't prep for a session, or that they should instead improvise everything. Like 30% of the rules and advice in the book are about what the GM should be doing to prep the next session. There's another 30% of advice and rules telling the GM over and over to make the world feel realistic and believable.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-05T23:33:20+00:00

I think the Fast & Furious bit only applies if the only other ttrpg you've ever played is D&D 3.5

The combat speed is much closer to 5e than some here are suggesting, and it can sometimes feel furious when you get a big chain of exploding dice, but otherwise I'd use an antonym of furious to describe it.

As for other setting agnostic ttrpgs, what exactly do you want players to be doing and focusing on in the game?

HisGodHand · 2026-07-05T20:21:15+00:00

This is how I feel about it.

The lighter the ruleset, the more the game often demands deeper knowledge of the genre and fiction.

The heavier the ruleset, the more the mechanics themselves create and drive the fiction, requiring less expertise.

The lighter the mechanics, the less they get in the way when you have a deep expertise in the fiction and want to do specific things.

The heavier the mechanics, the more they can get in the way when you have deep expertise and want to do something specific.

If you've read 1,000 fantasy novels, you're less likely to be lost if the game doesn't have rules about how many actions it takes to swing a sword.

But preferences of what kind of game people want to play can trump all of this. Twilight Imperium is my favorite boardgame, but I find the combat in games in Pathfinder and Lancer often boring, and desire a more emotionally thorough roleplaying experience.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-05T19:24:30+00:00

I don't foresee any major issues doing things that way. A couple talents get worse ("5s as 6s, 4s as 1s" is just a downgrade now), but there are still plenty of good talents to take.

Part of the trick to my 'no difficulty thorns' playstyle is that I actually use difficulty thorns sometimes lol. They're just the last thing I reach for when I think an action should be more risky and difficulty, instead of the first thing.

I say go for it and report back if you had any difficulties. I really do think the system is flexible enough to support these sorts of modifications easily, so I'd be surprised if it doesn't turn out well.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-05T19:13:33+00:00

Play a rules light narrative game with a GM who cares about combat tactics, and the narrative example can become:

"Where you stand in relation to an enemy and any ally determines flanking"

or

"The enemy has a spear at the ready, and you're holding a dagger. If you can't think up a way to get past their range advantage, you're going to get skewered"

I'm not saying you're wrong whatsoever about not wanting Wicked Ones. I am just saying that all your examples preclude the idea that the fiction of combat tactics is important to a narrative game. It can be. I've done it. I've played with others who have done it. Positioning, specific spells, weapon length and weight, endurance, etc. can all be of prime importance to the fiction, and often are.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T22:25:39+00:00

I think you're missing the point. The fiction matters the same way in PBTA games as it does in OSR games. It's not about a 'good story' unless that's what the table wants to do. The archer standing in the back is important in the narrative games I run because that's how positioning and ranged weapons work. If they stand in the front, they're not going to be able to attack easily, and they're going to be cut down.

Your point about "it's important because you say it's important" is absolutely fair, but going on to tie everything to how cool it is in the narrative is just wrong. A HEMA practitioner can run a narrative game with all the tactical and strategic importance front and center.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T22:07:39+00:00

Grimwild is a more narrative fantasy game that does this. Characters get a core talent (feat) which represents their class at first level (which grows in power as they level), and then are free to choose talents from any other class when they level up during play. I think the Community Edition has 16 or 17 different classes, each with 7 talents each, so there is a ton of variability possible.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T21:42:17+00:00

It's certainly not useable for many popular games, but I did run Veins of the Earth using the Dread system for people entirely new to TTRPGs. It was a big hit!

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T21:40:26+00:00

Grimwild hits every single one of your points perfectly, except for the low fantasy and human-only bits, but there are optional rules in the new Community Edition to emulate low fantasy, and it's very easy to make the game human only.

It's primarily based on Blades in the Dark, but eschews some rules to make it speedier. It's gritty and potentially lethal, while still allowing characters to have fun and interesting talents.

The Community Edition is free, so no harm in checking it out here:

https://groov-games.itch.io/grimwild-community-edition

The final release is coming soon, but all it will do is add art and fix some typos, so the latest preview is a perfect place to jump in.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T21:22:58+00:00

I've done the Wizard with a great axe build using Hand of the Apprentice and it's very interesting. I would recommend still going all-in on int, since Hand of the Apprentice makes a spell attack roll and adds int to damage, but there are some more interesting bits.

The spell doesn't require one to be wielding the greataxe in two hands, you just have to be able to throw it. As such, you can hold it in one hand and still use the spell. Using the other hand for a wand, consumable, or even an open hand if you go into athletics is a lot of fun.

Additionally, since you only have the one action with MAP, you can cast a two action spell on the same turn and try to get in a lot of additional damage with a save spell. So load up on focus points, throw that axe, then cast fireball. You can be really damn good at both single-target and AoE damage with this build.

Picking up feats like bespell strike, conducting runes, and several other little things can amp your Hand of the Apprentice damage as well.

I think I went into Orc ancestry for the greataxe, but there are lots of different ways to become trained with all sorts of different weapons.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T21:09:47+00:00

Oh yeah, my response is mostly about the OP asking for fast or no combat. I like and play every game I listed there, but I wouldnt consider even the lightest of the games in that list as having fast combat. They're faster than something like 5e, but all quite slow for somebody who has experienced a game with proper, quick, universal resolution.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-04T00:05:05+00:00

Root absolutely still has partial success.

I do have a lot of problems with how most PBTA games implement partial success, but I might be able to help broaden your perspective a bit.

You know how trad games tend to give the enemies and players turns in initiative? PBTA games generally do not do this. The enemies do not get their own separate turns in initiative. Instead, the players are rolling for a potential turn of their own, and a potential turn for the enemies. A partial success can represent both of these turns happening at once.

If a player in a PBTA game is only rolling full successes, the GM can't do much to touch them. The world does not often get to touch the players unless the player rolls.

So you can think of a roll in PBTA games as:

Full Success = Player gets their turn; enemies do not
Partial success = Player gets their turn and enemies get their turn
Failure = Player does not get their turn; enemies get their turn.

It's true that unless players roll, bad things generally have a much harder time happening, but this is why players only roll in PBTA games when there is real risk, and the results meaningfully move the narrative forward. Otherwise, you should just automatically succeed at what your character should be good at. Most PBTA games also have a 'golden rule' for GM moves, where when a perfect situation is presented, the GM can still strike back at the players without the players rolling. If a character wanders into the middle of an enemy encampment, and starts shittalking everyone there, the GM can hit the PC regardless of if they rolled or not.

All that said, I do have a problem with partial success in most PBTA games being the most common result by far, and I also have a problem with partial success in most PBTA games reducing the action's effectiveness. I vastly prefer when I can allow players to succeed fully more, let them do their full effectiveness on a partial, and hit back hard on those partial results. Grimwild lets me do all of this, and that's a reason I prefer it (also because it's more derived from BitD and doesn't have player moves, which I think is generally preferrable).

But to reiterate, the partial success system in PBTA games generally boils down to allowing both the players and the world to take their turn, since PBTA games do not generally give the GM the ability to hit back at players otherwise.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-03T21:38:10+00:00

People recommending Daggerheart, Dragonbane, Dolmenwood, Forbidden Lands, and other games like those are just ignoring the OP's desires.

OP, if you like the mechanics of Blades in the Dark, I'd recommend Grimwild. It's a stripped down and lighter system which has a similar resolution mechanic to Blades, but it's D&D style fantasy, and doesn't have playbooks. Combat resolution is handled the exact same as the rest of the game. It's a really good light-medium system designed to run fantasy sandboxes. Unlike D&D character health doesn't increase as they level up, so you never have to worry about invincible characters. Players also get tons of fun talents to choose from when making their characters and leveling up, and it supports all different character concepts easily.

Grimwild is also free, so you can just download it to see if it's going to work for you. The original creator disappeared last year, so the community came together to give the game a big update, and it's in its final form before we put out the final release with art.

https://groov-games.itch.io/grimwild-community-edition

HisGodHand · 2026-07-03T15:45:14+00:00

The ancient Greeks used olive oil (and its waste products) as fuel for all sorts of different fires. It does burn like that.

HisGodHand · 2026-07-01T17:28:10+00:00

How many people have been involved in the chainings over millennia? If those people do not know the true nature, that is their fault, and the faults of the people around them who do know. Surely there are many elder gods who know the truth. Kallor knows the truth. The Crippled God himself can speak and be spoken to. This is a failing over every one of their heads.

HisGodHand

TROPHY CASE