What are some systems that are surprisingly good outside of their given setting? Pic related. You'd think a game about being Mormon morality police wouldn't be terribly versatile, but I've seen it used for quite a bit else
Surprisingly adaptable systems
Isn't this system like a one time novelty which is a slug to run for a group larger than three players?
Pic related is pretty much an universal system that does larger-than-life scenarios fine regardless of the setting. To the point there is a substantial number of people who think the setting itself is the weakest part of the game, and it should be just treated as a general pulp, rather than obsessing with its metaplot
No. But it does fall apart if your idea for a scenario is trying to treat it like a combat-centric western game. Which means you didn't read the opening of the game, where this is addressed.
Also, consider this:
Eat the Reich is literally a one-time one-shot scenario, since the variety is non-existing and you would think it should be a board game instead.
BUT the system of the game is versatile enough that you can pick it and go wild with it, due to how adaptable and simple it is, while keeping shit abstract.
Who goes with it? Isn't it bash the fash for blue checkmarks from the creator of DIE?
I'd say it survives fine up to 4. Like
says though, if you come into it as a combat cowboy game, it's not going to be very interesting or fun compared to some alternatives.
To answer your original question, OP, Barbarians of Lemuria has been adapted (and elaborated upon) to a fairly wide range of settings.
>Isn't this system like a one time novelty
No, it's my go-to system.
Is it like pure improv role-playing? Can players at least take turns during the same event?
It's definitely not improv, there's initiative, everyone's taking turns. The general goal of "combat" is to try and resolve things without needing to resort to escalation, which is why this game isn't really suited to a shoot-em-up games. Having to haul iron is a bad thing.
>First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire.
Anytime there are stakes, the dice come out, but the stakes could very well just be talking a man down from doing something stupid. You roll your stats, your possessions, your relationships, and try to form poker-esque hands that the other person has to 'see and raise' or concede. If you run out of dice, you've got no option other than to give in or escalate to bring in fresh dice. But escalation is like moving from words to fists, or from fists to guns. With escalation comes more serious repercussions if things go poorly.
Yeah, I somewhat know how the system in DiV works, but I can't understand how player can play his hand better or worse. Is there a strategy to your actions? Should you calculate in mind which dice to use? Is it possible thst your failure be predeterminated by unlucky roll of the dice pool?
I think you do have to consider which dice to use, but yes, it comes down to where the dice fall. You have to rationalize that as, well, maybe there was never a chance to talk him down, and going for a punch was inevitable. In the end, it's supposed to be a highly narrative game, though, so failure can serve the story you're all creating. Even bad fallout can leave your character with interesting traits and ties to other characters.
It indeed sounds "highly narrative". It kind of bothers me that it is like one big check roll with a lot of dice and rules are there only to force you into role-playing.
I can understand that. It's definitely not the sort of system that would suit everyone or every setting. But I think the settings that it does suit, it does so very well. You could easily run a game where you play internal affairs agents going after crooked cops, or perhaps being ones themselves.
MAID RPG, I am unironically not joking. I've seen it used for everything from D&D style adventurer guild shit to Magical Girl monster-of-the-week type games.
MAID.
It's basically any comedy game with an ensemble cast.
That raises the question: how generic ARE Generic Systems, really?
They're not. Systems model things, and what they use to model things will make them better or worse for specific things. What statistics they use to definte a character, what actions they separate from other actions, what resolution mechanics they use, what they use to dress up success and failure, it all matters.
Unless you're going systemless storytime, your system will impact how the game plays out, what it drives people to do more or less of, etc.
The game that taught me this was Don't Rest Your Head, by way of being so specific but well designed for it that it got me looking at systems through a new lens.
DitV is good for games you could describe as "Ronin Games". That's why someone else ITT has found it good for star wars. Games are typically not pinned down by setting so much as by the tone, style, and tropes of the setting, which means that replacing mormonism and the wild west with honor and pre-meiji japan changes none of the things that the game is actually trying to model, just the paint on top.
based oldflagg.
The quality of being generic hinges on the range of games that can be played using the ruleset. Fate and GURPS, for example, are both generic systems, and both play wide ranges of games by virtue of having numerous robust rules for handling most situations, but the style of those games is radically different between the two by virtue of the rules in use. Both games capture most shows and movies you see, but I wouldn't choose Fate for Die Hard just as much as I wouldn't choose GURPS for Desperate Housewives.
Compare that to something like the d20 system that underlies modern D&D. It's horrible at capturing pretty much anything since the rules do not handle many situations, and the situations they do handle are handled in an idiosyncratic way you wouldn't see in most media.
Was a player in a Dark Tower game using Dogs. Appropriately enough we ended up in a permanent cliffhanger after boarding a train.
I miss that game. We were going to ride the Lightning.
Me too. It was probably the first really good online pnp game I had, or maybe at all.
King did Flagg dirty.
Flagg did King dirty, arranging things so he'd be hit by that van.
What's a near fatal car crash between old friends?
Don't sweat it, guys. Just like King, I can't write a good ending.
I've actually come to sincerely appreciate the absolute ending of the story, but a lot of stuff leading up to it is kinda malformed and needed revision. Especially what happened to our old chum RF. Los being reduced to his current pathetic state is also going to be a little confusing unless you've read Insomnia and Black House (which probably means you should have read The Talisman...). And that's not getting into other context like Hearts in Atlantis or Everything's Eventual. And Susannah getting replacement goldfish twinners to retire with was pretty frickin meh.
But anyway, that aside, games die, it's the norm.
I've used Battle Century G as a basis for both a Touhou and a Magical Girl campaign before, it's just a pretty good foundation for an episode-based campaign where the characters you make are independent from how they fight mechanically.
Bumping with something I found on /tg/ many moons ago
Sentinel comics. GYRO is surprisingly adaptable, considering the wealth of bs tables meant to funnel you into one playstyle or another.