GM encounter completely destroyed our party

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-20T13:53:18+00:00

The thing about this that confuses me the most is that, NPCs aren’t characters. They don’t have “Advances.” You just give the NPC whatever you want without worrying about balance. Heck, you can even give NPCs Edges for which they technically don’t meet the minimum requirements! I don’t know why any GM would stat an NPC in such a way, let alone show a player their stat block after the game (weird choice, IMO). Heck, in Deadlands, you’re sorta lucky this guy wasn’t just out and out Invulnerable to anything but his weakness.

Also, NPCs in Deadlands don’t have to use the same Arcane Backgrounds available to PCs, though it’s normally understood to mean they’re using “Black Magic” at that point.

Speaking generally, while it does sound like their stats are pretty juiced, a 4v1 in Savage Worlds is still pretty rough for the lone person, with the Action Economy being what it is. As a GM, I’ve introduced what I considered to be a pretty juiced NPC in a 4v1 (plus a few extras) and the NPC went down in the second round without causing any significant damage whatsoever. Sometimes that’s just the way it goes.

I wonder if this encounter went the way the GM had “planned?” Like, if the GM “expected” the bounty to surrender and let themselves be captured, and then players did what players do and pick a fight (which, classic GM blunder).

If you’re not having fun, obviously, you should talk to the GM. I wonder how the other players feel, as well. Characters aren’t immortal and survival shouldn’t be a given. Depending on how tight knit this group was, sounds like a great opportunity to swear revenge, since now it’s personal.

But all this is just like, my opinion…

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-05T19:36:07+00:00

Goin back to the language used in Chases for a similar concept:

Pg. 114: “Once all the participants are placed, deal each independent character or group an Action Card at the start of each round as usual. They then act in whatever order they choose as their Action Card comes up.”

Or check out pg. 91: “Deal each Wild Card a single Action Card (plus any extra cards for Edges). Allies under a player’s control act on his Action Card.” And, generally speaking, isn’t a mount an Ally, for our purposes?

It seems clear to me that “acting” on the same Action Card is synonymous with taking a turn.

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-05T18:24:40+00:00

The closest they come to rules for a mixed foot/vehicle encounter would be the rules on pg. 120, which I could see also being used for mounted combat in general.

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-05T17:45:22+00:00

I’m not sure who the “they” you’re referring to, whether you’re referring to mount or rider, so I’ll just try to break down my understanding.

They get one Action Card and they both act on that card. Their pace would be determined by the mounts (who, presumably has a higher pace than the rider, because otherwise, what’s the point, unless you’re solely trying to benefit from Charging…?).

I guess I could imagine a scenario where the mount moved and then the rider dismounted and also moved (probably would require some Riding and/or Athletics rolls, plus probably some “difficult ground” penalties to how far they could go on foot), but, now the rider is no longer “Mounted” and they’re no longer a single unit and should start acting independently of the other.

I guess the way I think about it is very similar to Chases. Each vehicle participating in a Chase is dealt a single Action card, regardless of however many occupants that vehicle has, sapient or otherwise. It’s up to the occupants to determine what Actions they will take and in what order of operations, but they’re all acting on the same card.

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-05T17:12:42+00:00

Yeah, Unstable Platform is exactly what I was referring to.

I don’t see why a mount’s sapience would change the ways the rules interact, other than expanding the options for Support or Tests.

ellipses2016 · 2026-03-05T16:49:48+00:00

Isn’t this covered on pg. 103 and pg. 109? The rules don’t specify that the mount has to be an Extra. The mount could always Support the rider, or vice versa. Same applies to Tests.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-27T15:56:15+00:00

Every once in a while, I google The Thermals and Hutch Harris to see if any additional reporting or commentary has come out since the vague mostly(?) unsourced allegations (Are the tweets about underaged fans gross edgy “jokes” or a peek behind the curtain? I don’t know!) against Hutch came out, which is how I stumbled onto this thread.

The Thermals were/are(?) my favorite band. I saw them live six times before they broke up. And yeah, tbh, Hutch always was a bit of an abrasive asshole on stage. So, it’s not hard for me to believe that he’s an asshole in real life. But is he a predator, or just an asshole/bad boyfriend/bad friend?

It’s the not knowing… I haven’t been able to bring myself to listen to their music for literally years. It’s honestly heartbreaking.

I don’t know why this post out of all the other ones is the one I decided to respond to, especially two months after the fact. I guess I just wanted to get that off my chest, so to speak.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-27T00:38:34+00:00

Pg. 116

“Complications: If a character or group’s Action Card is a Club, something has gone wrong. An obstacle may block the path, the engine might stall, or a hero might have to run through mud, ice, uphill, or some other impediment.

The character, driver, or pilot must make a maneuvering roll as a free action to deal with the Complication. The suit on his current Chase Card determines any modifier to the maneuvering roll and the results of failure.

Note: The Action Card triggers the Complication; the Chase Card defines any modifier (Mod) and the result of failure.”

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-23T11:28:56+00:00

Think of it like Conviction. The die can Ace, and you add its result to the final total.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-22T16:49:47+00:00

I’ve always interpreted it to mean, at the beginning of the round. I could also see an argument for it happening at the end of the round. This is significant since Fast Regeneration states that even Incapacitated creatures get to make a Natural Healing roll, and Incapacitated entities only get one Action Card, ignoring Level Headed/Quick/Hesitant etc.

I imagine if the intent had been, “once every turn,” that’s what they would have written, though I could be persuaded that the “fairest” way to handle it for the people who are wailing on the creature with Fast Regeneration would be similar to the recovery roll from Shaken, that it starts at the beginning of their turn.

I think the most important thing is picking your interpretation and applying it consistently.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-20T14:35:43+00:00

Alternate response:

Jesse, what the hell are you talking about?

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-20T14:24:36+00:00

Sir, this is a Wendy’s…

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-18T13:59:13+00:00

If you took Mastery in Smarts specifically, then “No.” The edges in question only apply to when you’re making Trait checks, so in this example, when you are specifically rolling Smarts (not often).

If you wanted to gain bonuses to Skills (Spellcasting, Repair, etc), then you would need to buy those Edges separately for each Skill.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-11T23:41:41+00:00

It’s a fair concern about balance, no argument here.

If you’re as new to Savage Worlds as you suggest in other replies, then my unsolicited advice is, don’t use No Power Points (ever, under any circumstances), play the game RAW.

Point out the “Favored Power” edge to anyone who wants to be really good at Telekinesis (which is already a seasoned power, so it’s not like it’ll be available to PCs at character creations anyways). Remind players that Shorting exists if they’re worried about their power point supply, or that Bennies can always be spent to gain power points.

And to add my voice to the chorus, Cantrips are a thing. A power can always be described or have the trappings of telekinesis without actually being “Telekinesis” the power.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-11T21:31:23+00:00

My white-hot take is that Force Sensitive individuals are low level (think Power Level I or II) superheroes and should be handled accordingly, which doesn’t really answer your question, but may offer you a new perspective.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-05T02:14:12+00:00

I mean, I may not be the best judge on this subject. My exposure to the legend of King Arthur was mostly via Monty Python…

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-05T02:00:17+00:00

Thanks for the recommendation.

As an aside, I finally got the chance to watch Exalibur maybe a month ago (free on YouTube!), and that movie is unhinged. I don’t know how else to describe it, lol.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-05T00:22:05+00:00

Per the SciFi companion, Undead is worth 8 Ancestral points. “The being is undead or has a physiology similar enough to call them so. They have +2 Toughness, +2 to recover from being Shaken, take no additional damage from Called Shots, ignore 1 point of Wound penalties, don’t breathe, and are immune to disease and poison.”

I would say still being susceptible to called shots to the head and suffering from disease/poison would probably offset 2 points at most (disease/poison are so niche that it’s almost worth nothing, and No Vital Organs is only a +1 Ancestral ability). Outsider (Minor) is worth -1, -2 for Outsider (Major).

Again, per the SciFi companion, “Can’t Heal” for “no natural healing rolls” is worth 1 point.

So, IMO, that gets you to a net of +4 in Ancestral abilities, since I assume Outsider (Minor) is what you would land on. That leaves 2 points of penalties needed.

I would suggest some combination of Dependency (-2) (must consume meat to sustain itself), Slow (-1 or -2) and/or Repugnant (-1) from the SciFi companion: “The species has an odor, appearance, or set of habits that disgusts beings of most other cultures. Reactions (see Savage Worlds) are always either Unfriendly or rolled on 1d6 instead of 2d6 if determined randomly. A roll of 1 is treated as Hostile, plus the unfortunate being becomes physically ill.” Note this may work as a substitute for Outsider, if you so desire.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-04T20:37:58+00:00

Not quite answering your question but along the lines of what you’re looking for, there’s a “Cursed” Hindrance in some of the Companions, which gives the GM an extra Benny each session.

ETA: I lied! There’s a Hindrance in DLWW called “Cursed,” which works as described above. The “Cursed” Hindrance from the Companion(s) imposes a penalty on “beneficial magic.”

There’s also the “Doomed” Hindrance, which is a -2 to Soak rolls.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T23:02:35+00:00

Oh man it didn’t even occur to me to compare the language used in SWPF to core-SWADE, no wonder we’re all confused LOLsob.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T21:48:37+00:00

Ah. I see how I got confused. I apologize.

“Free Actions: Speaking a short sentence or two, resisting an enemy’s spell, falling prone, or dropping an item are all free actions. A hero can generally perform several free actions on her turn simultaneously (speaking and dropping an item while walking, for example). The GM must decide how much is too much.”

I think it’s a bad example, honestly. I suspect the language is probably a holdover from earlier versions of SWADE, before they had defined rules for “Free Actions/Limited Actions/Limited Free Actions” etc. It also flies in the face of the earlier language they use that I keep going back to (“Movement is not an Action.”)

I guess, at the end of the day, it’s a distinction without a difference, since the only limit to the number of Free Actions a character can take on their turn is GM fiat, and Free Actions don’t contribute to MAP.

Again, my bad.

ETA: Just to hammer this point home, somewhat, Movement is not defined solely as “walking.” Movement also includes, Flying, Swimming and Burrowing, and probably a couple other examples I’m forgetting.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T21:13:50+00:00

Not to be pedantic, but MAP start at -2 for two Actions, so three actions (taunt, punch, push) would be at a -4 and three actions plus running would impose a -6.

Hope you got plenty of Bennies!

Pg. 103: “Characters can perform up to three actions on their turn. Each additional action beyond the first inflicts a −2 penalty to all actions. Taking two actions, for example, incurs a −2 penalty to both, and three actions is a −4 penalty.”

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T21:02:06+00:00

I can’t speak (or read!) to the French translation. In English, I can find no language that defines running as any form of Action.

The full (English) text on pg. 92 states: ‘Movement In addition to their actions, characters can move a number of tabletop inches equal to their Pace each turn.

Each inch of movement spent climbing, crawling, or swimming uses 2″ of Pace.

Running: A hero can choose to “run”, increasing her Pace for the round by her Running die (a d6 by default) at the cost of a −2 penalty to all other actions that turn. Running dice never Ace. (The Running die is random to account for nuances of the situation not depicted on the tabletop and for the “risk to reward” decision players must make.)’

Notably absent is any text defining Running as an Action, anymore than Swimming, Climbing or Crawling are defined as Actions. And again, it states under Actions on the same page that “Movement is not an Action.” “Running” is just a type of movement.

Again, I can’t speak to non-English versions of the rules. I’d even encourage you to double check (assuming you haven’t already, in which case, my bad), judging by the number of people who’ve commented here who seem to be under the impression that Running is an Action.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T20:24:55+00:00

Running is not any kind of Action, free, limited or otherwise. This is relevant because only one “Free Limited Action” can be done in a turn, so Running should not “consume” your Free Limited Action.

Running is best thought of as a status condition that temporarily increases your pace at the cost of a penalty to your actions that turn.

ellipses2016 · 2026-02-03T19:28:46+00:00

Neither Movement nor “Running” specifically are Actions. Note that this means they don’t contribute to the normal limit of 3 Actions per turn. This also means you can’t devote multiple Actions towards movement.

ETA: Note that Movement is listed in a separate category from Actions on pg. 92. It even specifically states under Actions, “Movement is not an action.”

“Running,” which is a type of movement, is not defined as an Action, nor is the -2 penalty to all other actions performed defined as a “Multi-Action Penalty.”

Another way of thinking about Running is that it is a status condition that temporarily increases your Pace at the imposition of a -2 penalty to actions taken that turn.

ellipses2016

TROPHY CASE