Achtung! Cthulhu 2D20 Quickstart - RPG Review

[@SingeScorcher]

Commenting early in the video bit can we talk for a sec about how customer friendly Modepheus is being? Most companies will get negative reviews and just avoid the reviewers so they look good. But these guys went. "This guy had a lot of criticisms and negatives with our stuff, so let's take the feedback, tune up our rules and see if he likes the update." Always nice when a company almost asks for criticism so they can improve.

[@calvinmaynardtmt]

I’ve had great experiences with them too! Bought a module and didn’t get the PDF by email, so I messaged, and then sent it right over in just a few minutes!

[@jackrussel9573]

Modepheus is the friendly game guys. I’ve had nothing but good interactions.

[@NorinnRichard]

Agreed and I think Seth was very classy in returning the favor. In the end it was not a positive review, and as always there was good logic behind it. But it feels like Seth also went out of his way to say "this was us, your mileage may vary". A classy company, and a classy guy, agreeing to disagree. Hats off to you both.

[@quarkinjapan]

Well, as a GM for Mutant Chronicles that was very much abandonned after the kickstarter, I beg to differ that they are really consumer friendly 😉 Same for not correcting issues reported in Infinity. However it's true that they usually are responsive, and that they showed a bit of courage asking Seth to review again a 2D20 game !

[@slayer0235]

The gold standard for customer interaction. Full stop.

[@peterdickinson4599]

“The only guy in the whole war that actually bothered to read the rulebook.” Great line.

[@Spark_Chaser]

One thing I truly appreciate about your reviews is that you will still give a recommendation for a system you're not completely sold on because you feel like it's still worth people's time to look at. I've seen too many people shoot down a good system just because it doesn't fit their particular style.

[@Razsteroid]

What a fantastic review of a game that you didn't care for. Fair, engaging, informative, honest - this one is a real winner. Great work man, keep it up.

[@AAron-gr3jk]

2d20 really works for pulp, my Conan game is amazing! possibly some of the best games I've played. The system takes 1 session to "get", 2 sessions to get somewhat comoftable, 3 sessions to become fluent, and 4 sessions to work out the very smaller nuanced rules.

[@Mu77ley]

I'm a big fan of the 2d20 system, Conan in particular, although it did take a few sessions for our group to break out of the restrictive grid-based mind set of the other games we play. I particularly enjoy getting the players to come up with interesting things that may have happened when I as a GM roll a complication and can't immediately think of something.

[@jpf338]

2d20 system is so cool once you get your mind around it. The freedom to do epic things, the non restrictive nature of it encourages plates to do imaginative things, instead of being restricted to particular rules per each thing to do. Biggest downside being that manuals are poorly organized.

[@robwalker4452]

Well, Mr. Skorkowsky, my group and I went "all in" after you showed us Conan 2d20, criticisms and all, and we love it because we are all Conan fans. Now that we know that system, this Achtung Cthulu would be an easy switch. I am a big WWII nerd as well, yet I'd never heard about this game until I saw this video. Mark my words; my group will be playing this soon. You, sir, are driving an industry and kudos to Modiphius for recognizing that fact. Also, I'm endlessly impressed by the detail you put into your videos. Where the hell did you get a Sten gun?

[@SSkorkowsky]

Thanks. I try to be fair and honest in both praises and criticisms. Even if I know something isn't for me, it's going to be great for somebody. I hope you and your players have fun with it. The Sten is made by a company called Denix. They do detailed non-firing replica guns, and I have a couple that I've used for videos. I got it from replicaweaponry.com/ They usually (not always) have the best prices, so shop around. Denix prices go all over the place seller-to-seller. I originally wanted a grease gun, but the sten was on sale and I've always liked the look of them.

[@euansmith3699]

"Mad" Jack Churchill read the rulebook 😆 The selection and tweaking of the background photos for Jack the NPC's bits were very cool, as ever. Regarding the 2D20 rules, Hankerin Ferinale has decided to use his Index Card RPG system rather than 2D20 for his Hard Suit game that Modiphius is producing. I can see that 2D20 has some elegant ideas, however, having played a bit of Conan 2D20, I feel that Momentum kind of strangles the actual momentum of play in the game. I feel that, anytime that players have got a shopping list of options to chose from, it seems to pull play out of the fiction and in to the rule book.

[@frankmueller2781]

Why is "Jack the NPC" dress in U.S. army uniform but packing a British Sten gun?

[@kgoblin5084]

"I feel that, anytime that players have got a shopping list of options to chose from, it seems to pull play out of the fiction and in to the rule book." It is a rather short list though... and you could arguably make it shorter. Eg. choose 1: +1 die, or do whatever faster. Leave adding truths to the fortune mechanic

[@SSkorkowsky]

@@frankmueller2781 Out of the like 3,000 inaccuracies and goofy things in Jack's outfits over the years that no one has ever once pointed out, I somehow knew someone would latch onto the Sten being wrong for him. It might even be the reason he introduced himself as "Anachronistic soldier," because I was certain that someone would mention that, despite no one ever once pointing out all the many others. It also give me full license to mock the person who mentions it. I mean, the black leather jacket and button-up shirt are hardly US Army or any army's uniform. Helmet and tags, yes, but that's it. Nothing else was even close. But I'll give you 2 answers for the Sten. First is the 'story reason'. Being a member of the Secret War, the various societies draw members from around the world. A unit of Section M may be comprised of members from several nations, some military, other civilian. Some equipment they brought with them. Some they were issued. Others they picked up as they went. Why does Jack have a sten? Because he wanted and SMG and Section M, who are British, had one to give him. Answer #2 is the real reason. I went looking for a replica grease gun, but the sten was on sale and I've always dug the way they looked.

[@frankmueller2781]

@@SSkorkowsky mock away Seth. It's fodder for the game. I know "Jack" is totally 'tongue-in-cheek', but as you said, I just couldn't help myself. That aside, I don't know if you've ever had a chance to shoot a sten before, but fun as they are to shoot, as weapon, they're... well junk is the nice word. Fun. I did say fun, right? But junk. But then, who's junk isn't fun? 😳🤪🥳

[@SSkorkowsky]

I've done a lot of shooting, but never a Sten. I ended up having to look up online just how in the hell I was even supposed to hold it, as every grip I tried was problematic. The heat shield is teeny and if you hold it too far back, your fingers are above the ejection port, too far forward and you burn you hand on the barrel. Ian on Forgotten Weapons also said that while everything about the sten was junk, they were surprisingly fun to shoot.

[@franckguillemot5228]

Very interesting and useful video !! I discovered 2d20 system with Conan but I did not had the luck to play with it. I use it in Dune where it is a little bit different and where both my players and I found it clear and cool (even if examples were not the clearer possible but there were more thant in Conan or Achtung) So I intrtoduce Achtung Cthulhu and they love the Indy/Hellboy/Cthulhu theme so we are going to jump in. SO many thanks for this video which clears a lot of things

[@kythian]

The Mothership RPG has a great illustration of ranges/zones for combat. I think it has hard numbers, too, but I think the illustration does a great job of "describing" range and zones. Check it out!

[@predtime]

Was going to leave the same feedback. Their mockup for the new work-in-progress player's guide is amazing. Their ranges are described with very flavorful horror-themed descriptors, such as "It can get you," "It can hear you," etc.

[@NefariousKoel]

Modiphius could explain the zone mechanic better than they have thus far. Fortunately I learned it from other RPGs which put it into better perspective. Us old timers get stuck in the old way, and these new-fangled mechanics should be given better descriptions and examples to break us out of our long-held predispositions. I grasped it fairly quickly but I get around when it comes to studying new mechanics. Others don't do so well in the rewiring.

[@Radiotomb]

24:30 Modiphius made the same oversight in the Star Trek quickstart, and I had no idea how to utilize weapon traits in my games. Bummer they made the same mistake again. 🙁

[@dubuyajay9964]

/)_- Dammit Modipheus...

[@KuyVonBraun]

Mad Jack Churchill gets a mention! Best of British 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

[@alexadre2142]

Me and my players liked the d20 system in conan. It is not our favorite but we had no problem using it.

[@dangarthemighty0980]

I do like the 2d20 system and have been running it for quite some time now but Seth you are absolutely right with your assessment of the system and while I love it, there is a lot of confusion and lack of examples to clarify. I have found myself while running just ignoring a lot of the rules with every 2d20 game I have run.

[@TeskoLove]

I think you are absolutely spot on about 2d20 trying to be both crunchy and rules-light. The game that sold me and my group on 2d20 was the Dune RPG, which is very stripped down and heavily focused on driving the narrative. We had so much fun with it, and it inspired me to use the system for a game of samurai drama in the Legend of the Five Rings setting. But with reading the A!C and Conan versions of the system, it seems like there are a lot of odd complexities thrown on top of everything that they system just doesn't need - at least not for my group.

[@NorinnRichard]

So zones and the idea of a "zone map". This reminded me right away of the Marvel Heroes game TSR produced in the 80's. It had the same kind of narrative focus, but always had a map as well.

[@catyear75]

Possibly my favorite setting for COC ! This review was great ! I have to pick this up ! Thanks Seth

[@christophertranter3475]

If there is anyone who can make a movie sucky, it's good old J J Abrams. I mean killing Star Wars and Star Trek should be a war crime. Man should be at the Hague, not Warner Bros.

[@Nephanor]

Preach brother

[@dirus3142]

JJ made his own movie Super 8 suck with it's ending.

[@richmcgee434]

Star Trek can be blamed on him. Star Wars I blame on Disney, because for god's sake did they not see what he did to Trek? He performed exactly as expected there, and they're the ones who let it happen.

[@SSkorkowsky]

Back in 2019 I was on a writing panel at GenCon and I mentioned my belief that JJ is a terrible storyteller. Half the room nodded in agreement. The other half gasped in horror. I went on to explain that JJ is probably the best in Hollywood at giving a hook. He's amazing at it. Lost ran for multiple seasons on only hooks. His weakness is he has no idea what to do with them. He can hook you with a promise, but when it comes time to deliver, he distracts you with another hook, hoping you'll forget about the first hook. If cornered, he slaps some BS resolution together that frequently falls apart under the weakest scrutiny. Three months later Rise of Skywalker came out, and I felt 100% vindicated about my statements. Before it released, JJ made a big deal about "All questions will be answered." A buddy of mine, who has damn near the opposite taste in movies saw it first. He loved it. Told me how it answered all questions, and I need to stop ragging on JJ. I told him that I would ask one question, and if the movie answered it, I'd leave JJ alone about it. He agreed, confident that the movie answered any question I might have. I asked him, "In the Force Awakens, we meet a little lady with buttholes for eyes who has Luke's lightsaber. When asked how she got it, she said it was a good question for another day, meaning there was a promise that it would be answered. She could have simply said, "A lot of money and a lot more luck. Relics from the Imperial Wars fetch more than you'd imagine in some circles." But she didn't. She teased us that it was a story for another day. Did they explain how butthole-eyed lady got Luke's lightsaber?" He slumped, and said no.

[@Nephanor]

@@SSkorkowsky YES! You definitely summed up what I was never able to put my finger on with his writing, and why I HATED Lost, all promise and hooks, and no delivery.

[@natalielyric2950]

IMO it really seems like this and Delta Green are games that have really good ideas and adventures to be done with Call of Cthulhu's rules.

[@victorayorke7123]

A quick thought on Threat... Having played systems with similar GM complication tokens in the past, I've found that treating the Threat (or eq) points as a mandatory resource that outranks the GM can disincentivise player-driven sideshows and shenanigans - a lively roleplay moment can still be an engine to create Threat for the main objective. For example, my group's first campaign in the detail-light heist system Dusk City Outlaws was railroaded to failure in the last session *because* our party face fumbled rolls with an inkeeper and his daughter in an incidental downtime scene, creating such a pile of Heat tokens that our GM was forced to get creative to dump them. (We later dropped the whole Heat/Threat system and used the rules to play what amounts to low fantasy Sharpe, which was probably our most loved campaign ever) A confident GM probably wouldn't have this problem and would probably find it a good tool to adapt difficulty to the scenario? But a GM picking up the game and trying to play rules-as-written might not have a instinct for what a balanced encounter or puzzle in Achtung! Cthulhu looks like, leading to unnecessary issues.

[@rushmw]

I’ve been looking forward to this review for quite some time; since I saw your tweets about it awhile back. I picked up the two core rule books because the setting/era aesthetic seems right up my alley and I wanted to compare to Pulp (or even just help idea generation!). Thank you so much for the thoughtful review. They really are probably the most helpful on the Internet. Looking forward to the scenario review!!

[@evilscientistrecords]

I'm just glad Jack's got Seth's back when it comes to book promo!

[@ff7fan12345]

Your explanation of this system helped me understand a few hangups I had with their fallout 2d20 system

[@theczarek]

There are examples of zones. Eg. STA Starter Set Campanig. Also there are tile sets for some 2d20 systems with zones marked.

[@plissken2245]

Thanks for an honest review. Cool art at the least. We play Star Trek Adventures and the 2d20 systems works for that. But navigating the rule book is a total nightmare, particularly when in mid combat at the game table. If I had one piece of advice for Modiphius it would be K.I.S.S.

[@Wraithing]

Hey Seth, 5 squid is pretty good value over here nowadays. Reckon I'd just go with £ as my standard squid symbol! Seriously - review is appreciated. I'm just getting my head around this system 😁👍

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

That'd be great to players in the UK, but for me, 5 squid would be $8.1. And the conversion rate would change daily.

[@JohnSmith-qq7fm]

As always, great video Seth. This is the first video I've had the opportunity to watch with your review of the 2d20 system. It reminds me of White Wolf's system, replacing d10s with d20s. I found that system helps a game flow well to help concentrate on the story rather than having issues with obscure game mechanics. With the Truth thingy, I was told many years ago (way back when I first started role-playing), that PCs aren't just normal scrubs. The fact that they're protagonists makes them "special" , so they are just plain better than NPCs, whether they're 1st level or 20th. A normal scrub wouldn't survive cutting a swathe through the challenges and threats that PCs are expected to. That would be a justification for heroic abilities or mechanics. But, as always, each GM, player, and group has their own preferences and levels of comfort. Thanks for pointing it out as a possible pitfall

[@aztecace]

Well damn. I have been working on a Achtung Cthulhu 2d20 game for my gaming group. Though we haven't played yet, I have put a lot of work on it including miniatures and terrain.

[@Caitlin_TheGreat]

So, after a long time of watching your videos which _very often_ touch on Call of Cthulhu, my gaming group finally played the system (7E). I was just a player since someone else took the opportunity to do it first (I'm still in the midst of running a different system). But that's fine, I was really happy to play. Generally, it went over quite well. One person didn't like the fragility of the characters, but myself and the Keeper see that as a fantastic element of the system, giving it a fairly unique feel. The other person was indifferent. For all of us, the absolute best part of the game was the investigation and roleplaying. Not a big surprise, we tend to gravitate toward that. What we didn't like was the combat. While I'm sure it gets easier as you get a better feel for the system, we've played enough stuff that does combat far more fluidly and with a better focus on the narrative aspect of it so that it doesn't feel like a completely separate game but a natural flow. Also, there was a consensus that there are too many skills. I'm okay with the skill selection, but I would also be fine with a slimmed down selection. Or, in my opinion, a better layout so "social" skills are all near each other and "technical" skills are grouped, and so on... figuring out the arrangement might be tough, but just categorizing them would have helped us out a lot. But since I still want to run some CofC, and especially do some of awesome scenarios that are out there (our first foray was a custom story... which narratively was a perfect fit, but did seem to lean a bit too much in the combat part of things without as much chance to discover things that would have helped us avoid/mitigate combat) I've been thinking of a way to address some of the problems. And partly, I do suspect that published scenarios will likely have a better mix of elements. I'm already trying to think of ways to hack the combat so that it remains deadly but not a chore. Make it lighter. An initial thought is to steal ideas from Powered by the Apocalypse games or Forged in the Dark games: players make rolls to do things, and their success "level" determines not only whether or not they do the thing (hit with a shot, dive for cover, cast a spell, etc), but also if an enemy attacks them or does a successful maneuver, or otherwise things go wrong. I'd need to fiddle for a bit and see how to balance it statistically, but we all generally like this way of running a game as it gets rid of "turns" which effectively makes combat no different from just regular play so there's no hiccup when transitioning from one to the other and it just goes far more smoothly (and there's a knock-on effect of naturally encouraging players to be engaged, since there's no guarantee of a turn... but all actions carry the risk of consequences). I'm wary of altering the skill selection, but may do so if a slimmer list (where some skills cover more ground) would allow for better overall balance with this approach. I don't want to stray too much from core CofC -- that is, I don't want to just wind up making my own FitD/PbtA hack that is essentially incompatible with the scenarios (but it _is_ a tempting idea since those systems do a lot of things so well). On the off chance I go that route, I think I'd detour from the standard approach of creating distinct "playbooks" and instead have a la carte playbooks where choosing your professions gives you access to some abilities (or maybe grants one or two abilities for free) but you can "purchase" from a wide range of common abilities everyone has access to, so that there's more options for customization. OR, profession gives you a special ability and otherwise you just "level up" but buying points in skills. I don't know, I'll have to think about it. Plus, I do love the sanity and luck mechanics of CofC 7E, the slow healing, and even the magic. It's just that combat is _soo_ laborious. That you need a flowchart is a good sign that it needs work.

[@SSkorkowsky]

I'd suggest checking out Pulp Cthulhu. Characters are a little beefier with twice the HP, but have a couple special abilities (it does Archetypes and Profession), as more starting Skill Points. It's been the perfect fit for us, where characters are a little larger than life, but still fragile. Call of Cthulhu combats for us are cinematic and fast. The trick, I've learned, is to first train you and your players on Cyberpunk for about 6 years. It's as deadly as Call of Cthulhu, but way more complicated with hit locations (then add a houserule of sub hit locations where it's not just your Left Arm but your Left Bicep that takes the hit), ablative sectional armor, and Pluses/Minuses instead of Advantage/Disadvantage. Once you have that down and players naturally strategize on how not to get shot and using the games rules to figure out the bet ways to get cover, get the bonuses while giving minuses to the enemy, once you have that down like a well-oiled machine, then flip to Call of Cthulhu, with is like 200x simpler, and they will dominate that system like you wouldn't believe. Also, check out my Combat Cheat Sheet for Call of Cthulhu. It's got most everything you need on 1 page: drive.google.com/file/d/0ByfJM9t2i6sic3duNUg3R0dIcjQ/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-r1-WAx9cS4So-GN685Zc1Q

[@andrewdiaz3529]

Those custom dice with your friend's face, gotta say; Love it. Also, you weird ww2 book sounds great!

[@nerdherd1819]

Man, I really want to run a Return to Castle Wolfenstein themed game, now.

[@reimannsum9077]

My, having played almost nothing by 2d20 games over the last three years - completely abandoning Pathfinder and others - I have to say that it's the single greatest mechanical system that I've ever encountered, challenged only by Powered By the Apocalypse and the original Call of Cthulhu based on the needs of the campaign and the type of experience that one wishes to create. It's just so intuitive and facile, one of the simplest systems that I've ever tried to learn. Thank you for the review.

[@vahlok1426]

I've been interested in this game for a while. I have always wanted to run a WW2 era, supernatural explorers game (think Indiana Jones meets CoC, or even a video game few seem to talk about, Strange Brigade).

[@ts25679]

Have you seen the ttrpg Never Going Home?

[@chadsmith8966]

Pulp Cthulhu would work which is kinda like Indiana Jones meets COC. It is also in the same vein as “The Shadow”, “The Rocketeer”, and “Big Trouble in Little China”.

[@SSkorkowsky]

It's hard to find now, but I did review it. Check out Hollow Earth Expedition. It's a pulpy 1930s game where you fight dinosaurs, Nazis, robots, pirates, and mad scientists across the world and within its hollow interior.

[@richmcgee434]

@@SSkorkowsky There's also a Savage Worlds Weird WW2 book which is pretty decent, and could be tweaked to be more Mythos focused with ease.

[@MyersSgt]

@@SSkorkowsky I watched your Hollow Earth Expedition review video a few weeks back and was ready to play it before your review even finished!

[@Aardvark892]

Hi Seth. Great video as always. I love that black rulebook; very classy and haunting. Thanks for this video!

[@MaxWriter]

I really enjoyed the original Achtung! Cthulhu using the Call of Cthulhu Rules, but I simply do not care for the 2D20 rules at all. I agree with your opinion it wants to be both crunchy and non, and it just doesn't work for me. Thanks for an honest and open review. I remain glad I passed on this one.

[@Nephanor]

I like some of this system, but I also like CoC, would like to see the CoC edition in print. The setting is awesome.

[@euansmith3699]

Possibly a Pulp C'thulhu edition?

[@Nephanor]

@@euansmith3699 there is a true CoC 7e edition, but Modiphius broke away from dealing with Chaossium to have more narrative control, and the 7e version never made it to print, only PDF

[@NefariousKoel]

I have the CoC/Savage Worlds books for Achtung Cthulhu. There may be some minor adjustments required to convert into latest edition of either but it's great because I have so much more content to easily use with those systems

[@HarryH256]

I really love the 2D20 system for Conan. I mostly use the more narrative elements sparsely, to spice it up from time to time. I think this works best rather than trying to abstract it away too much.

[@brianfroeschner6644]

Momentum reinforces a brother in arms reward idea that should exist in a military during wartime genre. That's why it is so appropriate here. Perhaps it can replace luck with the CoC rules when playing as a military unit. They don't rely on luck, they make their own. If a regular success is needed an a player makes a hard, add a momentum taken to the group pool... easy.

[@oz_jones]

And it DEFINITELY reinforces the idea of a crack squad of commandos in the style of The Dirty Dozen and the like.

[@johnkfriday]

Seth clearly, comprehensively and with proper diction and real English words explained how to do a skill test and I still got nfi.

[@crimfan]

I have played a lot of 2D20, mostly Star Trek Adventures. I really love 2D20 overall, but I think you nail its flaws fairly well. It is a fairly deep system in that it takes a while to learn but is very rewarding in terms of achieving a very narrative feel with an ensemble cast. You're right that it's missing good info on the attribute/skill combinations all throughout. I find this particularly true in the more abstract systems where there are attributes+attributes, such as JCA or Dune. They also don't explain things too well. I really like the weapon qualities as a way to differentiate weapons with otherwise very similar stats. Truths are like Advantages/Disadvantages but they seem to have pushed Traits into them as well. Traits aren't well integrated into the rules sadly, but do represent ways to have a character good at something that might not be otherwise nailed by their stats.

[@rattypumpkin6183]

There are some maps with clearly defined "zones" in the Star Trek Adventures starter set. And their "Starfleet Tiles" PDFs also come with the zones clearly delineated. But I think the zones mechanic as a "cinematic" detail might just work with the TV feel of Star Trek better than some other genres.

[@fartymcbutterpants7063]

Have you run Actung! Cthulhu with Pulp CoC? I'm curious as to which ruleset works better for this setting. I have the CoC 6e version, but haven't run A!C yet.

[@TheDoomAbides]

I’m happy you decided to review this system. I really enjoy your other Cthulhu reviews and I’ve recently been diving into Modiphius and their 2d20 system myself with the Conan game and was curious about your thoughts on this one. Great vid.

[@Khilkhameth]

The bigger trhe core book, the less I like the idea of a starter adventure adding pagecount and weight to the tome, not to mention the difficulty of flicking between pages! Having one exist in a seperate booklet is far better, in my opinion.

[@michaelb.3994]

3:19 You really did it. Just for a moment there, my brain thought of Seth and Jack as two completely different human beings. 😳😅

[@Sebbaasdungeon]

Thanks for the review. My experience with 2D20 mirrors yours. From playing Star Trek and Conan, I would say: beautifully made books, and I can see how the rules are laid out to facilitate episodes and seasons of classic Star Trek, or Robert. E. Howard Conan stories, but in actual play, the system is just too cumbersome. I'm currently considering running a Conan game, but only using the vast library of 2D20 books and adventures for inspiration, and run the actual game in Worlds Without Number.

[@erniemiller1953]

Seth, I am so grateful for your videos. I wish you could be one of my GMs.

[@gregoryfloriolli9031]

I had the same problem with the 2d20 system for Star Trek Adventures. There was a lot of stuff that sounded cool but I never felt like I had a firm enough grasp on the rules that I felt confident in GMing this game for a group.

[@MichaelB-jw5po]

I totally agree about the 2d20 rules being better between sessions than during sessions. They seem so cool in theory but they can get really bogged down in practice, especially during combat. I don't think I've ever ran a single session of a 2d20 game that didn't grind to a halt because some weird situation came up and the solution wasn't immediately obvious in the rulebook. I still love the system though, especially A!C.

[@williamlydon2554]

26:52 "...and it's a *farf nis* simpler...

[@gamelover260]

I find that mechanics that allow you too change the scene up are there to help encourage collaborative play between GMs and players. it can help players add more to the scene and help rigid DMs cut loose.

[@NefariousKoel]

That's how I view the "token" mechanics. It's there for the players to have more input on the situation & narrative; to spice things up and give players more control at key moments. The equivalent GM spends are there to show them they shouldn't go too overboard.

[@SidheGaliza]

Loved the review! You put a lot of work into it, as usual, and gave a very balanced look on the rules and the advantages and problems with the system. My experience with 2d20 systems has been limited to GM'ing Star Trek Adventures and playing a little bit of Conan, which left me with the impression it's an excellent system for Trek, but not so much for any setting that is really heavy on combat.

[@twitchew]

I agree. Star trek has a lot of the more crunchy elements taken out and I think work really well in a universe like star trek where every character from ensign to admiral can take on almost any challenge the story throw at them - if they are willing to "pay a price". Since most combat on the show is over in a few "rounds", the 2d20 flaws don't become glaring.

[@oldhatAN]

I ran the Star Trek version of 2D20 a few times. I had trouble with it. I liked the ideas when I was reading the book. I thought I understood how everything worked. When I actually started running it, I was floundering. I wound up flipping back and forth through the rule book and constantly wondering if I was running it correctly. I always felt like I was missing something. I spent 10-15 minutes flipping through the rule book trying to find all of the rules that applied to the players launching a spread of quantum torpedoes and I don't know if I actually found them all or did it correctly. Meanwhile, the game ground to a complete halt on the middle of an action scene. I spent so much time flipping around in the rule book trying to find the rules and work out how they interacted with each other while wondering if I was even running this game right that the sessions that I don't think the the game was very much fun. NO matter how much I read the book or how many tutorial videos I watched, the game always fell apart for me at the table.

[@RecklessFables]

And the rule book, while beautiful, isn't actually easy to find things in.

[@bundjohn]

Know that feeling, I would homebrew if I was unsure so as to keep the game running. In your example though I wouldn’t allow a full spread of torpedos unless it was the major action of the whole group and they all succeeded or had a bunch of momentum to burn.

[@oldhatAN]

@@bundjohn Ad hoc rules cause their own problems. The game was set during the Dominion War and they were fighting a Jem'Hadar ship so it would have been hard to justify not allowing them to use their weapons or restricting it heavily.

[@johnnysizemore5797]

I've been running a game of Modepheus' ttrpg Star Trek Adventures now for about 3 years now and can tell y'all that Seth is on the money when he says "mileage may vary". Before STA, I ran D&D 5E for about 6-8 months (group though it was too spread out for stuff you wanted/needed); a Blades in The Dark game for 8-9 months(loved the setting & lore but hated the system itself)and a Call Of Cthulhu/Pulp Cthulhu hybrid game I think I've mentioned in other posts on here(they hated that it was soo stacked against the players). The Adventures of the Starfleet crew of The USS Saladin has been running for around 2 "Seasons"(I'm on the Strange New World's Adventures book now) and my players have adored it. In the end, it all comes down to the question of "what do YOU find Beautiful?"...

[@NefariousKoel]

I've read reviews stating that the STA Klingon core book is in much better shape than the original STA, being a standalone released later on. Haven't dived into it yet to see for myself.

[@johnnysizemore5797]

@@NefariousKoel it actually is a little better put together book. They tried to fix what they missed in the original Corebook, so that was great. Not a big fan of Klingons myself, but I can understand why they were picked in the end....

[@johncollins7631]

I am eager to see your review for the starter adventure.

[@agrayday7816]

Recommendation for a game with a similar setting/theme? Pulp Cthulhu, Weird War II (Savage Worlds), Day After Ragnarok (Savage Worlds), Weird War II (GURPS), Dust Adventures, Mawbreakers (Tuesday night games), WWII: Operation Whitebox (Swords & Wizardry), Godlike, Gear Krieg, Operation: Fallen Reich, The Ministry of Extramundane Affairs. ?

[@richmcgee434]

Gear Krieg weirdness is much more mecha than horror, although IIRC there were some Nazi zombies roaming about. Godlike's weirdness is all superpowers, although it's certainly violent enough to be horrific and there are a few elements (eg the Wild Talent code-named Baba Yaga) that might as well be pure Mythos horror for all the good fighting will do you. IIRC there were a few old Chill scenarios set in WW2, and others that could have been moved to the period easily enough - SAVE has been around a long time, and their enemies are frequently immortal.

[@Radiotomb]

I got to GM a few Star Trek Adventures sessions, and yes I agree that the 2d20 system is both Fantastic and frustrating at the same time. But ot really has great potential! 🙂

[@TheInfamousRPGGroup-on-Rumble]

2d20 is only frustrating for people who bring their preconceived notions from other RPGs into it. That being said, I still had to homebrew stuff, namely combat and reputation

[@scottnolan2833]

I agree. It’s a powerful,flexible system that can be frustrating to run. And I also agree with Seth that a lot of the frustration would disappear or at least be ameliorated by including a wealth of examples.

[@quarkinjapan]

I like 2D20 (I'm a GM for Mutant Chronicles), but damn Modiphius is very bad at editing and organizing the rules in a logical manner. I think that it makes 2D20 seem more complicated than it is in rrality.

[@benkernow280]

From a STA GM point of view I agree with u but I think it fits well with Trek and to me the pros out weigh the cons but I can see there are a few annoyances.

[@NefariousKoel]

Yep. The layout, organization, and plentiful examples are an issue in every 2d20 game I've seen. Makes learning more difficult. Yet there are so many good things too. The MC3 lifespan char creation is awesome for example.

[@Frostfly]

It feels like they didn't use enough outside playtesters. Building a game with crunch and lightweight rules is Possible...I think. but it requires something more then just publishing a game. It's gonna be about iteration and playtesting. It does look like there was some improvement, but they seem to like shooting their progress in the foot. Like the 1d6 icon they use.

[@terminaldogma01]

I got the Black Sun edition, cuz shiny book. Haven’t got into it yet, tho

[@janwitts2688]

Lol remember my players went into a deep deep part of a cave system... then 4 of them opened up with flame throwers emptying their fuel tanks and anhilating the oposition... then of course died as there was no air left... ahh bless..

[@doctorlolchicken7478]

Every character is a veteran commando who got a job as a spy pretending to be a diplomat engineer.

[@bryanstephens4800]

Our group tried Mindjammer using Fate and had the same reaction. Fate wants to be crunch light, but ends us with hidden crunch. The system seemed to fight us. We are a high crunch group.

[@NefariousKoel]

There's a Traveller version (Mongoose 2E) of Mindjammer. I picked that one up instead of Fate.

[@wilmartinez1]

I'm glad I didn't pick it up but I could still use the adventures from that in Pulp Cthulhu so I'm good.

[@Undedproduction]

Appreciated as always. On the topic of pulpy horror games, I wanted to ask if you've ever given Deadlands a play? I'm thinking of giving it a shot but it's tough finding good quality reviews of it. I really dig the setting, but I haven't looked enough at the rules to make any decisions yet.

[@SSkorkowsky]

I've never checked out Deadlands. Sorry. I've suggested trying western settings like Call of Cthulhu's 'Down Darker Trails,' or Darker Hue's 'Haunted West' and my players weren't sold on the western theme, and I'm not into western settings enough to push for it. I have played Down Darker Trails twice at conventions. I like it. It's 7e Call of Cthulhu, but with some Pulp Cthulhu aspects. More like Hollywood Wild West than Real Wild West. So PCs are tougher than regular CoC characters and can do things like fanning a pistol.

[@NefariousKoel]

The Savage Worlds system, and Deadlands which is it's prime setting, is definitely worth checking out.

[@justinsinke2088]

I can see how "background truths" can be problematic, as even non-powergamers can easily fall into the mindset of "well, if this sample character can get these benefits just from saying that's a Truth of his background, then I should try to get the most benefit out of my background too". While in a way that does encourage the creation of a properly fleshed out background, the way it's incentivized feels kinda toxic to the point you're not encouraged to make a background that sounds cool to you and the story, you're encouraged to make a background that'll provide the most mechanical benefits you can muster out of it by claiming them as Truths that apply in game. I can agree that there seems to be a lot of interesting and intriguing elements to the system, but as you say, it seems to be mixing detailed rules with loose narrative rules, and that takes a certain mindset to really make it work. Think of it like a river; loose narrative rules flowing around the stones of harder, crunchier rules can make for a sensory experience of gentle kayaking, but if it doesn't mesh, that flow looks more like a rapids that, sure, you might get through and there were moments of enjoyment, but you look back and also recall how stressful it was in the moment.

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

My guy is a prodigy who is naturally gifted at everything!

[@LddStyx]

Background truths should be fine as long as the players keep in mind that the social contract trumps game rules. The player takes some of the DMs power to define the world, and with it a responsibility to make the change interesting for the whole table.

[@persephoneunderground845]

I feel like "background truths" could work, but only in a limited sense, kinda like a flashback in Blades in the Dark. I wouldn't like them written on a character sheet, but spending momentum points to say "my character spent a month training new recruits in proper munitions handling this summer" when about to do something risky with grenades seems fair. But the benefit can't be permanent- if they want to apply that background truth again in a different situation they have to spend game currency again. That being one of the only real examples given just seems like the terrible example writing that Seth mentioned to me. Obviously I can't know what the writers meant, but that's probably how I would rule it, based on how I have seen truths work in other games.

[@midnightblue6668]

I LOVE the concept of "Background Truths" or whatever other systems call it! One of the things I truly hate when coming up with a cool character concept is then creating that character and realizing that my allotted starting character creation options (attributes, skill points, traits, etc.) won't allow me to create a character that FEELS like the concept. Having some kind of mechanical "catch all" for the basics of the concept at least is a great way to handle this. A lot of the more narrative minded games that I've really grown to love over the last decade and a half handle this very well (Cortex, PbtA, Fate, etc.). Chill 3E even has a Background (off the top of my head) that incorporates something like a profession where you get bonuses to skills relating to that profession. These kinds of things really help flesh out a character concept and make it feel realized. Will there be power gamers? Yes...no matter what rules you have, there will always be power gamers trying to push the limits of the RAW. Some gamers like to play the game...some gamers like to game the system. That's just a fact of life.

[@jeffagain7516]

Thanks Seth (and Jack!). After listening quite closely to your assessment and pausing the screen frequently to actually read the topics described, I tend to agree that it seems quite rules heavy. Of course, many may enjoy that but when in the heat of an engagement that this particular game-play seems to focus on (war fighting more so than investigation), I think that it could quickly dampen an exciting turn of events looking up all the rules for each situation in the heat of conflict, at least until one got very proficient with said rules. If a Keeper could satisfyingly trim the rules down, at least to keep momentum, the scenarios/subject material at least, looks to be awesome!

[@janwitts2688]

A warbow arrow delivered correctly has roughly two thirds the power of a 9mm parabellum round at 30 feet but at several hundreds of feet... the arrow is not subject to tumbling in the same manner as a common bullet and retains its power due to holding (throw weight) within itself unlike a bullet which rapidly decelerates and becomes poor at penetration for both tumbling and the rapid reduction in imparted power. . At the moment of impact maximum range.. the arrow on its downward trajectory strikes the target on clean rotation and the long shaft pushes the armour defeating point into the structure using its considerable weight and momentum ... the bullet (I think an m1 carbine would be more accurate a comparison than an m1 rifle) is tumbling thus not armour penetrating and also has very little energy remaining.... In short guns up close.. powerful... guns long range... little better than an arrow and often worse.... although an m1 rifle is a poor example... I think it would be marginally better.. though not by much per shot... Of historic note.. when britain sent troops to fight napoleon during the peninsula war we considered including archers.. for this very reason..

[@Klomster88]

While i see your points, putting longer range on a longbow than an Enfield rifle is straight up silly. Sure, the arrow is heavier, it will strike with more force. But then again the bullet is going in supersonic speed and has comparatively little dropoff. Meaning the arrow has a higher chance to knock you over, but the bullet will probably blast straight through you. Plus that the arrow is heavier and with a lower initial velocity, it will simply not reach as far. Regardless of how much you arc it. And IIRC the reason bows were considered wasn't some longer range nonsense. It's the simple fact that trained longbowmen can put many times more arrows downrange in the time a musket fires. So yeah, i see you want to speak well of the bow, but guns are just hax. They are simply better at delivering killing. With muskets one can actually have a comparrison, but when the bullets go supersonic, that goes out the window.

[@janwitts2688]

@Klomster I said it would compare favourably at long range to an m1 carbine.. not a lee enfield or m1 garand which are battle rifles.... your assertion about maximum range effects on an arrow is incorrect compared to maximum range effects of a bullet.. due to the factors I listed... however as I said an m1 rifle was a bad example as it could out range a lower pull weight bow.. not a warbow used by a middle ages archer who trained all the time from young adult onwards ... firearms have the benefit of lighter ammo but also fail more often...

[@Klomster88]

@@janwitts2688 Well, true. A bow is a singular mechanism, while even the simplest firearm has many mechanisms that can all fail. But even carbines would normally outrange bows easily if memory serves me right. I also don't see how my statement on maximum effects on an arrow is false. It is simple physics, even the biggest bows don't give a percentile of mass, more speed than a firearm does a bullet. The bullet is so light compared to an arrow, that the bow would need an excessive amount of force to launch it at the same speed. Far beyond a human to draw.

[@WookieeRage]

I've experienced similar issues with the zone mechanic in Star Wars RPG by Fantasy Flight Games. But playing the SW RPG for years I've learned to define the zones with loose range bands which did require gaining a feel for them over time. It does leave room for interpretation which is a blessing and a curse. But for myself and my group we have made it work for us, so this isn't really any different.

[@PaintyMainy]

I first read "Ackhual Cthulu 2D20 Quickstart"

[@qwe1231]

Modiphius' 2D20 system is often clunky but usable. (Dropping CoC license has monetary but not playability benefits.) Not my first choice of system but the bumps can be better smoothed out with experienced Keeper & players.

[@marcar9marcar972]

About Truths. I know other systems have a similar thing, most rules allow the players to give themselves truths at character creation but you can only give yourself like three of them

[@TwojaStaraIFrytki]

I have right now 2 groups of players deep (ones) into campaigns, all of them enjoying it. We had to "tweak" or "straighten up" some of the rules. But not change them.

[@markbeardmore103]

Thanks for the review on this one, I've had limited experience with the 2d20 system playing the Infinity RPG, and my opinions of the system mirror yours. Mophidus lack of examples and zoning system didn't help either. Games designed with existing miniature lines really should have a ranging system that works well with using them on the table.

[@sollytom6266]

The Fortune mechanic is a good way to build tension. Over two or three scenes, the players can't spend Fortune. Obviously this shouldn't be done in scenes that are dangerous to the PCs or to completing the mission, but it can simulate the "sense of wrongness."

[@imperialtutor8687]

This is for me always a problem when a tabletop rpg demands a lot of additional trinkets, tools, tons of dice as well having overly convoluted rules just for the sake of appearing different. Over the years I moved away from games that are to in depth about using to many dice, cards etc. it’s not about being lazy or anything but more about the speed to move things along in game I love d10 and d100s and call of Cthulhu/delta green are my favorite systems because they are so accessible.

[@jirhonarmstrong4107]

I’ve been looking at getting this game but wasn’t sure. I do own and run the Conan rpg, and have many of the same issues with it. So I broke everything down that I loved about it, and removed many of the parts I didn’t like. Such as zones I just give everything a distance in feet. So if I would get this I think I would do the same thing. I love this review thank you so much my friend

[@SSkorkowsky]

A good middle-ground I've found with Zones versus Range in feet/meters is what Kult Divinity Lost does. The four Ranges are Arm, Room, Field, and Horizon. Only measurement definition they give is "Field" is up to 100m. I find it gives a good visualization of what range something is at, while not devolving to precise measurements.

[@jirhonarmstrong4107]

@@SSkorkowsky you know I didn’t think about Kult, that is a better way to do it. I’m going to use that as my distance when I start the new Conan game. Thank you so much

[@SSkorkowsky]

If converting it to 2D20, I'd add one more. Something like House or Barn to replace Medium Range. So now Reach=Arm, Close=Room, Medium=Barn, Long=Field, and Extreme=Horizon. After that it's simply Cover and line-of-sight modifiers. Have fun with the game.

[@jirhonarmstrong4107]

@@SSkorkowsky awesome thank you, this really helps😃. Thank you I’m hoping it will be good.

[@timparks9833]

I literally just got these an hour ago and was coming on youtube to see if you talked about it.

[@Bhegtvedt]

Haven't played the game yet but have bought their minis for other skirmish games. I really enjoy their minis and as I see you like minis too, they are definitely worth checking out.

[@warrendavis9262]

Fully agree with the antagonistic GM bit!!!!!

[@originaluddite]

Half-watching the reivew of a game that I'm disinterested in? Yes! It is still worth it because along comes Jack and tells me about Mad Jack Churchill. Now I'm reading his Wikipedia bio.

[@l0stndamned]

Some interesting ideas in the rules, but I fully understand and agree that some of it could be much clearer. One thing that bugged me with my brief delve into Achtung! is that they seemed to dump all the mythos critters as working with the Nazis. I feel this a) underplayed how much more significant some of these monsters were than humans and b) ignored the grudges and rivalries that existed between the monsters.

[@DasKame]

I adore Americans/Brits which try to say "Achtung" Greetings from Germany, great Channel!

[@mikegould6590]

I love the idea of the setting. Yes, the first thing I thought of was the opening scene of Hellboy. However, it sounds like this system needs and editor who not only knows the game, but how to explain it. Some rules aren't intuitive, so there's always confusion. This carries over in other Modiphius products, as players familiar with V5 will know. (This is a d10 pool system, so different mechanics. Same "lovely product, needs and editor" issue.) The 2d20 system CAN work, but man, does it need clarification.

[@Smiskot]

This! My thoughts exactly, as I told Modiphius in my feedback after reading the beta version. I really want to love this system, but they make it really hard.

[@Radiotomb]

Beautifully stated. Couldn't agree more.

[@cthulhupthagn5771]

I have a feeling that the reason why they went with a Zone concept is because they're trying to set up to be streamer friendly. Not saying that's necessarily a good or bad thing, but I have watched some online gaming and many of them seem to like to fly by the seat of their pants as far as measuring distance all in whatever works good from a narrative standpoint. It also seems similar to what they're using in the Warhammer pen and paper

[@NefariousKoel]

Yes, much easier to do "theater of the mind" style.

[@JoeMutant]

Mutant Chronicles has the "symbol" thing instead of d6s too...

[@nessdragon]

Yeah, I think your final assessment nailed what I was getting from your review; it wants to be a crunchy game and a narrative rules-lite game at the same time, and thus it ends up with problems. The lack of examples compounds this; rules-lite games like FATE have tons of examples to explain how to use their narrative mechanics, and even then they can be hard to wrap your head around. My group tried to play a side-game of FATE, and while we were all on board with the concept we came up with, we really struggled with the narrative mechanics in a way that none of us have with crunch-heavy games. And FATE has those firm rules for mechanics like Aspects and Compels and what you can use Fate Points for. The way the Truth thing is described here seems like a cheat...which would be fine if there were limitations, but there don't seem to be any here. It seems like you decide Truths about your character, and then you just kind of make your case to the GM and it gives you some kind of benefit? And there are no limitations to how many of these a character can have? Suddenly the whole thing just feels like Calvinball to me. I'd have to houserule that to a certain number of these per character at creation (maybe with the opportunity to earn more through RP over the course of a long campaign), and define what kind of benefits those Truths give, kind of like how some game systems have Perks for characters that give them some sort of edge. Or maybe require characters to take a certain number of negative Truths as well? At that point it kind of feels like I'm beta testing the game for the developers, though, instead of tweaking a game to my table's liking. It sucks that there's so much vagueness to it, because I love the Momentum and Threat pool mechanics. It makes me wish more games would adopt a mechanic like it. But one great mechanic isn't enough to get me to struggle through several poorly-defined ones.

[@StephMcAlea]

I'm not sure how a games company could've made a skill test roll more complicated. I can imagine it slows combat to a crawl... and I play MegaTraveller.

[@richmcgee434]

My group calls them "interpretive dice" games. Look at FFG's Gensys and Star Wars and Warhammer Fantasy Game (now OOP) for other examples.

[@NefariousKoel]

@@richmcgee434 - This. The 2d20 system was originally created by the same guy who made FFG's Star Wars/Genesys system. It goes for a similar kind of mixed dice pool results, but with normal numbered dice instead of those with the custom symbols as in FFG's. The possible range of mixed results require a bit more than just a pass/fail examination, along with spending extra successess or setbacks on bonus goodies, just like Genesys, but using a normal poly dice pool. I'm willing to bet that was a design decision based on some past potential customers complaining about having to buy custom dice. Personally, I like these kinds of mixed + bonus result systems and don't mind a bit more crunch in the dice mechanics, but realize it's not everyone's bag. I can see they were going for the same thing, but required more number checking due to using regular numbered dice.

[@richmcgee434]

@@NefariousKoel I like the concept and play style of games with Genesys/SW/interpretive dice mechanics just fine, but I'm definitely in the "don't make me buy custom dice" group. It's a real deal killer for me, frankly. My last Star Wars character needed two packs of dice for a lot of his rolls, and would have needed three in another few sessions if the game kept going. Those kind of dice are stupidly expensive and worthless outside of one narrow function. Finding my preference for "complex dice" shifting toward things like the Cortex system and (on the lighter side) the Sentinel Comics RPG.

[@taira1180]

I played two conan games and We had a ton of fun... but our GM said hated. I decide to master the game, my players had a lot of fun, but I finally understood what our GM had said: the rules are too complex (not the 2d20 in itself: that concept is easy)..

[@corradobonicelli842]

I think Dune is the best 2d20 system, it feels like a movie and the players are totally invested in the story. It gets rid of the boring d6 and statblocs that others 2d20 have (beside dishonored).

[@euansmith3699]

Ooh, that piques my interest for the Dune RPG; thank you.

[@beetlejuss]

Good thing I bough this game when it was using Pulp Cthulhu rules with the alternative of Savage Worlds.

[@duffzilla]

I'm really interested in the momentum/threat system and think I might try to find a way to incorporate the system into call of cthulhu somehow.

[@williamfawkes8379]

I have watched and appreciated this video. 3¥ up!

[@PrinceBoo21]

Hey Seth, if you and your group are frustrated with Conan but still want to play a bronze age fantasy game, I recommend Jackals. It's a d100 skill based system with a really great way to play monsters and a really intuitive initiative system as well. It's based on mythology like the epic of gilgamesh, the iliad, and even the old testament.

[@anthonyragan2696]

I think my experience mirrors yours: I love a lot about the Conan game, and the momentum mechanic works great, but the range system and the weird choice of a symbol to represent a d6 is just plain annoying. Of the WWII offerings for Cthulhu, I think I'm likely to go with "World War Cthulhu" when Chaosium comes out with that.

[@rpeterson9182]

6:11 What happens if you roll three Mikes?

[@SSkorkowsky]

Upon rolling 3 Mikes, the gate unlocks, the portal unfolds, angels weep, and everyone at the table grows a sweet moustache.

[@rpeterson9182]

@@SSkorkowsky Yay for that sweet, sweet moustache! That's the best part!

[@BitOBear]

Zones: it sounds to me (from your analysis) like zones are (supposed to be) dynamic. So some actions like "I hide behind the console" is an action I take to increase the difficulty of incoming attacks. It adds a zone for people shooting at me from the direction of the doorway, but not for the guy who moved to flank me. So if that it as a tactical dynamic. GM: "He's a good distance away from you, in the shadows behind the parked cars. That's for zones: near, far, cover, and darkness." P1: "I push the spotlight around and light up the parking lot." GM : "you light him up, dear in the headlights." P2: "I take two steps to clear the line of fire, is risky but life is risk... Perfect. I take the shot." GM: "with no cars between you, he's not too close or too far away, and him all lot up like that he's a duck in a shooting gallery. Make your rolls." Taking this as a way to quantify a situation that is otherwise pretty amorphous, the zone idea could be very powerful because it's very nonspecific. It gives a looser framework to let the players and GM to literally negotiate the train.

[@SSkorkowsky]

Zones started falling apart for us when you have multiple PCs and they start moving different directions. Zones are meant to be static. The only part that's not is the state of Reach. Things like cover and darkness could be Zones, or they could be Cover (which soaks damage like Armor) or Darkness (which affects the ability to see/hit, but doesn't slow movement or hampen sound). So shining a spotlight would negate the modifier of Darkness, but won't negate a Zone. Because Zones are also distance/range. So if a badguy is 4 Zones away, shining a spotlight only means that they're still 4 Zones away. So let's go with the idea, that the badguy is at Long Range. One of those Zone borders is Darkness, and I shine my spotlight, negating that darkness. Great. However my weapon range is Long. Now that the badguy is Medium, I have a harder time hitting him because he is closer than my weapon's ideal range. Additionally, Zones affect sound (I need a radio or phone for someone to understand what I say at Long or Extreme, but can shout to be heard at Medium.) Does shining a light make it easier to hear? Same with physical movement. I can easily move between any point within Close or Medium Range as a Minor action, but must use a Major Action to move to Long Range. Why did shining my light make moving that distance different? Meanwhile, if we did what RPGs have done since the 70's and simply go by distance between the attacker and target, that becomes subjective to every PC, and moves with the PC. The argument I've heard from Modiphius is how giving personal ranges, like "My rifle has a range of 200 feet" is that those precise measurements cause people to start counting squares and slowing it down and how they give no wiggle room. That makes sense only if you give ranges in exact distances. Meanwhile you have games like Kult, which uses the Powered by the Apocalypse mechanic, who do use weapon range, but gives them as Arm/Room/Field/Horizon. There's no precision where you have people debating if something is 30 feet away or 31. There's also no debate why something like a console means Cover in one battle, while in another it's a Zone border. So using something far simpler as the Arm/Room/Field/Horizon method to measure personal distance: GM: "He's a good distance away from you, in the shadows behind the parked cars. That's distance Field, but with protection of cover and a -1 due to the shadows." P1: "I push the spotlight around and light up the parking lot." GM : "you light him up, dear in the headlights. There's no minus for darkness anymore." P2: "I take two steps to clear the line of fire, is risky but life is risk... Perfect. I take the shot." GM: "with no cars between you, nothing is protecting him. Make your rolls." With that, the player was able to remove the modifier of Darkness and the armor of Cover, but the distance remained consistent while still being non-specific. Zones (the Modiphius ones, at least) overcomplicate things.

[@BitOBear]

@@SSkorkowsky I too have been gaming some the 70s. My thought was the problematic usage of the word "behind" in the scant exemplar for a zone that you read online. Vs the fact that "behind" is directional and circumstantial. So I was thinking of zone boundaries as transitions. All possible definitions of the zone idea is problematic since any sort of definite boundary confounds the idea of distance. Two people could be in separate zones and be much closer than two people I'm one single zone. The idea is broken if there's already cover and concealment rules. I was not clear on that from watching your summary. 🤘😎 I guess I was imagining a subtlety that isn't there.

[@nasir6r996]

Seth Did you see the trailer for COHORS CTHULHU ?

[@SSkorkowsky]

Just did. Few years back I picked up the 7e Call of Cthulhu Invictus book (also Roman setting). My players didn't feel a connection to the period and weren't sold on it (we ended up doing 2D20 Conan instead). So now it sits on my shelf with the Invictus Keeper Screen and quietly weeps.

[@nasir6r996]

@@SSkorkowsky What's your take on it? Think it will be, hopefully, better than Invictus? Or are you not too thrilled by it?

[@SSkorkowsky]

Am I thrilled about a new 2d20 game? Did... did you watch this video? I thought I made my stance on 2d20 pretty clear. My players didn't have an issue with Cthulhu Invictus for any reason than they just didn't feel a connection to Roman times. That would hold true no matter what game I presented them with.

[@nasir6r996]

@@SSkorkowsky yee, whoops. I uh...got too comfortable and fell asleep. Sorry Seth 😞

[@richmcgee434]

@@SSkorkowsky That's a shame, I quite like "Weird Rome" settings - although not ones married to 2d20, but there are plenty out there.

[@NetworkedOuija]

ive always struggled with wanting to run a game actually within a war. Something about professional soldiers for characters really just doesn't do it for me. Still, i love the idea and concept. Stepping my toes into 2d20 as well. Started with Star Trek and I did enjoy that. I may end up getting Alien to run it for my wife.

[@NefariousKoel]

Not sure if the setting is your thing, but Twilight 2000 has been a staple of a military style campaign. Although it's set in a recent post-apoc survival situation, so there's still reason for the players to make their own decisions.

[@skyblazeeterno]

You must remember that during a war most soldiers are not professional as such having been enlisted

[@kyostituominen]

2d20 system works… but only if you really bring it down to its core and simplify it. Because of that I think the best 2d20 game has to be John Carter of Mars. There the system shines and works perfectly.

[@tuomasronnberg5244]

How about the adventures themselves? If not the system, then would you recommend those?